FACTOR AFFECTING THE PARTICIPATION DECISION

IN SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PRACTICE: THE CASE

OF DUGDA WOREDA, EAST SHOA ZONE, OROMIA
REGION, ETHIOPIA

M.A THESIS

ASHENEFI KEFENIE NAGESSO

HAWASSA UNIVERSITY, HAWASSA, ETHIOPIA

JUNE, 2020
FACTOR AFFECTING THE PARTICIPATION DECISION
IN SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PRACTICE: THE CASE
OF DUGDA WOREDA, EAST SHOA ZONE, OROMIA
REGION, ETHIOPIA

ASHENEFI KEFENIE NAGESSO

MAJOR ADVISOR: PROFESSOR R. DAYANANDAN

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS,
DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATIVES,
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
HAWASSA UNIVERSITY, HAWASSA, ETHIOPIA

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
MASTER OF ARTS IN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

JUNE, 2020
 SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS,
DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATIVES
ADVISORS’ APPROVAL SHEET

This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “FACTOR AFFECTING THE PARTICIPATION
DECISION IN SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PRACTICE THE CASE OF DUGDA
WOREDA, EAST ZONE, OROMIA REGION, ETHIOPIA” submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Community Development,
the Graduate Program of the Department of Cooperatives, and has been carried out by
ASHENEFI KEFENIE NAGESSO under our supervision. Therefore, we recommend that
the student has fulfilled the requirements and hence hereby can submit the thesis to the
Department.

Major Advisor Signature Date

Professor R. Dayanandan _______________ ________

Co- Advisor Signature Date

Ato.Gari Umeta
________________ __________
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this M.A. thesis entitled, “FACTOR AFFECTING THE
PARTICIPATION DECISION IN SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PRACTICE THE
CASE OF DUGDA WOREDA, EAST ZONE, OROMIA REGION, ETHIOPIA” is my
original work and has not been presented for a Degree/Diploma in any other university, and all
sources of material used for this thesis have been duly acknowledged.

Name: ASHENEFI KEFENIE NAGESSO

Signature: _____________
Place and Date of Submission: Hawassa University ___________

i
 DEDICATION

To my beloved Daughters Sifan, Beka and Bemnet

This thesis is dedicated to you. You are a fitting tribute to the unbending love, understanding,
tolerance, patience, genuine concern and respect you have shown me during my engagement
in this study even while we had to miss each other due to circumstances.

I assure you that you are the essence of my love. All along, you have been a personal source
of encouragement and inspiration as well as a cause for my passionate commitment in
bringing this work to a successful completion.

It is my hope that the challenges I faced during my study and the resolve with which I
managed to tide over these challenge will set a good example for you. Almighty God may
help you to follow my foot print.

I love you!

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There is no easy and short cut way in life, ups and downs are always there. First and foremost,
I would like to thank the Almighty God for giving me strength and power to pass all
uncertainties during the study periods of my MA work and this thesis in particular.

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor Professor R. Dayanandan without

his meaningful involvement; the accomplishment of this research would have been difficult.
Likewise, his gentle advisor-ship from the early design of the research proposal to the final
write-up of the thesis by adding valuable, constructive and ever-teaching comments, highly
improved the contents of the thesis.

I will never forget your hard work toward the completion of the thesis. I appreciate your
valuable comments, criticism and guidance in my work. I appreciate your cooperation,
guidance and friendly atmosphere that existed between us. I have learnt some skills and
special talents from you; some of which I am sure will help on producing positive results in
my future work.

My special thanks go to Gari Umeta for his scientific guidance, constructive comment and
unreserved encouragement to complete this thesis on time.

My deepest gratitude and my sincere thanks again goes to my Uncles Mulugeta Duga and
Getahun Duga and my wife Adi Duga for their benevolent encouragement to pursue my
education. I believe, it is the values that they inculcated in me that have ultimately shaped my
life and therefore this work. Indeed, without their commitment and dedication, I would have
not been successful. I would also like to thank my children, Sifan and Bemnet for the
sacrifices they pay by missing their Father.
The prayers of my mother Adise Duga, have contributed a lot to success of my work, many
thanks to my lovely mother I wish you long life, I am here today because of you.
My great appreciation goes to my friends and colleagues Birtukan Fikadu, Andinet Bekele and
Nagesh Gebre for their enlightening ideas and strong support.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge all individuals and organizations who in one way or
another contributed to the success of my research work.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents Page

DECLARATION ......................................................................................................................... i

DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................ ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................................... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. viii

LISTS OF ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................... ix

ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................ x

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

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

1.1 Background of the study ................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Statement of the problem .................................................................................................. 6

1.3 Objectives of the Study ..................................................................................................... 9

1.3.1 General Objective ....................................................................................................... 9

1.3.2 Specific Objectives ..................................................................................................... 9

1.4 Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 9

1.5. Significance of the Study ............................................................................................... 10

1.6. Scope and Limitations of the Study ............................................................................... 10

1.7. Organization of the Thesis ............................................................................................. 10

CHAPTER TWO ...................................................................................................................... 11

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................... 11

2.1 Concepts and Basic Definition ........................................................................................ 11

2.2. Economic contribution of small scale irrigation practices ............................................. 12

iv
 2.3. Empirical Studies on Determinants of Irrigation Practices ............................................ 14

2.4. Empirical studies on the contribution of small-scale irrigation practice ........................ 18

2.4.1. Challenges and Opportunities of Irrigation Development in Ethiopia .................... 20

2.4.2. Irrigation Potential and Participation Situation in Ethiopia .................................... 21

2.4.3. Irrigation Potential and Participation Situation in Oromia Region ......................... 21

2.5 The Proposed Conceptual Frame Work .......................................................................... 23

CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................. 24

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 24

3.1. Description of the Study Area ........................................................................................ 24

3.2. Research Design ............................................................................................................. 25

3.3. Sample Size and Sampling Techniques ......................................................................... 25

3.4. Data and Methods of Data Collection ............................................................................ 27

3.5. Methods of Data Analysis .............................................................................................. 27

3.6. Econometric Model Specification .................................................................................. 28

3.6.2 Dependent Variables ................................................................................................ 30

3.6.3. The Independent variables and their definition ....................................................... 30

CHAPTER FOUR: ................................................................................................................... 34

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 34

4.1. Socio-economic characteristics of the respondent ....................................................... 34

4.1.1. Demographic characteristics ................................................................................... 34

4.2. Results of Descriptive Analysis ..................................................................................... 37

4.2. Econometric Results....................................................................................................... 48

4.3. Significant Explanatory Variables in Logit Model ........................................................ 50

4.4. Challenges and Opportunities of Small-Scale Irrigation Utilization ............................. 52

CHAPTER FIVE: ..................................................................................................................... 55

v
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 55

5.1 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 55

5.2. Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 56

REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 57

Appendix ................................................................................................................................... 60

vi
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page

Table 3.1: Sample Size Distribution ......................................................................................... 27

Table 4.1. Socio –economic characteristics of the respondents .............................................. 35
Table 4.2: The current small scale irrigation practices of the study area ................................. 39
Table 4.3: Types of crops cultivated by irrigation users........................................................... 39
Table 4.4. Annual income generated by sample households from the irrigated crops ............ 39
Table 4.5. Income generated by sample households from rain fed crops ................................. 40
Table 4.6. Live stock ownership by sample households (TLU). ............................................. 41
Table 4.7: Productivity ............................................................................................................. 41
Table 4.8: The Results of Continuous Independent Variables (N=150)................................... 42
Table 4.9: Percentage Distribution of Sample Households by Sex .......................................... 43
Table 4.10: Relationships between Financial Constraints and Irrigation Utilization ............... 44
Table 4.11: Relationships between Extension Service Access and Irrigation Utilization ........ 45
Table 4.12: Relationship of training and technical advice with irrigation utilization .............. 46
Table 4.13: Relationship between Credit Service and Irrigation Utilization ............................ 47
Table 4.14: Relationship between Market Information and Irrigation Utilization ................... 48
Table 4.15: Parameter Estimate of the Logistic Regression Model ......................................... 49
Table 4.16: Challenges/Constraints affected the users as rated by Farmers ............................. 52

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

Figure 1: Conceptual Frame Work of the study ....................................................................... 23

viii
 LISTS OF ACRONYMS

KAs Kebele Administration

PPS Probability proportionate to size

DAs Developmental Agent

FGD Focus Group Discussion

KIIs Key Informant Interview

MoA Ministry of Agriculture

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

CSA Central Statistical Agency

SSI Small Scale Irrigation

HH Household

CBO Community Based Organization

ix
 ABSTRACT
Ethiopia has abundant water resources, but its agricultural system does not yet fully benefit from the
technologies of water management and irrigation. The aim of this study was to explore factors that
affecting the participation decision in small scale irrigation practices among sampled households in the
study area. In this study multi-stage sampling techniques were used to select 150 target respondents in
which 90 irrigation users and 60 non-irrigation user. Both qualitative and quantitative data were
collected from primary and secondary sources. To collect the required data several methods like
interview schedule, focus group discussions and key informant interview were used. Various
documents were reviewed to collect the secondary data. To analyze the data, both descriptive statics
such as mean, percentage, t-test and p-value and inferential statics were used for data analysis. The
study finding indicates that most of the small scale irrigation users were using the motor pump from
underground and river water source. The study finding indicates that small scale irrigation practices in
the study area have made imprints on the economic development of the participants. Binary logit model
was used to identify the determinants of small-scale irrigation utilization. The findings of the study
revealed that among the sixteen explanatory variables entered into the model, seven of them were
found to be statistically significant. These variables include total income of the household, training and
technical advice, education status of household head, farm size, financial constraint, proportion of
irrigated land size, and access to market information. Besides, from focus group discussions and key
informant interviews, different challenges and opportunities were forwarded and underlined by the
participants regarding with household’s participation decision on small-scale irrigation. The overall
opportunities for the development and management of irrigation water are the availability of high
surface water and shallow water potential, the district has river and lake such as meki river, Ziway
Lake and many water streams flowing seasonally and throughout the year. Out of the challenges
pointed out by the farmers, lack of market at the time of harvest holds the first rank. It also include lack
of trained man power on the irrigation technology and design, poor technology choice, lack of market
information and access, lack of training on irrigation technologies, lack of irrigation structure
maintenance, poor infrastructures such as roads, lack of adequate credit service and extension
packages. Furthermore, Based on the results of the study, the researchers recommended the following:
- these are facilitate market linkage between producers and small traders, need for the intervention of
stakeholders such as CBO and cooperatives, Create access to credit, organize the farmers in to
cooperatives and encourage the farmers to apply new technology in order to empower the irrigator
farm households in participation decision. Therefore, the study suggests that to alleviate these
problems and improve small-scale irrigation utilization special consideration should be given by
government and non-governmental organization to address those factors that hinder small-scale
irrigation utilization in the study area.
Keywords: Binary logit model, Small-scale irrigation, Smallholder farmer, Challenges, Opportunities.

x
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

In Africa, agriculture forms the backbone of most of the continent‟s economies, providing
about 60% of all employment (Birendra et al, 2011). Ethiopia ranks 173 out of 187 the poorest
countries on the Human Development Index (UNDP, 2013). Its GDP per capita was $ 350 in
2010 compared to $ 809 for Kenya and $ 1,705 for Sudan (IMF 2011).In Ethiopia, the
agricultural sector creates employment for about 84% of the population and it accounts for 45-
50% of the GDP of the country and makes the largest input to raw materials for agro-
industries and food security (Amdissa Teshome, 2006). Small-holder farms are pre-dominant
and account for more than 90% of agricultural production and cover over 95% of the total area
under cultivation (Addis Tiruneh et al., 2001; MoFED, 2010).

The country is dominated by small scale agriculture with rain fed dependant, traditional as
well as subsistence farming with limited access to technology and institutional support service
(Desta Beyera, 2004). According to a report by FAO (2003), to overcome the dependency on
rain-fed agriculture, it is crucial to shift and expand irrigation agriculture. Likewise,
Awulachew Seleshi et al, (2005) indicated that improving irrigation agriculture ensures food
security, improved livelihood status and alleviates poverty. Ethiopia has great irrigation
potential, which is estimated as 5.3 million hectares of land of which 3.7million hectares can
be developed using surface water sources and 1.6 million hectares using ground water and rain
water management (MoFED, 2010; Awulachew Seleshi and Mekonin Ayana, 2011). The
average crop yields per hectare from irrigated land increases 2.3 times higher than the yield
produced by rain fed agriculture (FAO, 2007). However, currently irrigated agriculture
produces less than 3% of the total food production of the country (Teshome Atnafie, 2006). As
a result, the productivity of the agricultural sector is very low and lags behind the rate of
population growth and partially reinforcing food insecurity in the country (Awulachew Seleshi
et al., 2010). This is mainly due to poor water storage capacity and large spatial and temporal
variations in rainfall, there is no sufficient water available for most small-holder farmers to
produce more than one crop per year (Mekuria Taffese, 2003; MoFED, 2006). This results in

1
frequent crop failures followed by dry spells, occurrence of severe droughts and produce
significant soil erosion which may reduce the potential productivity of farmlands

(Awulachew Seleshi et al., 2010). Agriculture also provides employment opportunities to

about 83% of the population and supplies raw materials for 70% of the country‟s agro-
industries (EEA, 2012) and about 70% of Ethiopia‟s foreign exchange is derived from
agricultural exports (FAO, 2015).During the last decade, per capita agricultural production has
not kept pace with population growth. Ethiopia is the second most populated country in
Africa, and it‟s made impressive strides over the last 20 years in reducing poverty and
increasing access to basic social services. The number of people living in poverty fell from 48
percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2014. At the same time, the proportion of undernourished
people fell from 75 percent in 1992 to 32 percent in 2015.In 2001 close to 30 million people
required food emergencies due to droughts, floods and civil strife (You et al, 2010).

