WACHEMO UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

CHALLENGES AND ADOPTION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION

PRACTICES IN HEYSE KEBELE, LEMO WOREDA, HADIYA ZONE, CENTRAL
ETHIOPIA

SENIOR RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL

RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUAREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NATURAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT

STUDENT NAME ID
MEKDELAWIT TAREKEGN-------1406258
GEBISA GEDEFA---------------------1493760
ROMAN GETISO-----------------------141469

ADVISOR: BELAYNEH GELETO (MSc.)

DECEMBER, 2025
WACHEMO, ETHIOPIA
 WACHEMO UNIVERSITY

APPROVAL SHEET

This is to certify that the senior research project entitled “Challenges and Adoption of Soil and
Water Conservation Strategies: Insights From Heyse Kebele, Lemo Woreda, Central Ethiopia
Regional State” Submitted to Wachemo University for the award of the BSc degree in natural
resource management is a record of Valuable senior research project work carried out under my
guidance and supervision. Therefore, I hereby declare that no part of this project has been
submitted to any other university or institutions for the award of any degree.

Name of Advisor Signature Date

Belayneh Geleto(MSc.) _______ ______

Department Head Signature Date

_________________ _______ _____

 CONTENTS
APPROVAL SHEET.................................................................................................................................2
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................6
List of tables...................................................................................................................................................7
CHAPTER ONE............................................................................................................................................9
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................9
1.1. Background of the Study..............................................................................................................9
1.2. Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................................10
1.3.1. General objective.........................................................................................................................10
1.4. Significance of the Study............................................................................................................11
1.5. Scope and limitation of the study...................................................................................................11
CHAPTER TWO...........................................................................................................................................12
LITRATURE REVIEW...................................................................................................................................12
2.1. Definition and Concepts of Soil and water Conservation....................................................................12
2.2. Global Overview of Soil Erosion......................................................................................................12
2.3 Constraints of Land Degradation in Ethiopia...................................................................................13
2.3.1 Consequences of land degradation..............................................................................................14
2.4 Causes of Soil Erosion.....................................................................................................................15
2.4.1. Slope affecting erosion............................................................................................................15
2.4.2. Rainfall and wind affecting erosion.........................................................................................15
2.4.3. Soil Erodability affecting erosion............................................................................................15
[Link]. Vegetation and land cover affecting erosion.........................................................................15
2.4.4. Population pressure affecting erosion......................................................................................16
2.5 Consequence of soil erosion...........................................................................................................16
2.6. Soil and water conservation practices in Ethiopia..........................................................................17
2.6.1. Traditional soil conservation practices.....................................................................................17
[Link]. Application of manure..........................................................................................................18
[Link]. Soil (Stone) bund..................................................................................................................18
[Link]. Contour Ploughing................................................................................................................18
[Link]. Drainage Ditches..................................................................................................................18
[Link]. Cut off Drains.......................................................................................................................19
[Link]. Leaving Crop Residues.........................................................................................................19
 [Link]. Terracing...............................................................................................................................19
CHAPTER THREE........................................................................................................................................20
3. METHODS.............................................................................................................................................20
3.1. Description of study area....................................................................................................................20
3.1.1 Location............................................................................................................................................20
3.1.3 Population.................................................................................................................................20
3.1.4 Land Use and Production System.............................................................................................20
3.2 Sample Size and Sampling Technique.............................................................................................21
(Cochran, 1977)....................................................................................................................................21
3.3 Method of Data Collection...............................................................................................................22
3.4 Method of Data Analysis..................................................................................................................22
CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................................................23
4. RESULT AND DESCUSSION.....................................................................................................................23
4.1. Demographic Characteristics of Sample Households....................................................................23
4.1.1. Sex distribution of households.................................................................................................23
4.1.3. Marital Status of the Respondents............................................................................................24
4.1.4. Educational Status of Households............................................................................................25
4.1.5. Family Size of Households......................................................................................................25
4.2 Labor Resource................................................................................................................................26
4.3 Participation of Households in off-Farm Activities...........................................................................28
4.4 Involvements of Respondents on the Land Use...............................................................................28
4.5 Distributions of Respondents by Land Size......................................................................................29
4.6 Land Productivity.............................................................................................................................30
4.7 Soil and Water Conservation Practices............................................................................................30
CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................................................32
5. CONCLUTONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................32
5.1. Conclusions.....................................................................................................................................32
7. APPENDIX..............................................................................................................................................38
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, we would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to Almighty God for guiding
us in all aspects of our lives. We would also like to extend our sincere appreciation to our
advisor, Belayneh Geleto (MSc), for his invaluable guidance throughout the preparation of this
senior research project. Additionally, we wish to convey our deepest thanks to our parents for
their unwavering support and encouragement.
 ACRONYMS
ADLI Agricultural Development Led Industrialization
CSA Central Statistic Authority
DAs Development Agents
EFAP Ethiopian Forestry Action Plan
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization
GDPs Gross Domestic products
HHs Households
SIDA Swedish International Development Authority
SLM Sustainable Land Management
SWC Soil and Water Conservation
UNFCCC United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change
USAID United State Agency for International Development
 List of tables
TABLE 1. LAND USE TYPE.......................................................................................................................................... 22
TABLE 2 SAMPLE HOUSEHOLD HEADS BY SEX..............................................................................................................24
TABLE 3 SAMPLE HOUSEHOLD HEADS BY AGE GROUP..................................................................................................25
TABLE 4 MARITAL STATUSES OF RESPONDENTS...........................................................................................................25
TABLE 5 EDUCATION OF HOUSEHOLDS.........................................................................................................................26
TABLE 6 FAMILY SIZES OF HOUSEHOLDS......................................................................................................................27
TABLE 7 MECHANISM OF OVERCOMING LABOR SHORTAGE..........................................................................................29
TABLE 8 OFF-FARMING ACTIVITIES..............................................................................................................................29
TABLE 9 LAND USE IN FARMING PRACTICES.................................................................................................................30
TABLE 10 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS OF LAND SIZE............................................................................................30
TABLE 11 FERTILITY LEVELS OF FARM LANDS............................................................................................................31
TABLE 12 SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION MEASURE................................................................................................32
 ABSTRACT

Soil erosion and land degradation constitute critical challenges to agricultural productivity, food
security, and rural livelihoods in Ethiopia, particularly in the highland areas where population
pressure and inappropriate land use practices are prevalent. This study examines the challenges
and adoption of soil and water conservation (SWC) strategies in Heyse Kebele of Lemo Woreda,
Hadiya Zone, Central Ethiopia Regional State. The area is characterized by undulating and
steep topography, high rainfall, and intensive mixed farming systems, which together exacerbate
soil erosion and fertility decline.