Agricultural growth offers possibilities for reducing risks of food shortages at all levels,
increasing overall supply of food, creating economic opportunities for vulnerable people and
improving dietary diversity and the quality of food consumed by farm households (Lyne et al.,
2009). Development of the agricultural sector in Africa is therefore seen as central to
combating hunger, reducing poverty, and generating economic growth (through the reduction
of food imports and the boosting of exports). However, progress in the sector can only be
achieved if the main constraints are successfully addressed such as: variability in climate;
limited access to technology; low levels of rural infrastructure; and poor institutional
structures.

Ethiopia is an agrarian country where around 95% of the country‟s agricultural output is
produced by smallholder farmers (MoA RD, 2010). The contribution of agriculture to national
GDP (50%), employment (85%), export earnings (90%), and supply of industrial raw
materials (70%) has remained high (World Bank, 2010). Although the country is endowed
with three main resources namely land, water and labor for production, agriculture in the
country is mostly small- scale, rainfall dependent, traditional and subsistence farming with
limited access to technology and institutional support services.

2
Agriculture plays a pivotal role in Ethiopian economy (Makom be et al., 2011). About 73% of
the population is living in rural areas, creating their income from agriculture and relying on a
limited resource- land (ADEA, 2014).Hence, the ability of the nation to address food and
nutritional insecurity, poverty, and to stimulate and sustain national economic growth and
development is highly dependent on the performance of agriculture. In Ethiopia Agricultural
production, for instance, grew by about 2.3% during 1980-2000 while population was growing
on average at a rate of 2.9% per year, leading to a decline in per capita agricultural production
by about 0.6% per year (Demeke et al; 2004).

Ethiopian agriculture mainly depends on rain fed. Besides, the productivity of the sector is
very low and lags behind the rate of population growth and partially reinforcing food
insecurity of the country in the last decades. Currently, the government of agricultural policy
of Ethiopia paid high attention to develop small scale irrigation through water harvesting
technology in different corners of the country to support local farmers to improve agricultural
productivity, ensure food security and reduce poverty. Use of small scale irrigation agriculture
is important to increase productivity, household incomes, employment, avail different
products throughout the year and economic development. In Ethiopia, the average crop yields
per hectare from irrigated land increases 2.3 times higher than the yield produced by rain fed
agriculture. Higher productivity helps to increase returns to farmers' endowments of land and
labor resources and produced more than twice per year. To increase productivity and diversify
the livelihood scenarios as an option, development of small-scale irrigation schemes has been
introduced through water harvest technology. Small scale irrigation is an important strategy in
reducing risks associated with both rainfall variability, production of different crops twice or
three times within a year and increasing income of rural farm-households. In attempting to do
so, Ethiopia has yet developed not more than 5% of the irrigation potential. Ethiopia is
believed to have the potential of 5.1 million hectares of land that can be developed for
irrigation through pump, gravity, pressure, underground water, water harvesting and other
mechanisms (MOFED, 2010). In Ethiopia, there is ground water potential of 2.6 billion m3,
eleven major lakes with a total area of 750,000 ha and total annual surface runoff of 123
billion m3. Despite this abundance the country suffers from recurrent drought, food shortage,
sanitation problems and poverty. Currently, therefore, the country has developed 15 years

3
(2002-2016) regional and national water resource development plan to introduce efficient and
sustainable uses of water resources for irrigation and other purposes (MoWR, 2002). In
Ethiopia, development strategies in the last decade have largely focused on the expansion of
irrigated agriculture. The implementation of irrigation development schemes is one of the
most effective ways to reduce poverty and promote economic growth. These schemes raise
crop production through enhanced yield, acreage and number of cropping cycles per year, as
well as decrease the risk of crop failure. Increased availability of irrigation and the lowered
dependency on rain-fed agriculture is an effective means to increase food production and
enhance the self-sufficiency of the rapidly increasing human population (Jaleta et al., 2013).
Water resource management in agriculture is a critical contributor to the economic and social
development of Ethiopia. If successful, irrigation in Ethiopia could represent a cornerstone of
the agricultural development of the country, contributing up to ETB 140 billion to the
economy and potentially moving up to 6 million households into food security. However,
irrigation is not a simple silver bullet: first, it can only work if other components of the
agricultural system are also effective (e.g., seeds, extension); second, all the tools in the toolkit
will be required from small-scale irrigation to large-scale schemes to construct a viable
solution (Awulachew et al., 2010). Ethiopian agricultural practice has been traditionally
dominated for centuries by small-scale farmers and its performance has long been adversely
affected by shortage of rain and water that left many to sustain their lives on famine relief
support (Abebe et al., 2011). From the total production, about 97 percent of Ethiopia‟s food
crops are produced by rain-fed agriculture, whereas only 3% is from irrigated agriculture
(FAO, 2015). Due to high dependency on rain-fed agriculture and other topographic and low
adaptive capacity and other related factors, Ethiopia ranks the ninth most susceptible country
in the world to natural disasters and weather-related shocks (Tongul and Hobson, 2013). Also
contributes to poverty alleviation by enhancing productivity which leads to an increase in
income and promoting economic growth and employment (Garcia-Bolanos et al., 2011).

A rapid increase in the area covered by irrigation, especially small-scale water use, provides
farmers with opportunities to raise output on a sustainable basis and contribute to the
reliability of food supplies (FAO, 2012). The government of Ethiopia has placed great
emphasis on the development of irrigation facilities so as to increase agricultural production

4
and productivity. This may help farmers overcome the cost problem for modern irrigation
construction and overcome the problem of shortage of moisture for production. In line with
this goal, the government also has planned to undertake a medium and large scale irrigation
study and designing activities and making them ready for concerned relevant stakeholders
(NPC, 2015).

Oromia is one of the nine regional states in the country with its surface area of 359,620 square
kilometers, constituting about one third of the total area of the country. The problem of food
insecurity has increasingly become worse in the low land areas of the region, which represent
about 30 percent of the total land mass. Coping mechanisms of pastoralists and agro
pastoralists in these areas are so fragile that minor change in rainfall distribution often results
in famine (OIDA, 2004).

The development of irrigated agriculture in Oromia is at its infancy and its contribution to
food supply is insignificant the same as for the whole country. The demand for food, fiber and
energy by the increasing population of Oromia and the country as a whole is expected to grow
substantially in the years ahead. Rain-fed agriculture through area expansion and
intensification alone is not enough to provide the basic requirements of food, clothing and
energy for the rising population. Hence, the development of irrigation will be essential to
augment rain-fed agriculture. In order to decrease dependence on rain-fed agriculture, the
regional government was developed cost-effective irrigation schemes, especially in areas with
less reliable rainfall (MoARD, 2015).

Dugda Woreda is one of the districts located in low land areas of Oromia region and the
district has above 14,000 hectare irrigation potential, but only 2,568 hectare of small scale
irrigation was being irrigated. And, living standard of the community is subsistence and the
district supported by emergency program including some of irrigation potential kebeles
(DOID, 2015). Dugda Woreda is one of the Low land Rift Valley East Shoa zones from the
region even though its farming system is highly dependent on rain-fed farming (Monenus,
2016). Although Meki River and Ziway Lake found in this woreda consisting of high
irrigation potential, the potential available for irrigated farming is not intensively used
(DOoARD, 2016). There was no scientific evidence why the farmers in the district are not

5
using this potential to increase their production and improve their income and hence their
standard of living. Therefore, this study was mainly concerned with finding out the factors that
affecting the farmers‟ participation decision in small scale irrigation practices in the study
area.

1.2 Statement of the problem

The population of the world is increasing and hence the food demand, but not the supply side.
Sources indicate that compared to 2009, by 2050, a 70% more food production is required to
meet the global food demand and 100% for developing countries (Dubois, 2011). This shows
that the growth in food demand for developing countries is very high as compared to
developed countries, and this phenomenon is the same for Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, despite the
rapid population growth and food demand, the production of agricultural outputs using
modern technology at smallholder level is at its minimal stage (FAO, 2015).

The traditional system of production and rain-fed agriculture alone could not guarantee to feed
this rapidly increasing population and it needs supplementation from irrigated agriculture.
Agriculture, the main source of livelihood in Ethiopian economy is mainly rain-fed and it
depends on erratic and often insufficient rainfall despite its high water potential. As a result,
there are frequent failures of agricultural production and this forced many of the societies to
lead their live dependent on assistance from different organizations for food (Abebe et al.,
2011; Abebaw et al., 2015). In line with this, the agricultural practice in the country in general
and in the study area in particular is rain-fed agriculture and seasonal. While the country has
high potential to irrigate its agriculture, about 97 percent of Ethiopia‟s food crops are
produced by rain-fed agriculture, whereas only three (3%) percent is from irrigated agriculture
(FAO, 2015). There is a huge gap between the potential and the level of irrigation applied in
the country due to technical, physical and economic challenges (ATA, 2016), but the
determinants of participation in irrigation are not exhaustively identified in specific areas of
the country. For agricultural intensification (such as improved input use), water is an entry
point implying that irrigation development, especially smallholder private small scale
irrigation and adoption of smallholder private small scale irrigation technologies is very
important. On the other hand, lack of simple and affordable irrigation technology that fits the

6
production conditions of smallholder is a serious limiting factor to achieve food security.
While there is evidence that there is high demand from smallholder farmers‟ for different
types of water lifting technologies (such asmotorized and human powered technologies), the
level of adoption of the technologies is very low (Getchar et al., 2013).

Contribution of farmer based small-scale irrigation for semi-cash cropping has not been
studied, though such schemes cover more than 40 % of the irrigated land in the country
(Dessalegn, 2016). The impact of small scale irrigation on the individual farm household in
terms of food security and incremental income of small-scale irrigation need to be well studied
and documented (Wagnew, 2014). Seleshi et.al (2015) indicated the need for undertaking
impact assessment of small-scale irrigation particularly on income, production and
productivity of rural household.

Oromia is one of the nine regional states in the country with its surface area of 359,620 square
kilometers, constituting about one third of the total area of the country. The problem of food
insecurity has increasingly become worse in the low land areas of the region, which represent
about 30 percent of the total land mass. Coping mechanisms of pastoralists and agro
pastoralists in these areas are so fragile that minor change in rainfall distribution often results
in famine (OIDA, 2014).

Dugda woreda is one of the districts located in low land areas of Oromia region and the
district has above 14,000 hectare irrigation potential, but only 2,568 hectare of small scale
irrigation was being irrigated. And, living standard of the community is subsistence and the
district embraced by emergency program including some of irrigation potential kebeles
(DOID, 2015).

Dugda district has high potential of water resource but its utilization is perceived to be very
low especially by smallholder farmers. The district has rivers such as Meki river, Ziway lake
and many water streams flowing throughout the year and seasonally, swamps and seasonal wet
lands that can serve as irrigation area during the dry season after the rain quits, but it is not
intensively used (ADIDO, 2017). The use of water for agriculture is the highest withdrawal of
water resource even though it is not that much in Dugda Woreda. The reason for not
intensively utilized water potential in the study area and the importance of small-scale
7
irrigation on household income has not been systematically assessed. Because there was no
study conducted on why the farmers did not used the water potential available in the district
intensively and the contribution of irrigation practices analysis was not conducted in the study
area. Therefore, it needs such an analysis and come up with the points of solution so that the
policy actions and extension activities as well as further researches can be undertaken. This
may encourage the farmers to participate in irrigation and utilize water resource on their
farming to boost their production directly. Furthermore, this can change their standard of
living by increasing their income and contribute to the economic growth of the country.

Moreover, Small scale irrigation benefits the poor through higher production, higher yields,
lower risk of crop failure, and higher and year-round farm and non-farm employment. Small
scale irrigation enables smallholders to adopt more diversified cropping patterns, and to switch
from low value staple production to high value market oriented production. Increased
production makes food available and affordable for the poor. Since small scale irrigation
investments leads to production and supply shifts, indirect linkages operate through regional
and national level and have a strong positive effect on the national economy. On the other
hand, the expansion of small scale irrigation agriculture is usually complicated by so many
problems which include lack of improved technology, skilled man-power, access to market
and market information, extension service and input supply. All these constraints are
undermining the participation decision of households in small scale irrigation agriculture and
practices. Thus, previous studies that were done on the contribution of small scale irrigation to
household‟s income. No study was done on the factor affecting the participation decision in
small scale irrigation practices in the study site. Household‟s level of participation in decision
making processes in small scale irrigation schemes remains to be one of the major challenges
especially in relation to the existing water potential. Therefore, studying the factor affecting
the participation decision in small scale irrigation practices in Dugda Woreda in the Central
Rift Valley of Ethiopia is crucial to fill this gap.

8
1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General Objective

The general objective of this study is factor affecting the participation decision in small scale
irrigation practices in Dugda Woreda, East Shoa Zone, Oromia in the Central Rift Valley of
Ethiopia.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the study are:

 To assess the current small scale irrigation practices among sampled households in the
study area.
 To examine the contribution of small scale irrigation practice on household livelihoods
status;
 To identify factors that determines household‟s participation decision on small-scale
irrigation practices;
 To identify the opportunities and challenges of small scale irrigation practices in the
study area.

1.4 Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to answer the following questions:

1. What are the current small scale irrigation practices among sampled household in the
study area?
2. What is the contribution of small scale irrigation practice on household‟s livelihoods
status?
3. Which factors determine the participation decision in small irrigation practice by
farmers in the study area?
4. What are the opportunities and challenges of practicing small scale irrigation
technologies to farmers in the study area?

9
1.5. Significance of the Study

The findings of this study are expected to benefit local governments and development
practitioners in particular, policy makers in general in terms of improving the knowledge base
for impact of irrigated agriculture on enhancing household income. On top of this, the findings
of the research work give insight for researchers and students interested in similar research
theme for further investigation in other areas.

1.6. Scope and Limitations of the Study

The study was carried out in East Shoa Zone, Dugda Woreda which is 133kms away from
country capital-Addis Ababa. In the study area i.e in the four sampled most potential and
shallow water available kebeles administration, 240 rural households are engaged in small
scale irrigation practices and activities. It would have been very much rational idea to include
all the rest potential areas of Dugda Woreda kebeles in the study, but budget and time are
always limitations. As mentioned before, the study mainly focus on identifying the
contribution of small scale irrigation practices on livelihoods of households, to identify
factors that are expected to influence the performance of rural households on participation
decision of small scale irrigation practice in the study area, identification of the opportunity
and challenges of small scale irrigation practices in the study area and also understanding the
current small scale irrigation practices of sampled households.