The study employed a cross-sectional research design using both quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Primary data were collected from 100 randomly selected household heads through
structured questionnaires, key informant interviews, and field observations. Secondary data were
obtained from reports, published literature, and records of the Woreda agricultural office.
Descriptive statistical tools such as frequencies, percentages, and means were used to analyze
quantitative data using SPSS, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically.

The findings reveal that soil erosion is a major environmental and agricultural problem in the
study area, driven by steep slopes, heavy rainfall, land fragmentation, deforestation,
overgrazing, and limited awareness of sustainable land management practices. Both biological
and physical SWC measures are practiced, including vegetative strips, crop residue
management, reforestation, soil bunds, control bunds, and cut-off drains. However, adoption
remains limited due to labor shortages, land scarcity, inadequate training, financial constraints,
and weak institutional support. Despite these challenges, households practicing SWC reported
improved soil fertility, reduced runoff, enhanced land productivity, and better crop performance.

The study concludes that strengthening farmer participation, enhancing training and extension
services, and promoting context-specific and labor-efficient conservation technologies are
essential for sustainable soil and water conservation. The findings provide valuable insights for
policymakers, development agents, and natural resource managers in designing effective and
participatory watershed management interventions to improve land productivity and rural
livelihoods in the study area.

Keywords: Erosion, Soil and Water Conservation

 Citation rule using APA style:-
1. If the author was one, for example….Abebe Kebede and published year was 2010
In the main body, this is cited as: (Abebe, 2010).
2. If the authors were two, for example…..Dagne Bekele and Melaku Girma, and published year
was 2010

In the main body, this is cited as: (Dagne and Melaku, 2010).

3. If the authors were three and above, for example….Teketel Beyene, Assefa Tegegn, Aster
Kebede, and published year was 2010
In the main body, this is cited as: (Teketel et al., 2010).
 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study
Soil conservation involves preventing soil loss from erosion and mitigating fertility reduction
caused by overuse, acidification, salinization, or chemical contamination. Water conservation
refers to the preservation and management of both surface and groundwater resources, along
with pollution prevention (Nations, New York, 1997).

According to the International Soil Reference and Information Center, an estimated nine million
hectares of land globally are severely degraded, with their original biotic functions lost, and an
additional 1.2 billion hectares classified as at least moderately degraded. Inappropriate
agricultural practices are responsible for 28 percent of these degraded soils, with roughly one-
quarter situated in Africa and Asia and nearly two-thirds found in North America ( World
Resources Institute, 1996).

In Sub-Saharan Africa, soil degradation significantly contributes to declining per capita

production, driven by nutrient mining, soil erosion, poor land management, and limited
resources. In the East African highlands, degradation of arable land has emerged as a major
constraint on agricultural productivity, primarily due to nutrient loss from soil erosion,
inadequate restoration resources, and unbalanced nutrient extraction (Amede et al., 2001; cited
by Abay Ayalew, 2011).

Natural resource degradation is the principal environmental challenge in Ethiopia, evident in

eroded soils that have lost nutrients without replenishment, alongside issues of deforestation and
water resource depletion. Soil erosion is particularly severe in the highlands of Ethiopia,
especially in areas above 1,500 meters above sea level, which cover about 46 percent of the
country’s landscape. These regions support over 80 percent of the population, account for more
than 95 percent of regularly cultivated land, and host about 75 percent of the livestock population
(Bekele S and S Holden, 1998). Agricultural development data from 2007 indicate that Lemo
Woreda is vulnerable to soil erosion, exacerbated by population expansion, limited land
availability, inappropriate land use practices, overgrazing, and the collection of firewood for
construction.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

In Ethiopia, watershed degradation, characterized by soil erosion and declining fertility, presents
a significant challenge to agricultural productivity and economic growth. A watershed is not
merely a hydrological unit but also a sociopolitical and ecological entity that plays a crucial role
in ensuring food, social, and economic security, providing essential life support services to rural
communities (Wani et al., 2010).

Soil and water conservation is a vital practice that helps meet the basic needs of humans,
supports the survival of animals and plants, and enhances the economy of a country by
increasing productivity (MOARD, 2005). Soil erosion is among the most serious environmental
problems in Ethiopia. The prevalence of traditional land-use practices, coupled with inadequate
resource management, frequently leads to soil degradation. This has significant implications for
soil productivity, household food security, and poverty levels across various regions of the
country (Teklewold and Kohlin, 2011).

In Lemo Woreda, soil erosion caused by water has become a pressing issue, particularly as the
demand for farmland increases. Farmers are cultivating steep slopes and impoverished lands that
are highly susceptible to erosion. Additionally, soil and water conservation management
practices are not well implemented due to factors such as lack of labor, technology, capital, and
limited land availability. Therefore, this study aims to assess the soil and water conservation
practices in the study area to address the existing information gap.

1.3.1. General objective

The general objective of this study was to examine the challenges and adoption of soil and water
conservation strategies in Heyse Kebele, Lemo Woreda, within the Central Ethiopia Regional
State.
1.3.2. Specific Objectives

To identify the prevalent soil and water conservation methods in the study area.
 To evaluate the obstacles faced in implementing soil and water conservation practices in
the study area.

1.3.3. Research Questions

What are the prevalent soil and water conservation methods?

What challenges do farmers face regarding soil erosion management practices in the
study area?

1.4. Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will assist the Woreda natural resource officials and development
agents in formulating strategies, investment programs, and projects that foster positive attitudes
toward soil and water conservation practices. It will help identify key challenges hindering the
effective implementation of watershed management practices, enhance soil productivity, and
improve food security. Successful soil and water conservation practices rely on a clear
understanding of the causes and effects of watershed management degradation, the application of
suitable conservation measures, and the active participation of farmers in both planning and
implementing these measures. Furthermore, watershed users will recognize the importance of
their contributions and labor support, which are crucial for the successful adoption of watershed
management technologies that advance soil and water conservation initiatives

1.5. Scope and limitation of the study

The study was focused in the issue mention above in Woreda because it is not promising to
investigate other problems at the same time due to the resource inadequacy and other constraints
Therefore, since it is not possible to cover the whole aspects of the study area with the
unavailable time and inadequacy of resources, it is advisable to limit the study area. Hence, the
studied were focused on the representative sample kebele sites in area. During the research work
particularly data collection process, the researcher were been face some limitations and the major
ones are figure out as follows. These problems were associate with topography, temperature, lack
of transport costs and, communities suspicious to tell the right information’s specially, with
regard to household characteristics, and another relief organizations as well as inadequate
reference materials, were been the major limitations during the study.
 2. LITRATURE REVIEW
2.1. Concepts of Soil and water Conservation
In the first part of the review of the related literature, attempt has been made to give concise
definitions to commonly used terms in the research. As a result, land degradation is defined as
the loss of utility or potential utility through the reduction of or damage of physical, social-
cultural, or economic feature, and/or reduction of ecosystem diversity. There may be a single
cause or a complex mix of causes (Headworth and Steins, 2003).

Land degradation is the temporary or permanent lowering of productive capacity of the land.
Soil conservation refers to the protection of fertile top soil from erosion by wind and water and
the replacement of nutrient in the soil by means of cover crops, terracing, contour farming crop
rotation etc. SWC can define as the combination of the appropriate land use and management
practices that promotes the productive and sustainable use of erosion and other forms of land
degradation (Senders, 2004).

SWC is not restricted to the protection of the threatened hillside or their rehabilitation by
planting of trees. Its scope is much larger and it involves the whole agricultural and natural
resource conservation. Generally, soil-water conservation includes all forms of human action to
prevent and treat soil degradation (International Institute for Environment and Development,
1998).

As Tibabe and Mitiku, (2002) cited in Addisu, (2011), the aim of soil-water conservation is to
facilitate optimum level of production from a given area of land while keeping soil loss below a
critical value and protections of the life supporting capacity of soils such as soil quality, soil
depth , soil structure, water holding capacity and soil productivity
2.2. Global Overview of Soil Erosion
Since, our world population obtains more than 99.7% of their food from the land and less than
0.3% from the oceans and aquatic ecosystems, preserving cropland and maintaining soil fertility
should be of the highest importance to human welfare. Soil erosion is one of the most serious
threats facing world food production. Each year about 10 million ha of cropland are lost due to
soil erosion, thus reducing the cropland available for world food production.
The loss of cropland is a serious problem because the World Health Organization and the Food
and Agricultural Organization report that two-thirds of the world population is malnourished.
Overall, soil is being lost from agricultural areas 10 to 40 times faster than the rate of soil
formation imperiling humanity’s food security (Pimentel and Burgess, 2013). Much of the world
has been facing increasingly serious soil erosion of various degrees caused by both natural and
human factors as well as its consequent environmental deterioration.

The loss of soil through land degradation processes particularly by erosion is one of the most
serious environmental problems. The reduction in water availability due to land degradation and
soil erosion is a major global threat to food security and the environment (Pimentel, 2006).

Erosion by water is a primary agent of soil degradation at the global scale, affecting 1094 million
hectares, or roughly 56% of the land experiencing human induced degradation. Likely, soil from
the world's croplands is being swept and washed away 10 - 40 times faster than it’s being
replenished. Even, one rainstorm can washes away several millimeters thick soil. When we
consider a hectare, it would take 10s tons of topsoil - or several decades and even centuries if left
to natural processes to replace that loss (Mazengia, 2010).

Furthermore, the same study clarify that croplands are the most susceptible to erosion because of
repeated cultivation and the continual removal of plant cover More than 80% of land degradation
is due to soil erosion out of which 56% is due to the water induced soil erosion. As to this study,
with the addition of a quarter of a million people each day, the world population food demand is
increasing at a time when per capita food productivity is decline (Oldeman, 1992).Since 1945
moderate, severe, extreme soil degradation has affected 1.2 billion hectares of agricultural land
globally, an area size of China and India combined. Some 80 percent of this degradation has
taken place in developing countries and most countries lack sufficient resources to repair
degraded land (Melville, 2006).

2.3 Constraints of Land Degradation in Ethiopia

Degradation on the earth surface is one of the most severe global problems of our times, which
affect 33% of the land surface; with consequences for more than 2.5 billion
people. About 40% of the world’s agricultural land is seriously degraded, were 80% of this
degradation is caused by soil erosion.

This worldwide depletion of land resource continues to be serious hazard particularly, in the
main pillar of their economy. Land degradation in Ethiopia account for 8% of the global total
(Mazengia,2010).The most serious problem concerning country’s land resources, is the removal
of fertile top soil by water and wind. This much more severe in the highland area where 85% of
the human and 77% of livestock population are living and agricultural is intensive (Mazengia,
2010).

As estimates from national level studies indicates more than 2 million hectares of Ethiopia’s
highlands have been degraded beyond rehabilitation and additional 14 million hectares severally
degraded ,which is reflected in cereal yield reduction averaging less than 1.2 tons per hectares in
most of the highlands (International Journal of Ecosystems and Management, 2013).

As result of this extensive land degradation, which in turn caused by various intermingled
factors; soil productivity has been negatively affected and agricultural production has not been
meeting the basic food requirements of the growing population. This has significantly
contributed to the hunger faced by some five to seven million people in the country, there by
requiring external assistance every year for their survival and more than 45% of the total
population to toil below the absolute poverty line (Gete et al.;2006).

2.3.1 Consequences of land degradation

The problem of land degradation is not new. In fact soil erosion, soil salinity and related from of
land degradation have been with us from the time when humans first domesticated animals,
settled and started to raise crop at least 700 years ago (Blaike and Brook field, 1987). At time,
the problem of land degradation has become so severe that is has contributed to, if not caused,
the decline of great civilization in such place as china, Mesopotamia, Egypt, north Africa and
Greece (Hurin, 1990).

In Ethiopia, farmers who on average cultivation on hectare of food crops and keeps some
livestock, is now days dependent on natural condition and cannot tolerate further deterioration of
soil productivity due to increasing population, intense land cultivation, un controlled grazing and
deforestation often lead to soil erosion (Bishop, J 1992).

2.4 Causes of Soil Erosion

According to (Hurni, 1994), water erosion, wind erosion, and physical and chemical
deterioration are processes responsible for soil erosion and further he indicated that soil erosion
by water and wind account for 84% of all the damage. He has also indicated that 28% of all types
soil erosion at the global level is caused by cultivation and 35% by overgrazing and 29% are
related to deforestation.

2.4.1. Slope

Erosion increases dramatically because the increased angle facilitates water flow and soil
movement. Data for assessment of the effect of slope length and gradient on soil erosion is
limited. Increase slope lengths enhance soil loss as more run off can accumulate on long slopes
(Thomas, 1991).