1.7. Organization of the Thesis

The thesis entails five chapters exclusive of the reference section. The first chapter will deal
with the introduction part. The introduction part will consist of background of the study,
Statement of the problem, research question and objectives of the study, significant, scope and
limitation of the study. Chapter two deals with literature review. Chapter three deals with
research design and methodology issues and description on methods of data collection and
analysis. Chapter 4 presents results and discussion. The last chapter, chapter 5, presents
summary, conclusion and recommendations.

10
 CHAPTER TWO

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Concepts and Basic Definition

Ethiopia has abundant water resources, but its agricultural system does not yet fully benefit
from the technologies of water management and irrigation. Rain-fed agriculture through area
expansion and intensification alone is not enough to provide the basic requirements of food,
clothing and energy for the rising population. Hence, the development of irrigation will be
essential to augment rain-fed agriculture.

In this study, participation in irrigation practice can be considered as one of technology option
available to farm households owing to it enables them to carry out multiple cropping, diversify
their production and overcome moisture deficiency partially or fully and increase their
income.

Irrigation as the artificial application of water to land to assist in the production of crops.

Reddy (2010) also defined Irrigation as an artificial application of water to soil for the purpose
of supplying the moisture essential in the plant root-zone to prevent stress that may cause
reduced yield and/or poor quality of harvest of crops. This is an on purpose action made by
human beings to apply water for growing crops, especially when there is a shortage of rainfall
and during dry seasons.

Small-scale irrigation can be defined based on the area of land irrigated and it differ from
country to country. In Ethiopia small-scale irrigation schemes are understood to include
traditional small-scale irrigation schemes up to 100 ha and modern communal schemes up to
200 ha (Awulachew et al., 2005 after MoWR, 2002).

A rural households farmer is the one who depends on his efficiency in the utilization of basic
production resources available to him or her. About 73% of the population is living in rural
areas, creating their income from agriculture and relying on a limited resource- land (ADEA,

11
2014) and 95% of the country‟s agricultural output is produced by smallholder farmers
(MoARD, 2010).

A livelihood is a means of making a living. It encompasses people‟s capabilities, assets,

income and activities required to secure the necessities of life. However, a livelihood is
sustainable when it enables people to cope with and recover from shocks and stresses (such as
natural disasters and economic or social upheavals) and enhance their well-being and that of
future generations without undermining the natural environment or resource base (Mwakalila
and Noe, 2004). The relationship between the livelihood assets that farm households own or
have access is categorized as natural, human, social, financial and physical assets.

Each component of livelihood assets is expected to be measured using indicators such as: a)
Human assets: age and education of household head, labour availability in man-equivalent unit
and health threats of households, b) Natural assets: agricultural area, irrigated area, fallow
areas and number of livestock, c) Physical assets: value of shelter and building, sufficiency of
household water supply and sanitary, type and number of motorcycle, type and value of farm
equipment, d) Financial assets: access to credit, pension and remittance, value of household
assets, e) Social assets: membership of water user group, leadership of existing groups, kinship
network and community network. The households by utilizing the assets (the resources that
people own or can obtain access) in their productive activities may create income and satisfy
their consumption needs, also maintain their asset levels and invest in their future activities
(SIWI, 2005).

2.2. Economic contribution of small scale irrigation practices

The socio-economic impact of the irrigation schemes have been found to be in the following
areas according to Ortman and King (2010).

a) Crop diversification: The farmers are able to grow high value crops both for the local and
export markets, thus effectively participating in the main stream economy. While those who
cultivate in the dry land could concentrate on grain maize and groundnuts which are both low
value crops; others of large-scale production with high value horticultural crops could not be
possible under dry land conditions due to climatic limitations.

12
b) High yields: Irrigated agriculture produces substantially higher yields than dry land
agriculture. Based on the monitoring and evaluation data, the crop yields for maize which is
grown under irrigation ranges from 6-9 tons/ha as compared to maize yields of 1-2 tons/ha
under dry land. This shows that yields could go up manifold with the introduction of
irrigation.

c) Human development: Irrigators can develop a commercial mentality which can be

indicated by the use of high levels of inputs by irrigators in comparison with dry land farmers.
For example, irrigated farms use 450 kg/ha per ha top dressing fertilizer for maize where as
dry land farms use on average 100 kg/ha. This difference reflects that irrigators are operating
on commercial lines while needing labour intensive. The hiring of labour is also a
characteristic of business minded people. Each irrigator can open a bank account in which he
or she deposits all proceeds from crop marketing; hence developing their way of life.

d) Employment creation: The small scale irrigation practice provides seasonal employment
for people in the surrounding farms. Hired labour is paid in cash or in kind or both when
performing works in irrigation schemes. The small scale irrigation practice also acts as an
employer to the irrigators. The fact that only one male household heads out of twenty male
household heads works in town is an indication that the scheme provides gainful employment.
From a broader perspective the irrigation scheme is vital in curbing the rural to urban drift.

e) Food security: The small scale irrigation practice acts as a source of food security during
times of drought. In times of drought, non-irrigators come to buy grain maize from the
scheme. The irrigators do not experience any grain shortage like the dry land counterparts.

f) Drought relief savings: The small scale irrigation practice farmers are food self-sufficient
always. While farmers living in dry land often rely on food handouts from government, this is
not the case with the irrigators on the scheme. By not providing drought relief to the irrigators
and their families the government is making a huge financial saving. The government saving
only captures the cost of purchasing maize or other crops without even taking into account
transportation costs, manpower costs and other logistical support required in the distribution of
this relief packages. In addition a complete drought relief package could include other
commodities like beans which, if included, would double the drought relief requirement.
13
g) Assets: Irrigators manage to acquire assets using incomes from the scheme. For example,
farmers on the irrigation scheme can buy trucks, cultivators, ploughs, harrows and own small
cars which are bought from scheme generated incomes. The cars help in the ferrying of
produce to the market. Farmers could also buy animals from the scheme incomes if they wish.

h) Entrepreneurial skills: Irrigators can develop entrepreneurial skills over the years. The
skills might help them to budget for their cropping activities, can manage their own affairs and
can borrow and repay debts by participating in the irrigation scheme.

i) Support to other industries: The irrigation scheme enhances business activities for the
local dealer who supplies the scheme with inputs. The high value crops grown in different
irrigation schemes require high levels of fertilizer and chemicals and these are mainly
purchased from the local dealers. Transporters could also benefit from the farmers who hire
trucks to carry produce to the markets.

2.3. Empirical Studies on Determinants of Irrigation Practices

Different studies have been conducted by different scholars on the determinants of adoption
of irrigation practice by farm households in different countries of the world. The scholars
found different factors that determine participation in irrigation practice by small scale farm
households using different models and hypothesizing different repressors that influence
irrigation practice. Therefore, this section has been concerned with review of previous
empirical studies to come up with convincing information with most commonly significant
variables affecting adoption of irrigation practice to use them as a basis of the hypothesis for
this study.

Several studies revealed different results concerning how economic variables such as income,
cultivable land holding/farm size, number of oxen owned by household affects the small-scale
irrigation practice by farmers. For instance, Kinfe et al. (2012) and Abebaw et al. (2015) by
using binary probit model and binary logit respectively found that income of the farmer
affected the irrigation participation by smallholder farmers positively. They revealed that, a
household with higher income would be able to spend on irrigation than low income
households and they take part in irrigation practice more than lower income farm households.

14
Land holding on the other hand is found negatively influencing the irrigation practice by
farmers (Edo, 2014). But Beyan et al. (2013), indicates that, there was positive relationship
between land holding and irrigation practice by farmers. The different findings concerning the
cultivable land holding was due to difference in the underlying conditions in the areas those
researchers have undertaken their study. For instance the case of negative relationship between
land holding and irrigation practice found by Edo (2014), indicated that it was resulted
because the farmers with larger land size were found allocating their land for rain-fed
agriculture and animal husbandry. Beyan et al. (2013), revealed that, fragmentation of
cultivable land is a problem of crop diversification for most of the farmers in the study area.

Other studies indicate that farm size is found positively affecting participation in irrigation
practice by smallholder farmers (Abebaw et al., 2015; Sithole et al., 2014). These sources
found as it has a positive significant effect on the participation decision of the households, that
the farmers with large farm size were found participating in irrigated farming than their
counterparts but the reason behind this finding is not explained by the researchers. This
variable also shows that a positive influence on the area of land allocated for irrigation by the
farmers (Wang et al., 2015).

Oxen ownership also influences the small-scale irrigated farming decision positively
(Gebrehaweria et al., 2014). This finding was related with the risk taking behavior is more for
wealthier farmers as compared to poor farmers. Even though it is not explained, this result
might be related with the source of draft power used in preparing the land for irrigated
farming. The farmers with larger number of oxen can use their oxen for preparing the
irrigation farm easily and the households with lower number of oxen may face difficulty in
land preparation and may not be able to participate in irrigated farming.

The total livestock owned by the households also shown positive significant effect on the
irrigation participation decision of the households (Hadush, 2014). Farmers with higher TLU
were found with higher probability of participating in the irrigation practice. In general, the
above finding shows that farmers with larger value of the variable were found participating in
irrigation practice more than those with lower values.

15
Further studies conducted by different scholars revealed that educational status of the
household head had a positive significant influence on the irrigation practice decision of
farmers (He et al., 2007; Tewodros et al., 2013; Muhammad et al., 2013; Edo, 2014; Nhundu
et al., 2015; Abebaw et al., 2015). From these studies it indicate that education is the very
important variable that influences the irrigation practice by farmers and needing policy action
in different setup of different countries. Not only the participation decision, this variable also
influenced the area of land allocated under improved technology of irrigated farming
positively. It shows that educated farmers allocate more land for the water saving irrigation
technology such as subsurface drip irrigation (Wang et al., 2015; Pokhrel et al., 2016).
Another explanatory variable, training on irrigation technology issues has shown positive
significant influence on participation in irrigation practice (Abebaw et al., 2015; Nhundu et al.,
2015). This implies that farmers who attended more irrigation technology training were found
with higher probability of participating in irrigation practice than their counterparts.

The demographic factor such as sex of a respondent is mostly used as one of determinant
factors of participation in irrigation and found that male headed households are the most likely
participant in small-scale irrigation practice (Kinfe et al., 2012; Muhammad et al., 2013;
Gebrehaweria et al., 2014) and irrigate more area (Abebe et al., 2011). For instance, the study
by Kinfe et al. (2012), revealed that the finding is linked with different factors related with the
sex of the respondent that are more favorable for male than female such as suitability of easily
solving labor shortage due to physical, technological, socio-cultural and psychological fitness
of farm instrument to males than females and other related factors.

Age is another demographic factor that shows negative significant influence on participation
in irrigation (He et al., 2007; Beyan et al., 2014; Edo, 2014; Gebrehaweria et al., 2014; Sithole
et al., 2014; Nhundu et al., 2015). These findings indicate that, younger household heads are
more innovative in terms of technology adoption and are more likely to take risk than older
household heads. As evidences has depicted, this findings by different scholars, implies that
the older the farmers, the more reluctant they may be in participating in irrigated farming due
to tiredness on one hand or the wealth they have accumulated during their adulthood on the
other. This variable, (age), also shown that it affects the area of land allocated for improved
irrigation technology negatively (Wang et al., 2015; Pokhrel et al., 2016). This indicate that
16
the more aged the farmers, they allocate more of their land to non-improved traditional
farming practice rather than improved technology such as irrigated farming, because older
farmers have shorter plan of living at this age.

The institutional factor, access to market information used as a regressor shown a positive
significant influence on participation in irrigation practice (Kinfe et al., 2012; Abebaw et al.,
2015). This implies that the farmers who have access to market information was found to have
higher irrigation participation probability than those that does not have market information.
Farmers that have market information on input and output price would be attracted by the
benefit of irrigated farming and would be market oriented that enhance their participation.
This variable was also found influencing the area of land allocated for irrigation, such as
center pivot irrigated farming (Pokhrel et al.,2016). The farmer nearby the market can have
high information on input and output price as well as demand and the distance also matters.
But other source indicate that, the area of land allocated for irrigation is negatively related
with the distance of the market (Abebe et al., 2011). This finding was related with the
competition for water used in irrigation. Proximity of market will lead to the shortage of water
per individual and leads to lower allocation of farm land for irrigated farming.

Access to credit is also an institutional factor positively affecting participation in irrigation

practice by smallholder farmers (Muhammad et al., 2013; Sithole et al. 2014; Nhundu et al.,
2015). This finding is related with the reason that access to credit enables farmers to overcome
their financial constraints associated with production and participation in irrigation and also
encourages group formation and learning. Access to credit could enable farmers to use the
technologies by purchasing the inputs on time.

The distance of farm from irrigation water source is also another factor that has a significant
discouraging effect on participating in irrigated farming (Kinfe et al., 2012; Beyan et al., 2014;
Sithole et al., 2014). Based on the findings of these scholars, long distance plot of farm land
from water source lead farmers for extra cost when compared to nearest farmers to water
source in many ways such as opportunity cost of time, cost of irrigation water access. This has
forced the distant farmers from the water source to practice irrigated farming less than their
counterparts.

17
The studies by Tewodros et al. (2013) and Hadush (2014) shows that family size significantly
and positively affected the irrigation participation decision of the farmers. They indicated that,
the households use the family members as a labor force and easily undertake the irrigation
activity than lower family size households because of labor intensive nature of small-scale
irrigated farming.

Beyan et al. (2014) and Hadush (2014), shows that the households participating in the paying
nonfarm activity were found to participate in irrigation practice more than those not
participating in nonfarm activities. These studies indicated that, the positive relationship
between nonfarm activity and irrigation practice by farmer was due to the reason that the
income from nonfarm activity was used to cover the irrigation costs such as inputs required
and enable those farmers participate in irrigation easily as compared to their counter parts.