2.4.2. Rainfall and wind

Water erosion may take several forms, which include raindrop, splash erosion, sheet erosion, rill
erosion, gully erosion, and stream bank erosion. Surface running water is responsible for the
formation sheet, rill, and gully erosion. The extent of erosion is greatly affected by the size and
impact energy of the rain drops, the soil structure, and the steepness of the slope and particularly,
on plant cover (United Nation, 1997).

Erosive processes are set in motion by the energy transmitted from either rainfall or wind or
combinations are not easily observation on daily basis, water and wind are both capable quickly
damaging soil (Pimentel, 1998).

2.4.3. Soil Erodability

The major soil classes fond in the highland are vertisols, nitosols luvisols, artisols, cambisols,
and phalozemssols vary in there resistance to erosion partly based on texture and amount of
organic matter. Soil high in silt and low in clay and sand are highly erodible (Nill et al, 2001).

[Link]. Vegetation and land cover

Throughout the world, the lowest erosion rates, ranging from 0.004 to 0.5 ha per
year are found in undisturbed forests (Pimentel, 1998). However, one’s forest land is converted
to agriculture, erosion rate increase because of vegetation removal, overgrazing and tilling.
Vegetation cover reduces erosion by intercepting and dissipating rain drop and wind energy.
Plant roots also enhance water conservation by creating pores in the soil surface that enable
water to enter easily into the soil (Thomas, 1991).
[Link]. Land use
Tillage operation is sometimes carried out along slopes. Furrows formed along slopes cannot
slow down runoff compared to those made along contours. Production of teff, the main cereal
crop in the Oromia region, requires fine land preparation to allow the small teff seeds to
germinate. However, fine till aging also makes the soil vulnerable to erosion during the part of
the main season (Thomas, 1991).

2.4.4. Population pressure

Population growth increases the demand for land and contributes to farming on steep and fragile
soils, also leading to erosion problem. Population growth increases demand for livestock
products and there for leads to increased livestock numbers causing overgrazing and
consumption crop residue by animals (Baland and Platteau, 1996).

The rapid increasing population pressure has led to vast change in land use pattern mainly caused
by increasing agriculture production. In this region cultivated land showed slow but continuously
increasing trend at the expense on forest and grassland over the last 4 decades (Gete, 2000).

2.5 Consequence of soil erosion

Soil erosion has both on-site and off-site effect. The on-site comes due to loss soil productivity
capacity, causing either reduced output (crop yield, livestock yield) or the need to increase input
to achieve the same yield level. Off-site costs refer to the indirect effect of soil erosion, and
usually take the formal of externalities. Most off-site costs can be traced to the effect of site; soil
nutrients washed into surface water or leached into subterranean aquifer by rainfall and irrigation
of runoff (Bishop, 1992).

The impact of erosion on crop yield is through change in soil chemical characteristic and
changes in soil physical or chemical structural characteristics (FAO, 1999). One of the most wide
spread example of the former is the loss soil nutrient through removal of the top soil due to
erosion because the highest concentration of nutrient through necessary of plant growth is found
in the upper layer of the soil. Thus, the loss of this layer results in decrease in soil nutrient
reserve. This situation is more serious on soil with low level of natural fertility, as is the case in
much of the topic; ( Sanchez and Logas, 1992).
Soil erosion has causes widespread ecological damage. Such marks of erosion as wide spreads
rock outcrop, shallow and very shallow soil, strong surface of deep gullies at the bottom of steep
slope colluvial and alluvial accumulation are common features of the highland (Hurns, 1995).

2.6. Soil and water conservation practices in Ethiopia

Today, soil conservation in Ethiopia is considered to be top priority, not to maintain and improve
agricultural food production but also to achieve food self-sufficiency, which is the long term
objective of the agricultural development program. Therefore, massive effort is being made in
soil conservation by the ministry of agriculture (Hurni, 1990).

Soil conservation is maintaining good soil health by various practices. The aim of soil
conservation is to prevent soil erosion, prevent soilless over us, and prevent soil contamination
from chemical .There are various measures that are used to maintain soil health and prevent the
above harms to soil (Hudson, 1992).
2.6.1. Traditional soil conservation practices
Traditional soil conservation measures were pioneered by the natives and ethnic group found
mostly in remote areas of the uplands. These upland areas have been established settlements and
practices of technologies for centuries, even before the advent popularization of modern
technologies .These technologies, rooted on socio-cultural and religious beliefs, had been
developed over many generations and had passed the test of time (Rico and Dulnuan, 1980).
[Link]. Fallow land
Fallow land is a traditional practice of leaving the crop land uncultivated for one or more years
for the purpose of recovering soil fertility and minimizing soil loss (Herwerg, andLudi, 1999).
(Teklu and Gezahegn, 2003) argue that following is a practice of abandoning for rejuvenation
when the nutrients are exhausted. Fallow land is commonly as a grazing ground for five to seven
years depending on land holding of the farmers and the nature of the land recover.
[Link]. Application of manure
Application of manure is used by many farmers in order to improve the fertility of the
soil. Manure consisting of animal dung and urine and it’s the best form of organic fertilizer.
Farmers used manure mainly near the homestead. Farmers (especially, those who are poor) have
increased the use of manure applied because of the high current price of inorganic fertilizers
(Stark, 2000).
[Link]. Soil (Stone) bund

Soil (stone) bund is any embankment or ridge built across a slope along the contour. Soil bunds
are made up of soil or mud. On moderately sloping areas the farmers construct the soil bunds for
erosion control. On steep eroded bare lands, stones terraces are mostly used structures in steep
slope mountainous area (Tripathi, 1993).
It is common to see ridge covered with grass between plants of farmland. This structure is
important for soil conservation which can reduce the intensity of erosion in the farm fields and
important for soil fertility through controlling erosion (Gebregziabher, 1988).
[Link]. Contour Ploughing
Contour Ploughing is a practice of tilling the land along the contours of the slope in order to
reduce the runoff on a steep slope land. It is used separately or in combination with other
conservation structure such as plantation trees and cut –off drains. It is carried out using the ox-
drawn plough. Hence, it is part of the normal farming activity; it needs extra labor and time for
construction (Garrity, 1999).
According to (Yeshambel, 2013), most farmers in Ethiopia apply different methods of soil
conservation. Cultivating crops on the contour where the slope steep is one of the most of the
used contour Ploughing in order to minimize runoff and soil erosion.
[Link]. Drainage Ditches
Drainage ditches are one of the widely used soil conservation practices also known as traditional
ditches. These are micro channels constructed on cultivated farms to drain off excess water and
control soil erosion.

These are low cost measures in which construction is part of the normal Ploughing activity.
However, unlike the plough furrows, the ditches are made wider and deeper in dimension and
usually run diagonally across the field (Herweg and Ludi, 1999).

[Link]. Cut off Drains

Cut off drains are one of the physical structure constructed by digging the soil deep in order to
divert the run off before reaching the farmland. The farmers constructed such structure to prevent
loss of seeds, fertilizer and soil due to excessive runoff coming from uplands and dispose the
excess water for the field (Herwerg and Ludi, 1999).
Cut-off is more of less parallel or the roads. Their function is to catch and lead away the surface
water coming from higher lying areas before to reaches the road or to direct water to where it
safety crossing such as culverts, bridges and drifts.

These drains when property built are very effective in reducing the amount of water around the
road thus limiting the damage to the road and result reducing maintenance cost (Mushier, 2010).

[Link]. Leaving Crop Residues

Leaving crop residues on the field after harvesting is another traditional practice used by the
farmers. These types of practice improve fertility of soil and thereby protect soil from erosion.
As result the shortage of animal feed and roof cover for hut, most of the farmers used the crop
residue for off plot purpose (Herwerg and Ludi, 1999).

[Link]. Terracing
Terracing among one of the best soil conservation practices, where cultivation is done on a
terrace leveled section of land. In terracing, farming is done on a unique step like structure and
the possibility of water running off is slowed down (Tones et al., 1998). In protecting soil
erosion as studies indicates, soil conservation activities in Ethiopia are old history The
indigenous soil conservation practices have been practiced in various parts of the country. An
interesting example is the terracing activity of Konso farmers in southern Ethiopia. Other Soil
conservation including following, crop rotation, strip cropping, manuring, and ditches buildings
are practiced extensively (Gedano, 1990)
3. METHODS
3.1. Description of study area
3.1.1 Location
This study was conducted in Hayse Kebele, which is found in Lemo Woreda, Hadiya Zone. It is
located in 7km from Hossana town. The study area is located in south direction Dinika Kebele,
in the north semen Shacha Kebele, in the west Shacha Kebele and in the east Lisana Kebele
Map 1. Map of the Study Area

Source: Ethio-GIS (2024)

3.1.2 Climate, topography & soil Type

Hayse Kebele, has been wet weyna dega agro climate zone which extend to 1300-2200 m with
1000mm average rain fall .In addition to this, the minimum and maximum temperature was 18
and 25 respectively.
The topographic condition of Hayse Kebele is characterized by undulated, hilly and gentle or flat
area. The topographic area of the study area is more dominated steeper slope topographic area
(Lemo Woreda agricultural office, 2021).

In the Hayse Kebele have different types of soil, contain clay, sandy and silt soil. The major soil
types of the area based on their texture are clay, silt (Lemo Woreda agriculture office, 2021).
From those soil types, the dominant one is silt which covers 50% of the total area which is found
in depth has been reduced to less than 40cm in many areas of the high lands. Also the silt soil
type is located in cultivated, Forest and grazing land of the area. This soil is very useful
especially, in cropping area as it has good productivity (Abay A, 2011).

3.1.3 Population
The total population of Hayse Kebele was 3519 from those, 1777 are female and 1742 are male.
and out of the 483 total households, 312 are male and 171 are female (CSA, 2007).

3.1.4 Land Use and Production System

The study area of the land coverage is 894 hectares from these the cultivated land is 67.5%
ha ,grazing land 8.2 %, forest land 3.5% , home steady land 15% building of nongovernmental
institution 1.1% ,building of governmental institution 1.5% shrub land 1.2% and non-land use
0.5% and permanent coverage of land by rock 1.5% (Lemo Woreda, 2021). The production
system of study is mixed farming system which includes both crop production and livestock
husbandry. The dominantly cultivated annual crops are cereals like; maize, tiff, wheat, bean,
peas, chat and vegetable like; tomato, cabbage, potato and carrot. The dominant livestock
productions are sheep, goat, cow, ox, horse, mule, donkey and hen. These types of farming
systems are the major sources of income and increase the living standard of the community.
Table 1. Land use type

No Types of land use Area coverage in ha Percentage

1 Farm land 200 30.3
2 Forest land 10 4.38
3 Grazing land 7 2.29
4 Planted in the future land 16 10.36
5 Other land 8 5.74
 6 Settlement 18 3.33
7 Permanent cereal crop 265 32.0
8 Artificial planting by eucalypts cover 72 11.0
Total 596 100
Source: Field survey, 2025

3.2 Sample Size and Sampling Technique

The Woreda was selected purposively based on the presence of SWC practice. From the Woreda,
one Kebeles was selected also purposively due to the presence of erosion severity the existence
SWC products, and accessibility of the area for the research after discussion with the Woreda
agricultural office experts. Based on the stated objectives, it was important to select respondents
in which SWC practices are prominent form the study area. Accordingly, from the 483 total
households, sample households have been selected by using simple random sampling technique.
As a result, 100 household heads were selected. To clarify the selection of the 100 households
(HHs), we utilized Cochran's sample size formula, which is a well-established method in
research for determining an appropriate sample size based on specific population parameters.
Given the total number of households in the Woreda was 483, we calculated the initial sample
size (n()) using the formula:

2 no
z pq n=
n o= 2 no−1
d 1+
N
, where a confidence level of 95% corresponded to a z-value of 1.96, the estimated proportion of
the population (p) was set at 0.09, and the margin of error (d) was established at 0.05.
After calculating (n()), we applied the finite population correction to derive the actual sample size
(n), which yielded a final selection of 100 HHs. The decision to select 100 households was
guided by the need for a statistically significant representation while ensuring the feasibility of
data collection. This process allowed me to ensure that the sample was both representative of the
population and manageable within the constraints of the research timeline and resources. Thus,
the selection of 100 HHs is based on sound statistical principles tailored to the specific context of
this study.
3.3 Method of Data Collection
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------.