2.4. Empirical studies on the contribution of small-scale irrigation practice

Hillel (1997) stated that Africa has promoted small-scale irrigated agriculture as a means of
ensuring food security as well as improving the standard of living of the rural people for many
years. Various studies such as those conducted by You et al (2010) show that small-scale
irrigation improves food security and livelihoods of rural farmers in Africa.

However, according to Lyne et al (2009) despite their important role in improving livelihoods
of rural communities, small-scale irrigation schemes have had limited performances of
operating irrigation systems; generally, this has averaged less than 50% efficiency due to poor
infrastructure, limited knowledge of crop production among smallholders, limited farmer
participation in the management of water, ineffective extension and mechanization services
and lack of reliable markets, effective credit services and predominance of subsistence
oriented farming. Moreover, these could not identify socio-economic impact accrued from
irrigation schemes.

However, according to Birendra et al (2011) the economic and social output from irrigation
projects has been often lower than estimated at the planning stage. In a recent report which
evaluated more than 200 irrigation projects subsidized by the World Bank, for example, 23%
were rated unsatisfactory. Arcus (2004) argued that many accounts of irrigation projects report

18
failed to meet estimated agricultural production targets due to poor maintenance, and
disappointing economic returns on investments. On the other hand Smith and Maheshwari
(2002) argued that the future alternative water supplies for irrigation will have to be carefully
developed and managed. Another related issue is that the way farmers manage water affects
the long-term sustainability of their farms. There is now greater demand to share water
resources with the environment. As a result landholders need to consider the options available
to them to meet their irrigation water needs.

This indicated that irrigators were in a better position to invest in capital items than non-
irrigators because of their higher incomes. However, FAO (1997) in a brief general overview
of the small scale irrigation sub-sector in Ethiopia concluded that rural household‟s irrigation
has brought many successes to farmers.

The following observations were made: a) Smallholder farmers are now able to grow high
value crops both for the local and export markets, thus effectively participating in the
mainstream economy; b) In areas of very low rainfall, farmers enjoy the human dignity of
producing their own food instead of depending on food handouts from the department of
social welfare; c) Irrigation development has made it possible for other rural infrastructure to
be developed in areas which could otherwise have remained without roads, telephones,
schools and clinics; d) Smallholder irrigators have developed a commercial mentality; and e)
Crop yields and farmer incomes have gone up manifold. The report, however, identified a
number of constraints, which are hampering smallholder irrigation development. Some of
them are: a) The high cost of capital investment in irrigation works when one considers that
communal farmers are resource poor; b) Rural infrastructure to facilitate input procurement
and produce marketing is weakly developed in some areas, for example roads,
telecommunications and electricity; c) Lack of reasonably priced appropriate irrigation
technology for the rural households; d) Shortage of human resources at both technician and
farmer levels; e) Poor catchment management, which results in siltation of some water bodies;
and f) Lack of decentralized irrigation service companies to give back-up service in rural
areas.

19
2.4.1. Challenges and Opportunities of Irrigation Development in Ethiopia

There are many challenges that face the irrigation development in Ethiopia. Some of these
challenges are more or less related with technical constraints and knowledge gaps. In this case
the challenges indicated here are typical for small-scale irrigation.

Gebremedhin and Asfaw (2015), identified the challenges for Ethiopian irrigation
development as: (1) inadequate awareness of irrigation water management as in irrigation
scheduling techniques, water saving irrigation technologies, water measurement techniques,
operation and maintenance of irrigation facilities, (2) inadequate knowledge on improved and
diversified irrigation agronomic practices, (3) shortage of basic technical knowledge on
irrigation pumps, drip irrigation system, sprinkler irrigations, surface and spate irrigation
methods (4) scheme based approach rather than area/catchments based approach for the
development of SSI Schemes, (5) inadequate baseline data and information on the
development of water resources, (6) lack of experience in design, construction and supervision
of quality irrigation projects, (7) low productivity of existing irrigation schemes, (8)
inadequate community involvement and consultation in scheme planning, construction and
implementation of irrigation development, (9) poor economic background of users for
irrigation infrastructure development, to access irrigation technologies and agricultural inputs,
where the price increment is not affordable to farmers.

Besides challenges there are many opportunities that enhance irrigation development in
Ethiopia. These opportunities stem from both the natural favorability of the country for
irrigation and the emphasis given to irrigation development by the government of the country
and the stakeholders. Out of these opportunities the first thing is that emphasis and priorities
are given to irrigation in the growth and transformation plan of the country (NPC, 2015). The
second one is that there is indigenous knowledge and introduction of promising household
water harvesting and micro-irrigation technologies. The other thing is there is high
commitment by Government, donors and NGOs to support and encouragement to private
sector and public enterprises and involvement in irrigation development (ILRI, 2016). In
addition to the above opportunities the most important promising opportunity is availability of
abundant water resources and land suitability as well as availability of inexpensive labor.

20
2.4.2. Irrigation Potential and Participation Situation in Ethiopia

Modern irrigation was started at the Awash river basin with bilateral cooperation of Ethiopia
and Dutch company, during the 1950s for the productions of commercial crops such as sugar
cane and cotton (Gebremedhin and Asfaw, 2015). Resent source indicates that, the total area
of irrigated land in Ethiopia increased from 885,000 ha to 2.4 million ha in from 2011 to 2015
with a plan of increasing irrigated land to 4 million by 2020 (ATA, 2016), including the
658,340 ha of land developed with high and medium irrigation schemes (NPC, 2015). But
there is a plan to expand the high and medium schemes to about 954,000 hectares by the end
of the GTP-II (2019/20). Evidence also shows that, in Ethiopia, farm size per household is 0.5
ha and the irrigated land per households‟ ranges from 0.25 - 0.5 ha on average (MoA, 2011).

Ethiopia is a rich country in water resource and most of the time it is termed as a water tower
of east Africa because of its abundant water resource availability (Adugna, 2014). It has a
huge potential of water resource which accounts 122 billion meter cube annual surface runoff
and 2.9 billion meter cube groundwater, though it is characterized by uneven spatial and
temporal distributions (Tesfa and Tripathi, 2015).

But Ethiopia is using a very little of its abundant water resource potential for irrigated
agriculture (ATA, 2016). Even though there is no similar evidence about the potential it have
from different sources, it has a high potential. The estimated total irrigable land potential in
Ethiopia is 5.3 Mha assuming use of existing technologies, including 1.6 Mha through rain
water harvesting and ground water (Awulachew, 2010). This indicates that there are potential
opportunities to vastly increase the area of irrigated land. According to Awulachew (2010)
given this high potential, if it is successfully operated, irrigation in Ethiopia could play a
significant role in the agricultural transformation of the country, contributing up to ETB 140
billion to the economy and potentially moving up to 6 million households into food security.

2.4.3. Irrigation Potential and Participation Situation in Oromia Region

Oromia has 63 river systems and 688 tributary streams which annually generate 58 billion
cubic meters of surface water, the equivalent of half the nation‟s surface water resources.
Despite this large water resources potential, Oromia‟s agricultural sector is almost entirely

21
dependent on rain-fed farming. Irrigated agriculture constitutes just under 5 percent of the
potential and about 2.14 percent of the total cultivated land (Anonymous, n.d.). The same
source also indicates that, in Oromia region, out of the estimated 1.7 million ha of potential
irrigable land, only 85,400 ha has been developed so far, which is about 5% of the potential.

The development of irrigated agriculture in Oromia is at its infancy and its contribution to
food supply is insignificant the same as for the whole country. The demand for food, fiber and
energy by the increasing population of Oromia and the country as a whole is expected to grow
substantially in the years ahead. Rain-fed agriculture through area expansion and
intensification alone is not enough to provide the basic requirements of food, clothing and
energy for the rising population. Hence, the development of irrigation will be essential to
augment rain-fed agriculture. In order to decrease dependence on rain-fed agriculture, the
regional government is in process of developing cost-effective irrigation schemes, especially
in areas with less reliable rainfall (MoARD, 2013)

22
 2.5 The Proposed Conceptual Frame Work
Institutional factor

Human Capital Factors -Market access

 Education -Credit access

 Training -Availability of Extension

Service
 Experience
-Agricultural input

-Market Information

Factors determine
the participation in
small scale irrigation
practice

Bio-physical factors
Economic Factors/Asset holding  Farm distance from
irrigation water source
 Land  Water source
 Road Distance
 Cash income
 Topography
 Livestock  Infrastructure
 Irrigation Technology
 Labor input

Demographic Factors

o Family Size

o Age

o Sex

Figure 1: Conceptual Frame Work of the study

Source: Own Survey
23
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1. Description of the Study Area
Dugda district is one of the 25 districts in East Shewa zone, Oromiya Regional States,
Ethiopia. The capital town of the district is Meki. It located 130 km from Addis Ababa (Fin
fine) and 90 km from Adama. The district shares boundaries with Zuway-dugda to the East,
South Nation, Nationalities and peoples Region to the West, Bora to the North and Adami
Tulu judo kombolecha to the South.

The study was conducted in Dugda Woreda which is geographically located between latitude
8•03‟N and 8•24‟N and longitude 38•32‟E and 39•02‟E in the Ethiopian Rift Valley; a huge
volcano-tectonic sunken block basically formed in the Tertiary period. The study area lies on
the flat valley floor at an elevation of 1,655m. The vicinity of the Meki town comprises a
plain sloping gently southeast towards the Ziway Lake at an elevation of 1,636 m. The plain
generally has a rather flat topography, varying its slope from 0.5 to 2.0 % (DOID, 2012).

The Dugda Woreda meteorological station is located at the center of the study area. It
receives an average annual precipitation (1966-1999) of 774 mm. The annual rainfall is rather
erratic. It ranges from a low of 344 mm in 1995 to a high of 1,091 mm in 1983. About 64%
of the annual rainfall is recorded during the period from June to September. The drier months
are from November to February, only 8% of the annual rainfall is recorded during this period.
The heaviest precipitation usually falls during August with as much as 21% of the annual
precipitation occurring during this p The mean annual temperature is 20.3•C at Dugda Woreda
with mild temperature prevailing throughout the year, which is suitable for a wide range of
tropical and subtropical crops. Mean monthly air temperature varies from 18.8 •C in
December to 22 •C in May. Period from March to June is relatively warmer, when the mean
temperature is generally above 21•C. The air relative humidity is 66% on average. Average
annual potential evapotranspiration is 1,658 mm, which is more than two times the annual
rainfall period. The dominant soil type of the area is mainly clay loamy with clay texture. The
total mean annual flow from the Rift Valley River Basins is estimated at about 5.6 billion

24
meter cube (Awulachew et al. 2007). The Wareda composes of four (4) urban centers and the
rural areas divided into 36 Peasant Associations (PAs). The land size of the district is 95945
ha, from this such as cultivated land is 60769 ha, forest land 3547 ha (natural 2488ha,
plantation 1057 ha, bush and grass land 3015 ha), water body 12032 ha, grazing land 7987 ha
and urban area 11448 ha. The total population number of the area is 144,910 whom 74561
male, 70349 females. From those rural population is 118,362 whom 60,655 female and 57,707
male.The town population number of the area is 39,357 whom 20,531 male, and 18,925
female (CSA 2016).Mixed agriculture is the main economic activities and population density
is estimated at 113 person/ km2 (CSA, 2011). Farming system in the study area is represented
by “traditional livestock-based mixed-farming system”, in which crop production and animal
husbandry are significantly supplemented by each other. The predominant crops are food
grains and pulses including teff, wheat, maize, barley and haricot beans and fruits like Papaya
and Banana (WBoARD, 2014). Their coverage amounted to 55,900 ha or 82% of the total
arable land of 67,828ha. An intensive farming system with commercial horticulture production
has also been practiced to a limited extent, i.e. 2.7% of the total arable land, along the
Mekiriver and the lakeshores of Ziway (DOID).

3.2. Research Design

The research is mainly descriptive employing mixed approaches i.e both quantitative and
qualitative approach. To acquire credibility and reliability of crude data was collected, the
researcher employs integrated approach such as focus group discussion (FGD), Key informant
interview (KII), Semi structured questionnaires , personal observation and other relevant
triangulation and data collection mechanisms.

3.3. Sample Size and Sampling Techniques

A cross-sectional survey was used as a research design of the study; followed by multistage
sampling techniques were used to select the sample respondents.

First, out of the potential Woredas in East Shoa Zone that has small-scale irrigation practices,
Dugda Woreda was purposively selected because the woreda has shallow water table, large
number of small -scale irrigation practices and the potential of the Woreda for irrigation
activities. In the second out of 36 kebeles of Dugda Woreda 8 kebeles has high potential to the

25
small scale irrigation compared to other kebeles and the rest kebeles were depend only on rain
fed agriculture. From these eight kebeles, in the third stage four kebeles are randomly selected
due to high potential and shallow water table to develop underground water for small scale
irrigation practices i.e Walda Makdela, Walda Kelina. Bekele Girrisaand Shubi Gamo
kebeles administrations were selected for the study. In these four kebeles, 240 households
were engaged in small scale irrigation practices. Moreover, the researcher has an exposure and
experience on small scale irrigation practices and knows well the study area

Finally, 90 irrigation users and 60 non-irrigation user respondents were selected using simple
random sampling techniques taking into account probability proportional to size of the
identified households in each of the four selected peasant associations. Therefore, a total of
150 respondents were interviewed.

Finally a random sampling technique was used.