3.3 Methods of Data analysis

The information collected comprised both quantitative and qualitative data. For the quantitative
data, descriptive statistics were employed, including frequencies, percentages, and means, using
software SPSS. This analysis allowed for a comprehensive summary of socio-demographic data
and the adoption rates of SWC practices. For qualitative data, thematic analysis was performed
to identify key patterns and insights, which were then, quantified using percentage calculations
and tables for clarity and presentation.
 4. RESULT AND DESCUSSION
4.1. Demographic Characteristics of Sample Households
This chapter is mainly concerned with the description and interpretation of the finding based on
the result of the cross sectional data collected using questionnaire that was administered to 100
sample households and data collected using interview and field observations on the study area
about demographic characteristics as well as the soil and water conservation practiced in the
study area.
4.1.1. Sex distribution of households
According to the total sample household heads 54 (54%) were male and 46 (46%) were female
household head. The survey result shows that there was a difference between male and female
household headed with respect to the adoption of soil and water conservation practice. That is
male household heads are more actively participated than female household head in soil and
water conservation practice because female household head have more responsibilities at the
home. Women are also more involved in regular household activities than men. In the area, a
woman takes most of the household responsibilities (child care, food processing and weeding
and bringing water from long distance) as well as most SWC practices in the area require a great
deal of labor for construction which can’t be undertaken by women alone.
Table 2 Sample household heads by sex

Sex of households Frequency percent

Male 54 54
Female 46 46
Source: Field Survey 2025
4.1.2. Age status of households
The age of respondents was categorized in to different age groups Based on this finding, as Table
1 shows, the average age of rural households of this Kebele is found between the range of 20-30,
31 -45, 46-64 and >64 that is 15%, 52.5%, 25%, 7.5% respectively. Age is one of the
demographic characteristics that influence the decision of farmers to soil and water conservation
practices. Most of the HHs (85%) is in the age range of 31 -64 years. Farmers in this age group
are assumed to have a good understanding of problems of soil erosion due to access to
information, and as a result, usually more interested in soil and water conservation practices. The
proportion of elderly farmers is 7.5%, an age group in which labor shortage can be difficult to
practicing soil and water conservation measures.
Therefore, the survey result shows that 18 there were few old age respondents due to short life
expectancy and farmers with this age usually troubles in the soil and water conservation practices
because as SWC practices needs higher labor forces.

Table 3 Sample household heads by age group

Age group Frequency Percentage

20-30 33 33
31-45 35 35
46-64 25 25
About 64 7 7
Total 100 100
Source: field survey, 2022
4.1.3. Marital Status of the Respondents
Marital status of household head is one aspect of demographic characteristics that determine
households access to information and resource and hence on soil and water conservation
measures.
As in Table 2, specified, the overall marital status of households were characterized as high
percentage of rural households have getting married 77.5%, divorces 5% and significant numbers
of widow contained. This indicated that large number of households getting married and this has
advantage for soil and water conservation practices in mutual cooperation as well as to share
information among each other with in the households’ members.
Table 4 Marital statuses of respondents

Marital status Frequency Percentage

Single 30 30
Married 41 41

Window 25 25

Divorced 4 4

Total 100 100

Source: Field survey, 2025

4.1.4. Educational Status of Households
According to the educational status of households in the study area, about 35 (35%) of the
sample household heads were unable to read and write, out of this 65 (65%) wearable to read and
write. The result of the survey indicated that the level of education was related with adoption
decision of soil and water conservation practice that is literate farmers are more participating on
SWC practices than of illiterate farmers, because literate farmers were in a better position to get
information and use it in their farming practices about conservation practices. Therefore,
education is an important instrument to enhance agricultural technology adoption decision in
general and SWC practices in particular via acquired knowledge and information which are
consider to the result of education. This is supported by (Yonuis, 1993) stated in his study
education increase awareness of farmers about the comparative advantage of SWC practices,
observation of the negative consequences of soil erosion, might influence farmers to adopt SWC.

Table 5 Education of households

Education Frequency Percentage

Illiterate 65 65
Read and write 35 35

Source: Field survey, 2025

4.1.5. Family Size of Households

. Household size, which can determine the amount of labor force in the households, is expected
to bring about variation behavior of households as to which soil and water conservation practices
to use (Semgalawe, 1998). Households with large work force may invest more in conservation,
which is considered more effective and efficient by the households. From the total household
head as indicated that the average family size of the sample household heads was ranging
between < 3 (25%), 4-6 (55%), and 7-9 (15%), respectively.

The survey result indicated that large number of households their family size was found 4-6
family members whereas no number of households their family members was found >10 family
members. Households with large family size contribute significant labor for agricultural
activities including soil and water conservation practices as most of farming community gets the
labor force from the family members.
According to the information gathered from the interview and questioners who have small
household size, require additional labor not only to construct and maintain soil and water
conservation measure but also for agricultural activities. This indicates SWC measures need
large number of labor forces like agriculture and that is the reason why large family in the rural
area is considered as a wealth in order to support during agricultural and conservation activities
as well as to support during old ages. Thus, household size influences the decision of farmers to
undertake the type of conservation measures as household is the supplier of the required labor for
undertaking the farming and soil conservation operation.

This is supported by the study of Wogayehu and Darke (2003) who indicated that because the
practice of SWC is tied with higher labor forces, in the household, large family size positively
influences on the practices of soil and water conservation practices. In relation to this our field
study shows that the positive relation between family size and SWC practices.
Table 6 Family sizes of households

Family size of households Frequency Percentage

1–3 30 30
4–6 35 35
7–9 25 25
> 10 10 10
Total 100 100
Source: Field survey, 2025
4.2 Labor Resource
Labor together with land, capital and management are the most important factors of (inputs) in
any kind of production like farming activities and SWC practices. Mostly, 21 farm activities
Such as cultivation and harvesting are labor intensive. However, soil and water conservation
activities are highly labors intensive that may need labor more than available in the household
and the sample households’ reported that labor shortage was one of the problem faced during the
peak seasons.
From the total sample households all respondents were faced labor shortage particularly during
the peak seasons and to solve the problem the households use different mechanisms. As shown in
Table 1.3, the sample households were using by hiring labor 40%, both hiring and cooperating
with other 42% and by cooperating with other farmers 18% to overcome the labor shortage. The
survey result indicated that the popular way of overcoming labor shortage in the study area was
the traditional by cooperating with other farmers system and both hiring and cooperating with
other. Information from the key informant interview supported what was found out by the main
questionnaire indicated that labor shortage is one of the problems faced specifically during the
harvesting of agricultural crops season as they were asked to explain it. At this period the
demand for labor reaches its peak and labor shortage happens and use cooperating with other
farmers and hiring at time of harvesting, plowing and weeding to solve the problem. Therefore,
the farmers were faced labor shortage for agricultural activities including soil and water
conservation practices

In addition to this, as they were asked to explain their labor resources to the FGD members, local
labor organizations are categorized in local institutions, which were born and grown up with in
the community. Mostly, farm activity such as cultivation and harvesting are labor intensive and
also SWC activities are highly labor intensive. In their locality, there are two types of traditional
labor organization that help to perform farm operation, social activities like wedding,
construction and conservation activities. These are labor exchange and labor party. Both are
takes place between neighbors, kinship groups and people who have marriage ties.