As indicated above and also shown below the total small scale irrigation farmer repondent size
was determined by Yemane/1997/formula.Inthis regards, Singh andAjay (2014)., which was
used to determine sample size as below;

Where
n = sample size
N = population size
e = sampling error (0.05) which is 95% of level of confidence
According to the above formula, the total sample size for the total population is calculated as
follow

=240/1+240(0.0025)
=240/1+0.6
=240/1.6
=150

26
 Table 3.1: Sample Size Distribution

Total households Sampled household Total sample/

Participating in small Irrigating Non- kebele

scale irrigation irrigating
S/N Name of kebeles

1 WaldaMakdela 80 26 20 46

2 WaldaKelina 40 20 10 30

3 Bekele Girrisa 70 24 20 44

4 ShubiGamo 50 20 10 30

Total 240 90 60 150

Source: Own Survey, 2020

3.4. Data and Methods of Data Collection

For this study both qualitative and quantitative data were collected from primary and
secondary sources. To collect the required data several methods like interview schedule, focus
group discussions and key informant interview were used. The secondary data were also
collected from different sources such as relevant books, woreda agriculture and Natural
Resource office reports, internet and journal articles through reviewing the secondary sources.

3.5. Methods of Data Analysis

The collected data were compiled by using SPSS Version 20 statistical software. Both
descriptive and qualitative techniques were used for data analysis. The data gathered through
household survey were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods such as frequency,
percentage, mean and standard deviation (SD). Moreover, an independent t-test was used to
test mean differences between irrigation users and non-users with respect to continuous
variables which affects likelihood of participation in irrigation water utilization. A chi-square
test was also used to test the mean differences between irrigation users and non-users with the

27
relevant categorical variables. The qualitative data obtained from focus group discussions and
key informant interviews were also organized and reduced into themes; then interpreted,
narrated and finally complemented with the descriptive results.

In the second place, appropriate econometric methods based on the nature of dependent
variable was decided and used. Since the dependent variable of this study was dichotomous,
binary logistic regression was used to determine the factors influencing household‗s
participation decision in small-scale irrigation utilization among respondents.

3.6. Econometric Model Specification

The study was analyzed the level of significance for factor influencing household‟s
participation decision in small-scale irrigation utilization using binary logistic regression
model. Binary logistic regression model was used to identify factors influencing household
participation decision on small-scale irrigation. Variables included in the model were tested to
check the existence of multi co-linearity effect. The dummy and categorical variables will was
tested using contingency coefficient, and continuous variables were tested using variable
inflation factor. Contingency coefficient value ranges between 0 and 1, and as a rule of thumb
variable with contingency coefficient below 0.75 shows weak association and value above it
indicates strong association of variables. The contingency coefficient for the dummy and
categorical variables included in the model is less than 0.75 that don‟t show multi co-linearity
to be a serious concern. As a rule of thumb continuous variable having variance inflation
factor of less than 10 are believed to have no multi co-linearity and those with variance
inflation factor of above 10 are subjected to the problem and should be excluded from the
model. The computational results of the variance inflation factor confirmed the nonexistence
of association between the variables and will be included in the model. The model is assessed
for its goodness of fit by examining how well the model classifies the observed data or by
examination of how likely the sample results actually are, given the estimates of model
parameters (Hosmer and Lemeshow, 1989).

As indicated in Gujarati (1995), logit or probit models are widely applied to analysis of
determinant studies for a limited dependent variable and their result is similar.

28
The dependent variable in this study is the participation decision of the farmers in smallscale
irrigation practice. Since one of the dependent variables of this study, household‟s
participation decision in small-scale irrigation practice is dichotomous (binary), it takes a
value of 1 if the household has participated in small-scale irrigation practice and zero
otherwise.

Econometric Model specification

Following Gujarati (1995), the functional form of logit model was specified as follows:

− (𝛽0+𝛽1𝑥1)
Pi = E(Y=1/) = 1 /1+ (1)

For the case of exposition, we write (1) as;

−𝑧𝑖 (2)
Pi = 1/ 1+

The probability of the given household is not participating on small-scale irrigation is

expressed as by (2) while, the probability of participating on small-scale irrigation is;

𝑧𝑖 (3)
1-Pi = 1/ 1+

Therefore, we can write;

−𝑧𝑖
𝑃𝑖/ 1−𝑃𝑖 = 1+ 𝑧𝑖 /1+ (4)

Now, (Pi/1-Pi) is simply the odds ratio in favor of participating on small-scale irrigation. The
ratio of the probability that a household will not participate on small-scale irrigation to the
probability of that it will participate on small-scale irrigation. Finally, taking the natural log of
equation (4) we obtain:-

Li = ln(𝑃𝑖 /1−𝑃𝑖 ) = Zi = βo +β1X1 + β2X2 + ------- + βnXn (5)

Where Pi = is a probability of being participate on small-scale irrigation, ranges from 0 to 1 Zi

= is a function of n explanatory variables (x) which is also expressed as:-

Zi = 𝛽𝑜 + 𝛽1𝑋1 + 𝛽2𝑋2 + − − − − − − − + 𝛽 𝑋 (6)

29
𝛽𝑜, is an intercept, β1 , β2, -----------------------βn are slopes of the equation in the model Li =
is log of the odds ratio, which is not only linear in Xi but also linear in the parameters. Xi = is
vector of relevant household characteristics If the disturbance term (Ui) is introduced, the logit
model becomes

Zi = βo +β1X1 + β2X2 + --------- + βnXn+Ui (7)

3.6.2 Dependent Variables

The main intention here is to identify the factors determining the participation of the farmers
in small-scale irrigation practice.

3.6.3. The Independent variables and their definition

From the previous assessed literatures, the independent variables affecting participation in
small-scale irrigation practice are: Demographic variables such as education level and age of
the sampled respondents are independent variables. Moreover, land holding size, Number of
Ox owned, total annual income, Market distance ,Market information, Training, credit access,
farm distance ,family size and number of livestock owned... etc are the independent variables.

Age of household head (Age): This variable is continuous measured in years. From the
findings of different studies age of household head is found negatively affected the
participation in small scale irrigation practice by farmers and intensity of participation.
Therefore, this variable is hypothesized as influencing the small-scale irrigation practice
participation and intensity of participation of the farmers negatively.

Sex of the respondent (Sex): This variable is found that as the probability of participating in
small scale irrigation practice and irrigated area will be higher for male headed household as
compared to female headed households .In most cases the small-scale irrigation in rural areas
is carried out as extra farm activity and supplementary source of income for covering the extra
household expenditures and the effort required may be hard to female headed households to
participate in small scale irrigated farming. Therefore, this variable was hypothesized as, if the
household head is female there would be low probability of participating in small-scale

30
irrigation practice and less area of land to be irrigated when found participating in irrigated
farming.

Educational status of the respondent (Education level): This can be due to the knowledge
on the technologies they can get from education or by reading or utilizing the social Medias.
On the other way round, the literate farmers may be able to plan for getting higher income by
using both irrigated farming and rain-fed rather than being reluctant to participate in
smallscale irrigation practice than illiterate farmers. Based on these reasons, this variable was
hypothesized as being more an educated the respondent the more probability of participating
in small-scale irrigation practice and irrigating more area of land than illiterate counterparts.

Total annual income of the household (Income): This variable is continuous variable, which
is the total annual income measured in Ethiopian Birr. This variable is positively and
significantly affecting the small-scale irrigation practice participation of the farmers. The
higher the total income of the household, the higher the probabilities of participation in
smallscale irrigation practice by the farmers. This could be the case if the farmers with higher
income can cover the irrigation cost easily than lower income households. The farmers with
higher income can easily buy the inputs required for irrigated farming than lower income
households. Therefore, this variable was hypothesized as influencing the small-scale irrigation
participation decision of the farmers and its intensity positively.

Number of oxen (Oxen): This variable is quantitative measured in number of the oxen
owned by a household. The farmers with higher number of oxen are found to participate in
irrigation practice and with higher intensity of participation than those with lower number of
oxen . Oxen can be used as draft power for land preparation. The farmers with no oxen or
lower number of oxen may face difficulty in land preparation and may be in low probability
for participating in small scale irrigation practice. Hence, the variable is hypothesized as
affecting small-scale irrigation participation decision of the farmers and intensity of
participation positively.

Land holding size (Land size): This variable is continuous variable measured in terms of
hectare. Those farmers having larger area of cultivable land are participate more in irrigation
practice than their counterpart. Large size of cultivated land is sometimes seen as social status.
31
Because the status they have in the society may encourage those farmers to participate in
irrigated farming to maintain their status in the society. Therefore, this variable is
hypothesized as influencing the small-scale irrigation participation without predetermination
of the direction and influencing the area of land allotted for irrigated farming by the farmers
positively.

Distance of the nearest market (Market distance): This is a continuous variable measured
in hours it takes the farmer to arrive at the nearest market on foot. This variable is directly
related to transaction cost and it is used as a proxy. When transaction cost increases it
discourage participation in irrigation. The farther the distance of the market from the farmers
residence area, the lower the probability of the farmers participation in small-scale irrigation
practice. This can be due to the cost of transportation to take the outputs produced from
irrigation farm, the less accessibility of transportation means

Market information: This variable is found positively and significantly affected the
participation decision of the farmers This may be rendered that the information on the market,
such as input and output price enable the farmers to be benefited from the production under
irrigated farming. If the farmer does not have information on the demand of the product, they
may not be encouraged to produce since they do not know that production will have positive
return or loss. Therefore, this variable was hypothesized to influence the irrigation
participation and proportion of irrigated land positively.

Training: It is indicated by evidences that the farmers that obtained training on irrigation were
found to participate in small scale irrigation practice and irrigate more area, as compared to the
farmers that did not get any training on irrigation. Training can create awareness in the farmers
on the advantage of irrigation, the management of irrigation, and the knowhow and this may
enable the farmers to participate more in irrigated farming. Therefore, this variable was
hypothesized to influence participation in small-scale irrigation positively.

Credit access (Credit): The farmers having access to credit are able to buy irrigated farming
inputs required on time than those who do not have credit access. If the farmers cannot get
budget to purchase the inputs from their own fund and if they do not have access to credit on
the proper time and place, they may be unable to undertake the irrigated farming and it affects
32
them negatively. Therefore, this variable was hypothesized to affect participation decision and
intensity of participation in irrigation positively.

Distance of plot of land from water source (Farm distance): This factor leads to the higher
cost for the farmers to bring the irrigation water to their plot of land, or even they may be
unable to apply the irrigation water to their plot of land because of high cost required. Thus,
this may force the farmers having the plot of land far from the source of irrigation water not to
practice small-scale irrigated farming at all. Therefore, this variable was hypothesized to
influence participation in small-scale irrigation and intensity of participation negatively.

Family size: Family size is a quantitative variable measured in numbers of persons included in
the household. The farmers with higher family size were found participating in small-scale
irrigation practice more than those with lower family size. This may be the case when the
family members are used as the labor force in irrigated farming. This will reduce the cost
incurred in hiring external labor. It also enable the availability of labor on time at the time of
irrigation reducing the searching time for labor. Therefore, this variable is hypothesized to
influence participation in small-scale irrigated farming and its intensity positively. This means
that the higher the family size of the household, the higher the probability of participation in
small-scale irrigation practice and the higher the area of land the farmer will irrigate.

Total livestock owned (Livestock):The higher the total livestock owned by the respondent
the higher the probability of participation in small-scale irrigation practice . This result can be
related with the possibility of using the livestock sale at the time of irrigated farming as a
source of income that can be used for expending on irrigated farming. This means the wealth
can be used for more investment. Therefore, this variable was hypothesized to enhance
participation in small-scale irrigation practice participation of farmers and intensity of
participation.

33
 CHAPTER FOUR:

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is concerned with the discussion of the results obtained from the survey data and
secondary data from both qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Therefore, it includes the descriptive analysis of the farm household characteristics in the
study area, factors determining the participation decision of the farm households in small-scale
irrigated farming as well as the current status of small scale irrigation practice.

Lastly, major challenges (constraints) and opportunities in small-scale irrigated farming in the
study area are presented in this chapter.

4.1. Socio-economic characteristics of the respondent

The summary of socioeconomic characteristics of the farmers along with the mean difference
test (t-test) of continuous variables is presented in Table 4.1. As it can be observed from Table
2, the mean, standard deviation, minimum and the maximum values of the variables are
computed for the entire sample and for the groups, participants and nonparticipants. After
estimating the mean values, the significance of mean difference test was undertaken by two-
group mean comparison test for the continuous variables. The distribution of the categorical
variables related with irrigation participants and nonparticipants is given on Table 4.1. The
proportions of the respondents falling into these categories are given and the difference of the
proportion across participants and nonparticipants was tested by using chi-square test. The
detailed discussion of both continuous and categorical variables is presented under different
conceptual groups.

4.1.1. Demographic characteristics

The general demographic characteristics of the sample respondents are grouped on the basis of
their sex, age and educational background. Before going to the detail examine of the
objectives of the study, it is necessary to start from discussing the general characteristics of the

34
 households (respondents), because it plays a great role part of analysis and it also part of the
study that should be identified and assessed.

Table 4.1. Socio –economic characteristics of the respondents

Variables Irrigation utilization Total

Users Mean Non-Users Mean
Sex Category Male 57(63.3) 28(46.7) 85(56.67)
Female 33(36.67) 32(53.3) 65(43.34)
Total 90(100) 60(100) 150(100)

Age range 20-30 10(11.11) 38.8 8(13.33) 38.3 18(12)

31-40 35(38.88) 45(30)
10(16.66)
41-50 32(35.55) 15(25) 47(31.33)
Above 50 13(14.4) 27(45) 40(26.66)
Total 90(100) 60(100) 150(100)
Educational Illiterate 25(27.7) 18(30) 43(28.67)
background Read and write 35(38.89) 24(40) 59(39.33)
Primary 30(33.33) 18(30) 48(32)
Education and
Above
Total 90(100) 60(100) 150(100)
Source: Own Survey, 2020
Note: Figures within Brackets show percentages

The demographic factor such as sex of a respondent is mostly used as one of determinant
factors of participation in irrigation and found that male headed households are the most likely
participant in small-scale irrigation practice (Kinfe et al., 2012; Muhammad et al., 2013;
Gebrehaweria et al., 2014) and irrigate more area (Abebe et al., 2011). For instance, the study
by Kinfe et al. (2012), revealed that the finding is linked with different factors related with the
sex of the respondent that are more favorable for male than female such as suitability of easily
solving labor shortage due to physical, technological, socio-cultural and psychological fitness
of farm instrument to males than females and other related factors.