Labor exchange is a group of 5-10 farmers working together rotation ally on their farm plots
especially in peak period. Here, each farmer covers his expense for food but for drinking is
expected from the owner of the activity. However, in labors party the owner of the farm on
which activities were being performed expected to cover all expenses of other farmers including
payments unlike the labor exchange. Thus farmers in the study many areas faced labor shortage
for farm operations such as cultivation, harvesting and SWC activities. They used local labor
organization to solve the problems.

Table 7 Mechanism of overcoming labor shortage

Mechanism Frequency Percentage

By hiring labor 40 40
Both hiring and cooperating with other 42 42
By cooperating with other farmers 18 18
Total 100 100
Source: Field survey, 2025
4.3 Participation of Households in off-Farm Activities
Participation of households in off farm activity is common practice in the study area. Off-farm
activities may have a negative effect on the SWC practices due to reduced labor availability and
it may have also positive effect as it became source of additional income and it might encourage
investment in the farming and SWC practices. As show from Table 1.4, out of 100 sample
household heads about 100%was involved in off-farm activities. Farmers that engaged in off-
farm activities in the study area includes handicraft 37%, laborer 21%, petty trading 15%,
brewing 6% and selling firewood 21% as additional income for agricultural production. Of the
total households that were participated on off farm income, 100 responded involving on off-farm
income was not hinders for soil and water conservation practices. The survey result show that
involving on off–farm activities were not constraints to participate on SWC practices
Table 8 Off-farming activities

Types of work Frequency Percentage

Handicraft 37 37
Laborer 21 21
Petty trading 15 15
Brewing 6 6
Selling of firewood 21 21
Total 100 100
Source: Field survey, 2025
4.4 Involvements of Respondents on the Land Use
As shown in Table 1.5, from the total sample household heads about 47% respondents were
involved in cultivation of their own land, about 36% were involved on share cropping and the
remaining 17% was involved in renting only. The results were indicating that involvement in
informal land exchanges was common in the area. The two most important exchange
mechanisms of the land between the farmers are share cropping and renting of land. In case of
share cropping the yields are shared equally between the land owner and the renter and all
expenses that require during the farming processes covered by the renter. Where as in the case of
renting of land the renter will pay the payment in the form of cash to the land owner depending
on their agreement. However, farmers who are involved in share cropping and renting land did
not construct permanent and effective conservation measures as they cultivate the land only for
short term as long as the agreement with the owner exists.
Table 9 Land use in farming practices

Description Frequency Percentage

Cultivation their own land 47 47

Share cropping 36 36

Renting 17 17

Total 100 100

Source: Field survey, 2025

4.5 Distributions of Respondents by Land Size

According to the Table 1.6, of the total respondents 28% were having < 0.5ha of land,
41% of having 0.5-1.0 ha of land, 20% were having 1.0- 1.5 ha and 11% having > 2ha of land.
This indicates that more than half of the households owned not exceeds one hectare and this
condition motivated the farmers to cultivate the grazing land for compensation. This condition
leads to expose the land for erosion and the distribution of the land also has another problem that
resulted from the ever increasing population pressure leads to fragmentation of the land.
Table 10 Distribution of respondents of land size

Land size in hectare Frequency Percentage

< 0.5 28 28
0.5 – 1.0 41 41
1.0 – 1.5 20 20
>2 11 11
Total 100 100
Source: Field survey, 2025

4.6 Land Productivity

Land productivity is essential to raise agricultural production on a given plot of land. The fertility
level of a soil is essential to enhance crop production. As shown in the Table 1.7, the fertility
level of the soil of this kebele is classified by the households` perception as good or productive
soils 36%, followed by very good 29%, moderate 25% and poor 10%. The survey result indicates
that 36% of the households were classified the land productivity as good.
They indicate that better yield is shown because of the result of soil and water conservation on
the small watershed based natural resources conservation. But, it is limited to the conservation
practices were implemented site.
Table 11 Fertility levels of farm lands

Responses Frequency Percentage

Poor 10 10
Moderate 25 25
Good 36 36
Very good 29 29
Total 100 100
Source: Field survey, 2025
4.7 Soil and Water Conservation Practices
Soil conservation involves the use of biological and physical measures to offset the effect of land
degradation specifically soil erosion. Biological or agronomic measures refers to skills and
knowledge that uses in the farming practices where as physical measures are aimed at controlling
and diverting the runoff in arable and none arable area (Semgalaw, 1998).

This study indicated that two type of soil and water conservation practices in Ana balesa kebele
and the most widely practiced by public participation were biological (Vegetative strip 40%,
Protecting bush land 20%, Reforestation 20%, Crop residue 35%) and physical (Terracing 2% ,
Check dam 5%, Control Bund 30%, Cut of drain 10%) those type of conservation method are
also promoted by self-motivation to protect the plots from severe erosion and to increase
agricultural production traditionally such as application of control bund , plantation, fallowing.
According to the total of 100 sample household heads, about 65 (65%) of the households
participated on public soil and water conservation and about 35 (35%) of the total households are
not participated on public soil and water conservation practices. Response of household through
questionnaire indicated that no doubt soil and water conservation have their own importance not
only to increase the amount of crop production but also at the growing stage where crops and
grass show better performance on places in which conservation practices are takes places.

Table 12 soil and water conservation measure

Types of SWC Biological Physical Frequency Percentage

(%)
Biological Physical Biological Physical

1 Vegetative Terracing 40 2 40 2
strip
2 Protecting Check dam 20 5 20 5
bush land
3 Reforestation Control bund 20 30 20 30

4 Crop residue Cut of drain 35 10 35 10

Source: Field survey, 2025

4.7.1 Training on Soil and Water Conservation
Although training has significant contribution on soil and water conservation practices, the level
of training is very low in study area. According to survey, about 72.5% of farmers have never got
training on soil and water conservation applications, 22.5% have got only a limited training, and
only 2.5 % has got adequate training. These indicated that training and education on soil and
water conservation practices need to be provided to improve soil and water conservation efforts
and to create further awareness on natural resources conservation generally and on SWC
practices specifically as well as to create smooth relationship with experts. This shows that soil
and water conservation practices require relatively frequent training and education but it is
limited as depicted.
 5. CONCLUTONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions
Based in the field survey, Soil erosion is the major problem challenging the livelihood of the
people in the study area. Among the physical factors, heavy rainfall and topography of the lands
are the major one, while the human factors include land mismanagement, lack of awareness,
deforestation, over grazing. The people of the study area have been practicing soil and water
conservation methods. These soil conservation methods are both biological and structural
(mechanical) soil conservation measures. Among the biological methods, application of
plantation, cutoff drain, and fallowing, while structural was only soil bund.