35
The result reveled that majority (56.67%) of the respondents are male headed when compared
to female headed. Likewise the proportion of the male headed households for participants
(56.67%) and non-participants (43.34%) (Table 4.1). This show that most of the male farmers
were living around that area participated on the small scale irrigation practices in addition to
rain fed agriculture.

Age is another demographic factor that shows negative significant influence on participation
in irrigation (He et al., 2007; Beyan et al., 2014; Edo, 2014; Gebrehaweria et al., 2014; Sithole
et al., 2014; Nhundu et al., 2015). These findings indicate that, younger household heads are
more innovative in terms of technology adoption and are more likely to take risk than older
household heads. As evidences has depicted, this findings by different scholars, implies that
the older the farmers, the more reluctant they may be in participating in irrigated farming due
to tiredness on one hand or the wealth they have accumulated during their adulthood on the
other. This variable, (age), also shown that it affects the area of land allocated for improved
irrigation technology negatively (Wang et al., 2015; Pokhrel et al., 2016). This indicate that
the more aged the farmers, they allocate more of their land to non-improved traditional
farming practice rather than improved technology such as irrigated farming, because older
farmers have shorter plan of living at this age.

Table 4.1 indicates that mean age of sample household heads of irrigation users and non-users
were 38.8 and 38.3 respectively; this indicate that the more aged the farmers, they allocate
more of their land to non-improved traditional farming practice rather than improved
technology such as irrigated farming, because older farmers have shorter plan of living at this
age.

The result show that the majority of respondents from both irrigation user and rain fed were
under the group of above 50 years. The descriptive analysis revealed significant difference in
age of household heads between participants and non-participants in irrigation. The mean
difference age of household head between the non-participants and participants was significant
at 5% (Table 4.1). The result indicated that the age of non-participants was higher as
compared to participants.

36
Human capital is the basis for the development of the economy of individual in particular and
that of the country in general. Education has significant role in developing countries like
Ethiopia for accelerated technology transfer and adoption of modern production system. This
is true for study area. Education equips the productive force with the necessary skill in
improving the productivity level. Education according to Philips (1994 as cited by Haile,
2008), helps people with the necessary skills and knowledge to actively participate in different
economic activities of their surroundings, and promote entrepreneurship. Thus, it is expected
that farmers with basic literacy and numeracy level can easily adopt new and productive
agricultural technologies.

Among the sample farmers, the majority (39.33%) were read and write, while only about
28.67% could illiterate .The rest attended Primary Education and above school. As it can be
seen from the estimated result, there is a positive relationship between household heads
education level and small-scale irrigation utilization. That means if farmers are educated, it is
easy to search and adopt new technologies and extension services. Education enables farmers
to search for new irrigation management practices. Moreover, as the result indicated that
majority of irrigation user household heads are educated as compared to non-users.
Descriptive statistics result revealed that, there is statistically significant difference between
the two groups in their education level (Table 4.1).

4.2. Results of Descriptive Analysis

This part of the study deals with the analytical result from descriptive statistics and
econometric model. The analysis was done based on the proposed objectives of the study.

Education status of household head: It was a continuous variable representing different

levels of household education status and assumed that it might increase the probability of
small-scale irrigation utilization. As it can be seen from the estimated result, there is a positive
relationship between household heads education level and small-scale irrigation utilization.
That means if farmers are educated, it is easy to search and adopt new technologies and
extension services. Education enables farmers to search for new irrigation management
practices. Moreover, as the result indicated that majority of irrigation user household heads are
educated as compared to non-users. Hence, the t-test result shows that there is a significant

37
mean difference between irrigation users and non-users regarding with the education status of
household heads (Table 4.1). This result is in line with Takele (2008) finding that stated as
literacy of a household head has a positive relationship with the use of irrigation water and
household income.

Farm Size: It was a continuous variable measured in hectares. It refers to the total land
holding of the household. It was estimated that farmers who have large land holding could
more likely involve in irrigation water use. This is mainly because farmers would have ample
production opportunities to boost their household income. If small land holding, the only
option is intensive production or producing two to three times a year. The t-test result shows
that there is a statistically significant mean difference between irrigation users and non-users
regarding with farm size (Table 4.4). Haile et al. (2001) also stated that land holding
determines the type and amount of production in the context of smallholders.

Proportion of Irrigated Land Size: This is a continuous variable and defined as the ratio of
irrigated land holding over the total land holding. Intensive irrigation enables households to
diversify their production and practice multiple cropping at different seasons. Large irrigated
land would have positive relationship with house holds‟ income diversification and poverty
reduction (Eshetu et al., 2010). If conditions are favorable availability of large proportion of
irrigated land could directly increases households‟ income (Smith, 2004). The t-test result also
showed that there is a significant mean difference between irrigation users and non-users
regarding with the proportion of irrigated land size (Table 1). This result is in line with Desta
(2004) study that indicated as direct positive relationship between proportion of irrigated land
size and irrigation utilization which has direct impact on households‟ income.

Total income: The total income in this study refers to all income obtained from farm
activities, off-farm and none-farm activities. Those households having better total income
have relative better capacity to participate in irrigation activities because it provides a start-up
capital. The t-test result also showed that there is statistically significant mean difference at
1% probability level between irrigation users and non-users (Table 4.2).

38
 Table 4.2: The current small scale irrigation practices of the study area

S/N Types of small scale irrigation No users

1 Modern micro dam -
2 Traditional river diversion -
3 Motor pump 80
4 Treadle Pump 10
Source: Own Survey, 2020

The study finding indicates that most of the small scale irrigation users were using the motor pump
from underground and river water source.

Table 4.3: Types of crops cultivated by irrigation users

S/N Types of crops cultivated by the irrigation No users

users
1 Onion 56
2 Cabbage 32
3 Tomato 28
Source: Own Survey, 2020

This shows that majority of the small scale irrigation users are cultivated onion

Table 4.4. Annual income generated by sample households from the irrigated crops

S/N Irrigation users (n=90)

Income (Birr)/household/year No Percentage
1 22500-35500 53 58.5
2 35501-50000 19 21.5
3 50001-75000 11 12.3
4 75001-100000 7 7.7
Mean 2106.66
Std. deviation 1460.24
Source: Own Survey, 2020

39
As shown in table 4.4, irrigation users have generated mean income of Ethiopian Birr 2106.66,
the maximum being Birr 100000 and a minimum was Birr 22500. The majority of irrigation
users' (58.5%) income fall in the first category (Birr 22500 to 35500), and it is only 20% of the
farmers who managed to generate income with the range of Birr 50001 to 100000. As shown
in Table 4.5, sample households' income from rain fed crop production is indicated. From the
table, it is possible to note that the majority of the sample households' income was found
within income range of Birr 20000 to 30000. In terms of mean income, irrigation users were in
better position, (since they are using chemical, fertilizer and properly used extension advisory
services), and the test statistic revealed that there is significant difference between the two
groups in their mean income.

The study finding indicates that small scale irrigation practices in the study area have made imprints
on the economic development of the participants. Small scale irrigation practices helped them to
increase in income, crop diversification, human development, employment creation, entrepreneurial
skills, food security productivity, assets and investment, changed occupation; users have realized the
economic benefits of the small scale irrigation practices.

Table 4.5. Income generated by sample households from rain fed crops

Income from rain fed Irrigation users (n=90) Non-Users(n=60) Total(n=150)

(Birr)/household/year No Percentage No Percentage No Percentag
e
20000-30000 45 50 42 70 90 60
30001-35000 22 24.4 11 18.3 33 22
35001-40000 14 15.6 5 8.3 15 10
40001-45000 9 10 2 4 12 8
Mean 1438.47 886.78 1162.62
Std. deviation 1200.27 753.02 1035.73
Source: Own Survey, 2020

40
 Table 4.6. Live stock ownership by sample households (TLU).

Irrigation users (n=90) Non-Users(n=60) Total(n=150)

No Percentage No Percentage No Percentag
Livestock (TLU) e
<3 14 21.5 29 44.6 53 33.1
3.01-8 35 30.8 27 41.5 57 36.2
8.01-12 41 32.3 7 10.8 28 21.5
>12 10 15.4 2 3.1 12 9.2
Mean 7.58 4.38 5.98
Std. deviation 4.77 3.67 5.53
Source: Own Survey, 2020

Livestock ownership

The result on Table 4.6 shows that mean livestock ownership by irrigation users is almost
double than that of non-users. The number of farmers who own more than 8 TLU was 31 for
users and only 9 for non-users. This shows that, irrigation user households have large number
of livestock as compared to non-users. A t- test result reveals that, there is a statistically
significant difference between users and non-users in the livestock ownership, at a probability
level of less than 1%.
Table 4.7: Productivity

Productivity Irrigation Utilization

User Non user Total
%
No % No % No %
Agree 71 78.9 49 81.7 120 80
Disagree 19 21.1 11 18.3 30 20
Total 90 100 60 100 150 100
Source: Own Survey, 2020

This shows the majority of the respondents responded productivity increase due small scale
irrigation participation.
[

41
 Distance of Irrigated Land from the Water Source: this shows the distance between
irrigation water sources and households „farm plot. In this study, this variable has an
implication on costs incurred to get irrigation water. Most of the farmers were using motor
pumps to access easily and timely the available irrigation water. In this regards, it was
reported that additional costs were incurred in purchasing of long plastic pump as the farm
plot is becoming very far from the water sources. Moreover, there was decreased water
potential around tail-end and more water was diverted by nearby up-stream motor pump users.
This had an adverse impact on participating in irrigation water utilization. Conversely,
households who were closer to the irrigation sources do not incur much cost. For instance,
upstream users have location advantage to exploit higher volume of irrigation water than the
downstream groups (Bahattari et al., 2002). Moreover, in this study the t-test result indicated
that there is statistically significant mean difference at 5% probability level between irrigation
users and non-users (Table 4.8).

Table 4.8: The Results of Continuous Independent Variables (N=150)

Irrigation Utilization
User Non user
Variables Mean Std.dev Mean Std.dev t-value p-value
Age of the household 38.8 8.26 38.30 6.89 -0.421 0.689
head
Education status of 5.31 3.31 2.90 2.84 4.587*** 0.000
household head
Active labor force 4.65 1.78 4.47 1.62 -0.614 0.540
Farm size 0.78 0.36 0.76 0.39 3.591** 0.012
Proportion of 0.56 0.27 0.86 0.49 4.847*** 0.000
irrigated land size
Total income 17498 8381 10473 4758 5.888*** 0.000
Livestock holding 3.76 2 3.36 1.74 -1.248 0.214
Farm distance from 0.71 0.35 0.85 0.39 2.264** 0.025
irrigation water
source (Km)
Source: survey result, 2020 **, *** significant at less than 5% and 1% probability level,
respectively

42
 Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

Sex of Household Head: It is hypothesized that probability of sex of the farmer would have a
positive influence on the use of irrigation water. As indicated from the total result 85 (56.7%)
of the respondents were male. Moreover, it was understood during focus group discussion
(FGD), female and male households did not participate equally in irrigation farming activities.
In line with this, Smith (2004) also detected that there is a positive and significant relationship
between sex and irrigation water productivity.

Table 4.9: Percentage Distribution of Sample Households by Sex

Sex of household Irrigation Utilization

head
User Non-User Total χ 2- value P-value
No % No % NO %
Female 33 36.7 32 53.3 65 43.3 4.072* 0.064
Male 57 63.3 28 46.7 85 56.7
Total 90 100 60 100% 150 100
Source: survey result, 2020; * significant at less than 10% probability level.

Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

Financial Constraints: Financial Constraint: this variable was negatively and significantly
affects the probability of participation decision on small-scale irrigation at less than 5%
significance level. This could be due to the fact that availability of cash at hand is pre-requisite
to purchase or rent irrigation pumps and its related expenses like fuel and repairing. Moreover,

43
irrigation activities are much expensive as compared to rain-fed in terms of use of external
inputs like fertilizers and physical labor. Therefore, irrigation activities are more capital and
labor intensive as compared to rain-fed and needs sufficient cash at hand for efficient
production and productivity. In addition to its huge labor requirements, irrigation practices
require a relatively large amount of money for re-designing of irrigation schemes, irrigation
networks and maintenance of the offered irrigation structures. This variable was expected to
correlate negatively with irrigation water use decision. The result reveled that majority of the
total respondents 130 (86.7%) were reflected that there is financial constraints. Hence, the chi-
square test result also showed that there is a significant relationship between financial
constraints and small-scale irrigation utilization (Table 4.10).

Table 4.10: Relationships between Financial Constraints and Irrigation Utilization

Financial Irrigation Utilization

Constraints
User Non-User Total χ 2- value P-value

No % No % No % 3.846* 0.084
No 8 8.9 12 20 20 13.3
Yes 82 91.1 48 80 130 86.7
90 100 60 100 150 100
Source: survey result, 2020; * significant at less than 10% probability level

Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

Extension Service Access and Utilization: Availability of extension service inevitably plays
a crucial role in terms of creating knowledge and skill in using improved agricultural inputs. It
also increases awareness among farmers about new farm activities through demonstrations,
trials and discussions. Unfortunately, the result from FGDs confirmed that extension agents

44
 were reportedly engaged in administrative activities rather than their real profession. This
shows that there is a weak extension administrative arrangement on the behalf of WBoARD.
Moreover, the chi-square test result revealed that there is no significant relationship
between extension service access and irrigation utilization in the study area (Table 4.11).

Table 4.11: Relationships between Extension Service Access and Irrigation Utilization

Extension service Irrigation Utilization

access and use User Non user Total χ 2- value P-value
%
No % No % No %
No 19 21.1 11 18.3 30 20 0.174NS 0.835
Yes 71 78.9 49 81.7 120 80
Total 90 100 60 100 150 100
Source: survey result, 2020; NS= not significant

Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

Training and Technical Advice: Training and technical advice is an important factor to
enhance the knowledge and skills of farmers. The more training and technical advice is
provided to the farmers, the higher is the probability that farmers adopt the technologies like
small scale irrigation to improve their production system. Most rural people lack knowledge
about the advantages of new technologies; hence, there is high demand for training and
technical advice especially while adopting new technologies. Most of the irrigation users were
identified that they have got training and technical advice. The chi-square test result revealed
that there is a significant relationship between training and irrigation utilization (Table 4.12).

45
Table 4.12: Relationship of training and technical advice with irrigation utilization

Training and Irrigation Utilization

Technical User Non user Total χ 2- value P-value
Advice
No % No % No %
No 20 22.2 43 71.7 63 42 36.129*** 0.000
Yes 70 77.8 17 28.3 87 58
Total 90 100 60 100 150 100
Source: survey result, 2020; *** significant at less than 1% probability level

Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

Credit service Access: Input credit was an important institutional service to purchase
agricultural inputs and water pumping motors. BUSA GONOFA and Oromia and Credit and
Saving Microfinance Institutions and informal credit institutions like Equb provide the credit
services as reported. It facilitated the use of new technological innovations like improved seed
varieties. In this sense, the findings of Takele (2008) also pointed out a similar result.
Irrigation users who accessed credits were maintaining their output if production fails due to
risks. The chi-square test result showed that there is statistically significant relationship
between credit access and irrigation utilization (Table 4.13).

46
 Table 4.13: Relationship between Credit Service and Irrigation Utilization

Credit Irrigation Utilization

service User Non user Total χ 2- value P-value
access and
use
No % No % No %
No 56 65.6 39 65 98 65.3 4.231* 0.067
Yes 31 34.4 21 35 82 34.7
Total 90 100 60 100 100 100
Source : Survey result, 2020; * significant at less than 10% probability level Source:

Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

Access to Market Information: In this study, it was assumed that the respondents who
owned radio had better opportunity to access market information on prices of inputs and
outputs, and use of radio on current local market information is determinant factor of
marketing agricultural products. As a result, owing radio helped some to get information on
existing market price. Others reported that owing radio widened their knowledge on new
market-oriented production activities. Farmers face low and unpredictable prices for crops
because they lack up-to-date information to access high-value markets (Eshetu et al., 2010).
Farmers‟ irrigation use decisions are mostly based on market price information (Abonesh et
al., 2006). In line with this, the chi-square test result revealed that there is a significant
relationship between access to market information and irrigation utilization (Table 4.14).

47
Table 4.14: Relationship between Market Information and Irrigation Utilization

Access to Irrigation Utilization

Market User Non user Total χ 2- value P-value
Information No % No % No %
No 29 32.2 22 63.7 51 34 4.985** 0.045
Yes 61 67.8 38 63.3 99 66
Total 90 100 60 100 150 100
Source: survey result, 2020; ** significant at less than 5% probability level

Note: P-value greater than 0.05 shows negative association with participation on the small
scale irrigation practices

P-value less than 0.05 shows positive association with participation on the small scale
irrigation practices

4.2. Econometric Results

Binary logistic regression model was used to identify factors influencing household
participation decision on small-scale irrigation. Variables included in the model were tested to
check the existence of multi co-linearity effect. The dummy and categorical variables were
tested using contingency coefficient, and continuous variables were tested using variance
inflation factor. Contingency coefficient value ranges between 0 and 1, and as a rule of thumb
variable with contingency coefficient below 0.75 shows weak association and value above it
indicates strong association of variables. The contingency coefficient for the dummy and
categorical variables included in the model was less than 0.75 that didn„t show multi co-
linearity to be a serious concern. As a rule of thumb continuous variable having variance
inflation factor of less than 10 are believed to have no multi co-linearity and those with
variance inflation factor of above 10 are subjected to the problem and should be excluded
from the model.

The computational results of the variance inflation factor confirmed the nonexistence of
association between the variables and were included in the model. The model was assessed for
its goodness of fit by examining how well the model classifies the observed data (in the

48
 classification table) or by examination of how likely the sample results actually are, given the
estimates of model parameters (Hosmer and Lemeshow, 1989). The result indicates that (the
model chi-square value) the parameters included in the model taken together were
significantly different from zero at less than 1% level of significance. Thus, the hypothesis set
that the entire coefficient except the intercept was rejected. The value of chisquare (155.467)
indicates also the goodness of fitted model (Table 4.11). Another measure of goodness of fit in
the logistic regression model is seeing how much the observed value is correctly predicted. In
other words, the observation is grouped as users if the computed probability of adoption is
greater than or equal to 0.5 (50%), and as non-users, otherwise.
Based on this, the result showed that about 93.3% of the non-users, and 94.4% of the users
were correctly predicted using the cut off value of 0.5. Overall, the model correctly predicted
94% of the sample cases (Table 4.15). Thus, the model predicted both user and non-user
groups of small-scale irrigation accurately.
Table 4.15: Parameter Estimate of the Logistic Regression Model
Explanatory variables Coefficient S.E Wald Sig. level Odds ratio Exp(B) Ratio
Estimated (B) statistics (P)

Age 0.469 0.997 0.221 0.639 1.598

Sex -0.067 0.070 0.924 0.337 0.935
EDU 0.360 0.181 3.981 0.046** 1.434
ACTFOR 0.502 0.387 1.681 0.195 1.652
FARMSIZE 6.584 2.667 6.096 0.014** 8.476
IRRLANDSZ 8.004 3.145 6.478 0.011** 0.001
TOTINC 0.000 0.000 7.500 0.006*** 1.003
TLU -0.126 0.342 0.136 0.712 0.882
FINANCONST 4.210 2.131 3.903 7 0.048** 7.387
FARMDIST 2.025 1.268 2.548 0.110 0.132
EXTVISIT 1.615 1.175 1.889 0.169 0.169
TRAINING 4.073 1.562 6.796 0.009** 18.706
RECVCREDIT 0.135 1.204 0.013 0.911 1.144
MKTINFO 2.997 1.633 3.368 0.066* 0.050
Constant -7.715 4.188 3.394 0.065 4.322
Pearson- ᵡ 2 value = 155.467*** df = 16 P = 0 .000
-2log Likelihood = 46.437
Prediction success(overall) = 94.0
Correctly predicted non-user = 93.3
Correctly predicted user = 94.4
Source: Model output; *, **, *** significant at 10%, 5% and 1% probability level,
respectively
49
4.3. Significant Explanatory Variables in Logit Model

The result of the logistic regression model is presented in Table 10. Out of the hypothesized
sixteen independent variables; seven were found to influence household participation decision
on small-scale irrigation in the study area. These are total income (TOTINC), education status
(EDU), farm size (FARMSIZE), training and technical advice (TRAINING), access to market
information (MKTINFO), financial constraint (FINANCONST) and proportion of irrigated
land size (IRRLANDSZ). These significant variables are discussed in detail in the following
section.

Total income of the household: The variable was significant at 1% significance level and
positively related to household participation decision on small-scale irrigation. This implies
that all other things being kept constant, the odds ratio in favor of small-scale irrigation
utilization decision increases by a factor of 1.003 as the total income of the household
increases by one birr. The possible reason for this is that having more diversified sources of
income would encourage households to participate in irrigation activities by providing a start-
up capital.

Education status of Household Head: This variable was hypothesized to increase the
probability of household's participation decision on small-scale irrigation. As a prior
hypothesis, this variable has a positive relationship to household's participation decision on
small-scale irrigation and affect significantly at 5% probability level. Other factors hold
constant, the odds ratio in favor of increasing household's participation decision on small-scale
irrigation by a factor of 1.434 as the household head education level increases by one year of
schooling.

Farm Size: Availability of appropriate farm size is highly important when farmers are ready
to adopt new technology. Farm size was positively related to the use of small-scale irrigation
and significant at less than 5%. This implies that all other things being kept constant, the odds
ratio in favor of small-scale irrigation utilization increases by a factor of 8.476 as the farm size
of the household increases by one unit. The possible reason for this is that farmers who have
large farm size could more likely involve in irrigation water use. The study result is in

50
agreement with the work of Haile et al. (2001) stated that farm size determines the type and
amount of production in the context of smallholders.

Training and Technical Advice: the variable was significant at 1% significance level and
positively related to household participation decision on small-scale irrigation. This implies
that all other things being kept constant, the odds ratio in favor of small-scale irrigation
utilization increases by a factor of 18.706 for those respondents who have got training and
technical advice regarding irrigation activities. The basic assumption is that the more training
and technical advice is provided by the extension agent to the farmers, the higher is the
probability of the farmers to utilize small scale irrigation.

Access to Market Information: this variable was positively and significantly affects the
probability of participation decision on small-scale irrigation utilization at less than 10%
significance level. This implies that all other things being kept constant, the odds ratio in favor
of small-scale irrigation utilization increases by a factor of 0.050 for those respondents who
have access to market information. The possible reason for this is that having more access to
up-to-date market information on prices of inputs and outputs would encourage households to
participate in irrigation activities and widened their knowledge on new market-oriented
production system. The result is in line with the work of Abonesh et al. (2006) stated that
farmers‟ irrigation use decisions are mostly based on market price information.

Financial Constraint: this variable was negatively and significantly affects the probability of
participation decision on small-scale irrigation at less than 5% significance level. This could
be due to the fact that availability of cash at hand is pre-requisite to purchase or rent irrigation
pumps and its related expenses like fuel and repairing. Moreover, irrigation activities are much
expensive as compared to rain-fed in terms of use of external inputs like fertilizers and
physical labor. Therefore, irrigation activities are more capital and labor intensive as compared
to rain-fed and needs sufficient cash at hand for efficient production and productivity. All
other things being kept constant, the odds ratio in favor of small-scale irrigation utilization
decreases by a factor of 7.387 for those households who constrained financially.

51
Proportion of Irrigated Land Size: This variable was significantly and positively affects
household's participation decision on small-scale irrigation at less than 5% as a prior
expectation. This implies that all other things being kept constant, the odds ratio in favor of
small-scale irrigation utilization increases by a factor of 0.001 as the proportion of irrigated
land size of the household increases by one unit. This can be justified by the fact that large
irrigated land helps to boost agricultural output through intensive production and minimizes
the risks through growing two or more crops within a year.

4.4. Challenges and Opportunities of Small-Scale Irrigation Utilization

Even though the Regional government in collaboration with other concerned institutions
supported the irrigation farm households with different input and credit services, technical
supports and supportive policies, the farm households has pointed out some limitations which
affect the irrigation performance negatively during the study. A field survey with sampled
respondents indicates that small-scale irrigation‟s great benefits are accompanied with multi-
dimensional challenges, some of them are presented here as below table.

Table 4.16: Challenges/Constraints affected the users as rated by Farmers

S/N Challenges/Constraints Numbers of users %

1 Lack of market access 80 89
2 Lack of Storage facility 64 71
3 Lack of market information 38 42
4 Shortage of agricultural inputs 44 49
5 Financial constraints(Access to credit facility) 76 84
6 Lack of skill man power on irrigation 30 33
technology
7 Lack of infrastructure (road) 42 47
Price 64 71
Source: Survey result

Challenges: The key informant interview figured out the following major constraints in the
study area. These include lack of knowledge on the efficient use of irrigation by the farmers.

52
Not only the farmers, but also there was lack of trained man power on the irrigation
technology and design. This lack of skilled man power lead to the loss of irrigation water
when using in irrigated farming since it was dependent on traditional and less effective
irrigation technologies such as totally earthen canals. The lack of market and linkage to other
market such as regional or national market was one of the major constraints in the study area.

Lack of strong linkage between micro finance institutions and smallholder horticultural crop
producers of the rural household was explained as it was very weak and it was pointed out as
one of the other major constraints restraining the farm households to participate in irrigated
farming. In addition to these challenges, as pointed out by key informants, there was no
research to overcome the problems and research based extension systems are not adequate to
improve the knowhow of the farmers and the development of irrigation systems. poor
marketing access and linkage, lack of adequate and frequent training to handle technologies
prior to introduction, shortage of improved seed supply, dependency syndrome on government
and donors (farmers want construction of diversion and water harvesting technologies from
the government and donors rather than introducing such irrigation activities and technologies
using their resources) and inappropriate utilization of inputs are the major challenges in the
study area. During focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews, respondents
were also reported that the governmental water sectors should solve the major small scale
irrigation problems identified during the survey include financial constraints especially for the
purchase of motor pumps, shortage of agricultural inputs like improved seed and pesticides,
design and construction of high cost irrigation structures, poor technology choice , supply of
spare parts, technical supports such as maintenance of motor pumps, strengthening value
chain, provision of market information and market networks, facilitating infrastructures like
roads and storages, and supply of agro-chemicals.

Opportunities: According to the information collected from focus group discussions and key
informant interviews, the overall opportunities for the development and management of
irrigation water are the availability of high surface water potential in the area, wide range of
technologies are now exists countrywide and can be also adapted to the local situation.

53
The other opportunity is that there is availability of favorable climate condition and ground
water in the area. It can be used as an opportunity to produce more than once a year if the
farmers could be able to access the ground water by means of treadle pump, hand pump and
motor pump, even though the motor pump was indicated as costly both for buying and the
energy required in terms of fuel. The other thing that can be taken as an opportunity for
irrigation development in the study area is a great emphasis given for irrigation development
by the government at country level. These all positive factors and the current natural situations
such as climate change (i.e. occurrence of El Nino) and agricultural products market
competition are good reasons to utilize the available water resources in the area.

54
 CHAPTER FIVE:

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSION

From the field observations made during the field work and the results presented and
discussed in the earlier sections, the following conclusions are made:

Nowadays, in Ethiopia, irrigation plays the key role in the performance of agriculture, which
increases income growth that is essential for national economic growth. The objectives of the
study were to identify factors that determine household„s participation decision on small-scale
irrigation, and assessing opportunities and constraints towards utilization of small-scale
irrigation by smallholder farmers‟ in the study area. In the study multi-stage sampling
techniques were used. Primary data were collected through interview schedule. Various
documents were also reviewed to collect the secondary data. To analyze the data, binary logit
model was used to identify the determinants of small-scale irrigation utilization. The findings
of the study revealed that among the sixteen explanatory variables entered into the model,
seven of them were found statistically significant at 1%. These variables include total income
of the household, training and technical advice, education status of household head, farm size,
financial constraint, proportion of irrigated land size, and access to market information.

Furthermore, there were many challenges and opportunities pointed out by the farmers and
key informants in the study area. The major challenges pointed out include shortage of market
demand and low market price at time of harvest, poor technology choice, lack of market
linkage, lack of skilled man power on irrigation issues, lack of training on irrigation
technologies and lack of knowhow, lack of adequate infrastructures and poor linkage between
applied research and extension services in the area of irrigation water management and
development were forwarded by the participants were the major constraints figured out in the
study area. These opportunities can be used to the maximum possible benefits if there is a
collective action by the farmers. Effective support from different institutions, governmental
and any other concerned civic associations could also be key role player.

55
Moreover, it needs calling up on these stakeholders to take part in enhancing the irrigated
farming by reducing the hindrances and strengthening available enabling factors in the study
area.
Therefore, to alleviate these problems and improve small-scale irrigation utilization, woreda
agricultural and natural resource office and other concerned bodies should attempt and
consider both ground and surface water as source of irrigation water and surveying activities
to address those factors that hinder small-scale irrigation utilization in the study area.
5.2. Recommendations

The findings of this study leads to the following specific recommendations.

 Irrigation farming to be sustainable, there is need for intervention by interested
stakeholders such as community based organizations and cooperatives.
 Market experts of the district should disseminate market information on the input and
major products prices, so that the farmers can use the information in deciding the type
and timing of crop produced by irrigated farming.
 The farmers should organize in to cooperatives in irrigation to minimize the
challenges of small-scale irrigation practice concerning market access.
 Encouraging farmers to apply new technology to be successful in smallscale irrigation
practice.
 The credit system and utilization means need to be facilitated more in the study area to
enable the farmers to use the credit in small-scale irrigation because this variable was
one of the significant variables found affecting irrigation practice.
 Local market linkage between producers and small traders as well as linkage to other
markets should be created to the farm-gate if possible to reduce the hindrance coming
because of market distance and access problem that discourages participation in
irrigation.
 Household head‟s education level was found to be significant determinant of the
decision of participation in small-scale irrigation. Therefore, the farmers should be
educated by a means that fits with their living condition, such as adult education.
 Develop the capacity of Farmers Training Center by supplying important equipment
and deployed skilled agricultural experts.

56
 REFERENCES

Abebe Ejigu, BihonKassa and Gebremedhin Yihdego. 2011. Determinants of land allocation
to irrigation and its wealth effect: Evidence from northern Ethiopia. Journal of the
Drylands, 4(2): 310-319.

ADEA (Association for the Development of Education for Africa). 2014. Ethiopia Country
Report For The 2014 Ministerial Conference On Youth Employment, Abidjan, Côte
d‟Ivoire, 21-23 July, 2014

AdugnaEneyew. 2014. Five key constraints to small-scale irrigation development in Ethiopia,

socioeconomic view: Review paper. Global Advanced Research Journal of
Management and Business Studies, 3(10):441-444

Anonymous.n.d. Irrigation sector overview in Ethiopia.

Awulachew, S.B. 2010. Irrigation Potential in Ethiopia.Constraints and opportunities for

enhancing the system. International Water Management Institute (IWMI).

Arcus G (2004). Principle, approaches and guidelines for participatory revitalization of

smallholder irrigation schemes. Year 1 Progress Report, WRC Project No.
K5//1463/4.Arcus Gibb, East London.

Birendra K, C, Schultz, B and Prasad, K (2011) Water Management to meet present and future
food demand. Irrigation Drainage. Vol 60, p 348-359

DerejeMangistie and DesalegnKidane. 2016. Assessment of the impact of small-scale

irrigation on household livelihood improvement at Gubalafto District, North Wollo,
Ethiopia. Agriculture, 6(3): 01-22.

Dubois, O. 2011. The state of the world's land and water resources for food and agriculture:
managing systems at risk. Earthscan. Edo

Gebremedhin Gebremeskel and AsfawKebede. 2015. Irrigation in Ethiopia: A review.

Academia Journal of Agricultural Research, 3(10): 264-269.

57
GorCornist.(1999) Peri Urban Irrigation in Kumasi, FAO.

Hellin J, Dixon J, Higman S, Keleman A 2011. High value agricultural products and poverty
reduction: Smallholder access to maize markets. Journal of Crop Improvement, 25:
371-391.

Hussain, I and Hanjra, M,A (2004) Agricultural Water and Poverty Linkages. Case Studies on
large and small systems in Asia. Development Bank Water and Poverty. The Realities

ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute). 2016. Workshop on Developing Policy for
More Effective Management of Water and Livestock Resources for Community Based
Irrigation in Ethiopia.

Jackson A and Steenhuis, T (1997) Environmental Issues. Small Hotters Sectors, University of
Zimbabwe.

Kaswamila, M (2004). The Role of Traditional Irrigation Systems in Poverty Alleviation in

Semi-Arid Areas: The Case of Chamazi in Lushoto District, Tanzania. MkukinaNyota
Publishers

Lyne MC, Hendricks SL, Chitja JM (2009). Agricultural growth and food security. In: S L
Hendricks and M C Lyne (ed), Does food security improve when smallholders access a
niche market? Lessons from the Embo Community in South Africa.The African Centre
for Food Security, University of KwaZuluNatal, South Africa.

MoA (Ministry of Agriculture). 2011. Small-Scale Irrigation Situation Analysis and Capacity
Needs Assessment, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

MoARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). 2010. Ethiopia‟s Agriculture

Sector Policy and Investment Framework: Ten Year Road Map (2010-2020), Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.

MonenusHundara. 2016. The impacts of hydropower projects in Ethiopia: The case of Fincha-
Amarti-Nashe (FAN) project in HoroGuduru, western Ethiopia. Fribourg University.

58
Mwakalila, J and Noe, P (2004) The Use of Sustainable Irrigation for Poverty Alleviation in
Tanzania: The Case of Smallholder Irrigation Schemes in Igurusi, Mbarali District.
MkukinaNyota

NPC (National Planning Commission). 2015. Ethiopian second five year (2015/162019/20)
Growth and Transformation plan, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Publishers

Ortman GF, King RP 2010. Research on Agri-food supply chains in Southern Africa involving
small scale farmers: Current status and future possibilities. Agrekon, 49: 397-417.

Sokoni, C and Shechambo, T (2005) Changes in the Upland Irrigation System and
Implications for Rural Poverty Alleviation. A case of the Ndiwa Irrigation System,
West Usambara Mountain; Tanzania

TesfaWorku and Sangharsh Kumar, Tripathi. 2015. Watershed management in highlands of

Ethiopia: A Review. Open Access Library Journal, 2(06): 1-11.

You L, Ringler C, Nelson G, Wood-Sichra U, Robertson R, Wood S, Guo Z, Zhu T, Sun Y

(2010). What Is the Irrigation Potential for Africa? A Combined Biophysical and
Socioeconomic Approach.IFPRI Discussion Paper 00993.International Food Policy
Research Institute, Washington, D.C.

59
 Appendix
Questionnaires

I. Demographic Background information of the household head

1.1. Sex: A) Male B) Female

1.2. Age: A) 20-30 B) 31-40 C) 41-50 D) Above 50

1.3. Marital status: A) Married B) Single C) Widowed D) Divorced

1.4. Education level: A) Illiterate B) Read and write C) Primary education D)Secondary
education E)Diploma & above

1.5. How many family members do you have?

A) 1-5 B) 6-10 C) More than 10

II. Small Scale Irrigation practices

2. Have you ever experienced in small scale irrigation activity? A) Yes B) No

2.1. If yes, for how long you have been practicing small scale irrigation activity?

A) 6month-1 year B) 1-2year C)More than 2 year

2.2. Which small-scale irrigation type do you use?

A) Modern micro dam B) traditional river diversion C) motor pump D) treadle pump E) others
(specify) 2.3. Have you cultivated your irrigable plot in full scale? A) Yes B) no

2.3.1. If no, why? A) Shortage of agriculture inputs B) Shortage of water C) Financial

constraints D) Shortage of water

2.4. What is the main source of your irrigation water? A) Well B) River C) Lake D) under
ground

2.4. How many times you produce per one cropping season on irrigable land?

A) Once B) twice C) three times D) four times

3. Have you used small scale irrigation planning? A) Yes B) no

3.1. If yes, what criteria you used to decide when and type of irrigated crops?

60
A) Demand of the crop B) Cost of the production C) Return/Profit D) Knowledge of
cultivation/experience

6.2. How far is the nearest of irrigation farm land from the water source?

A) 50-100m B) 101-150m C) 151-200m C) Above 200m

III. Socio-Economic status of the household

1. What is the total farm land you have (owned)? A) 0.5-1h B) 1-1.5h C) 1.5-2h D) Above 2h

1.2. How much of your land is used by small scale irrigation? A) 0.125-0.25h B) 0.26-0.5h C)
0.5-0.75h D) More than 0.75h

2. Have your own active family members participated in farm activity? A) Yes B) no

2.1. If yes, what type of activity they are engaged in? A) Weeding B) harvesting C) threshing
D) watering E) planting F) ploughing

3. What are the main sources of the labor for your small scale irrigation activity? A) Family
labor B) hired labor

3.1. Did you face any labor shortage during the last cropping/production season? A) Yes B)
No

3.1.1. If yes, how did you solve the labor shortage? A) Through hiring additional daily
laborers

B) Through debo/jigi C) using own family labors

6. Annual income from irrigation in one cropping season A) 22500-35500br B) 35501-

50000br C) 50001-75000br D) 75001-100000br

6.1. Annual income from rain fed in one cropping season? A) 20000-30000br B) 30001-
35000br C) 35001-40000br D) 40001-45000br

6.2. How far is your irrigation farm land from the main road? A)100-300m B)301-500m
C)501-1km D)More than 1km

IV. Access to extension service (Institutional Support and other related services)

2. Do you have access to extension services? A) Yes B) no

2.2. If yes, where do you obtain extension services? A) Development agent B) NGO C)
Media D) Woreda agricultural office

61
2.3. Do you receive any sort of extension services by agricultural development agents? A) Yes
B) no

2.3.1 If yes, around what topic? A) Agronomic practices B) IPM C) Post harvest

D) Applying agricultural inputs

3. Have you get any type of training on small scale irrigation utilization means? A) Yes B) no

3.1. If yes, by whom the training was given? A) Trained farmers B) by agricultural expert
C) by local NGOs working on the irrigation development D) DA

3.2. Do you think the training given was sufficient? A) Yes B) no

3.3. If no, if possible what type of training you want to be added? A) Appropriate method of
irrigation land B) Demonstration C) Manipulation of water pump

5. Do you get market information about your irrigation products? A) Yes B) no

5.1. If yes, what is the source of information? A) Intermediaries B) radio C) Cooperatives D)

Local market E) Extension agent

7. How do you sell your products? A) As individual B) as the members of informal groups

C) As a cooperative

8. How you perceive the price of irrigation products during harvesting season? A) Cheap
B) fair C) expensive D) fluctuate

9. Do you have market for your irrigation products? A) Yes B) No

9.1. If yes, what are the main problems in marketing your produce? A) Transportation
problem B) Too far from market place C) low market price of the product during production
season D) lack of storage facility E) Low demand for the produce

10. Where do you sell your farm products? A) On farm (local assembler) B) Taking to local
market C) Through service cooperatives D) Other (specify)

12. What is the method you used to transport your product? A)On back B)Vehicle C)Horse
cart D)Donkey cart E)Other (specify)

13. Do you need credit services for the production of your agricultural products? A) Yes B)
No

12.1. If yes, why?

62
A) To buy farm inputs B)To purchase oxen C)To rent additional farm land D)Other (specify)

14. What is the source of your credit?

A)Local traders B)Friends/Relatives C)Microfinance D)Traders E)Saving and credit

cooperatives(RUSSACO) E)Bank

Thank you!

63
 Interview guide for key informants
1. What is the trend of small scale irrigation activity in the past five years in the district?

2. How do you view the strength and weaknesses, of the small scale irrigation systems? (In
relation to technical and social aspects), what are the opportunities and challenges?

3. What are the existing policies in relation to agriculture in general and small scale irrigation
in particular and how do you view them?

4. Is there any restriction on the use of existing rivers for small scale irrigation?

5. How do you view the role played by Ethiopian government in small irrigation development
in the district?

6. What are important strategies for small scale irrigation development in the area?

7. What are the cultural and religious factors that affect the household‟s economic activity?
And their holdings?

8. What is the agro-climatic condition of the study area?

9. What are the major social organizations in the area and what are their roles?

10. What are non-farm activities available in the district?

11. What do you think are the major environmental problems in the area?

Thank you!

64
 Guiding questions for focus group discussion
1. What are the major opportunities in your local area to utilize small-scale irrigation water?

2. How do you view the strength and weaknesses, of the small scale irrigation systems? (In relation to
technical and social aspects)

3. What are the main constraints you face during utilization of small-scale irrigation water in your
local area?

4. Is there any restriction on the use of existing rivers for irrigation?

5. How do you view the role played by the government in small scale irrigation development in the
area?

6. What are important strategies for small scale irrigation development in the area? What type of small
scale irrigation water source do you think is more advantageous for the community in the area?

7. What are the indicators for wealth ranking according to the local community standards? Is there any
relationship with small scale irrigated farming?

8. What are the cultural and religious factors that affect the household‟s economic activity and their
holdings?

9. Discuss the following issues in your group; access to basic school facilities, health facilities,
drinking water (for humans & animals), irrigation services, road infrastructure, credit facilities, access
to modern farm inputs (fertilizer, improved seeds, pesticides, herbicides, veterinary drugs).

10. What are the major social organizations in the area and what are their roles in small scale irrigation
farming?

11. What are non-farm activities available in the district and how do you view its advantage related to
small scale irrigation farming?

12. What do you think are the major environmental problems in the area related with small scale
irrigation?

Thank you!

65