The soil conservation methods have their own challenges and benefits through their application.
Among the challenges, narrowing the farmland, need extensive labor, economic challenges,
social challenges and perception of farmers towards soil conservation methods are the major one.
While regarding benefits of soil conservation methods includes: protecting land quality, inducing
permanent farming, well planned soil conservation, reduce risk of flood, enhance food security
and providing employment opportunities. Generally, as we observed there were a number of
challenges which affect adoption of soil conservation practices to control soil erosion as well as
benefits which is protecting land quality, inducing permanent farming, well planned soil
conservation reduce risk of flood, enhance food security and providing employment
opportunities.
 5.2. Recommendations
In this researcher assessed the SWC practices in the study area based on design methodology
gathered data were analyzed and different findings are identified to reach conclusions, Depend
on the conclusion the following recommendations are forwarded.
 In study area the adoption of on soil and water conservation is limited. This is suggested for
improvement adoption technologies aimed at individual household participatory technology
development. Therefore, farmers` training and promotion should be given due to attention to
build up its community capacity through increasing training at FTC level
 Soil erosion was the increasing problem which needs the adoption conservation practices
decision of soil and water conservation practices. This implies that unless planners first
increase farmer’s recognition of soil erosion hazard, it would be very difficult to implement
effective and sustainable SWC practices. In another words, the planning, designing and
implementation process of conservation activities should ensure local people participation in
all stages of SWC and make use of the existing local knowledge with conventional
technologies to improve the adoption of the tecnologies.
 The study also identified those challenges of SWC practices. However, the nature and extent
of the problem vary depending on the agro-climatic and socioeconomic conditions of the
kebeles. The conservation measure that is suitable and works in one location may not match
to other locations and face unexpected limitation. So, it is recommended that the concerned
body should consider the specific field condition and prescribe measures that are appropriate
to that particular area.
 A major policy implication of the study is the strengthening of development agents on
creating awareness in the farmers contributes significantly improves conservation adoption.
REFERENCES
Abay Ayalew. (2011). Construction of Soil Conservation Structures for improvement of crop and
soil productivity in the Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Environment and Earth Science
Adbacho Wachiso. (1991). Biological or Vegetation Cover as a Sustainable Soil Conservation
Strategy: A case study of Tilku Demala, [MA Thesis]: School of Environmental
Science; University of East Anglia. Aguchocatchment, west [Link]
conservation research project report
Aklilu Amsalu and Graff, [Link]. (2006). Determinants of Adoption and Continued Use of
Amede, T and Kirk by, R. (2001).Guidelines for integration of legumes in to the farming system
of East African High lands.
Ayalneh Bogale. (2002). Land degradation, impoverishment and livelihood strategies of rural
households in Ethiopia: Farmers perception and policy implication. PhD
Dissertation Institutional change in agriculture and natural resources, Bd. 8 Zugl:
Berlin, Humbolds, Germany. 1-208 pp.
Baland, JM, and Platteau, JP.(1996).Halting degradation of Natural resources. Oxford; Oxford
University Press.
Bekele Shiferaw and [Link].(1998).Resource degradation and adoption of land conservation
technology in Ethiopia highland; case study in AnditTid, northshowa;
[Link].18 (3), pp233-248.
Bishop, J. (1992).Economics analysis of soil [Link] keeper series, NO.92-
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling Techniques, Third Edition, New York: John Wiley& Sons,
Inc.
CSA (Central Statistic Authority). (2007). Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia, Result at
De Roo, A.P. (1993). Modeling surface run-off and soil erosion in catchments using
geographical information system. PhD [Link] of [Link]
Nether lands.
Dercon Stefan. (1999). Ethiopia poverty Assessment study. Revised version of a report for
IFAD. Development and Sustainability; Vol. 8, pp 119–137. 96
Departement. Environment. Available at: Ethiopia. M.S.C. Thesis. Agriculture
University of Norway (AUN). 32
FAO. (1999). Erosion induced loss in soil productivity and its impacts on agricultural production
and food security. Southern and Eastern Africa. Harare, zimbabuwe,8-12
(December 1997).
Fisum Hagos, J. Pender and G. Nega. (2002). Land Degradation and Strategies for Sustainable
Management in Ethiopian Highlands: Tigray Region (second edition)
Socioeconomic and Policy Research Working Paper 25. ILRI. Nairobi, Kenya.
Garrity, D.P. (1999).contour farming based on natural vegetative strips expanding the scope for
GebreEgziabher, A. (1998). Socio economic and ecological analysis of soil conservation in
Gedano, M. (1990). Sustainability of soil and water conservation prates, Southern nation,
nationalities, and people region.M.A Thesis. Addis Ababa University, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia
Gete, Mazengia, (2006). Extensive Land Degradetion in the Soil Erosion
Gete, Zeleke. (2000). Land scape dynamics and soil erosion process modeling in the Northern-
western Ethiopian high land. African studies series. University of Berne,
Switzerland.
Headoworth and Steines (2003). Single couseor complex mix of couse in the soil and water
conservation
Herwerg, [Link], E. (1999). The performance of selected soil conservation measures. Case
studies from Ethiopia and Eritrea Catena, Vo. (1-2):99-114.
Hiwot Desta. (2000). Overview on Degradation of Land Due to Over Grazing in Ethiopia,
[Link] September
Hurni, H. (1990).Degradation and conservation of the soil resources in the Ethiopian highlands.
In African mountains and high lands: problems and perspective, USA. Increased
food crop production on sloping lands in Asia. Environment development and Ir.
(1998). Land use erosion and water resources. Newdelhi, India,pp 37-71.
Kassaye Belay. (2004). Land use and Land Cover Change in the Central Highlands of
Ethiopia:the Case of Yerer Mountain and its Surroundings. MA Thesis, Addiss
Ababa University. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Kessler, C. (2006). Decisive key factors influencing farm households’ soil and
water conservation investments. Applied Geography 26:40–60.
Kirk, M. (1999). Land tenure, technological change and resource use: Transformation processes
in African agrarian systems. EuropäischerVerlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt
Main
Lemo Woreda Agricultural Office Hadiya Zone, (2009).Land use, type, system, and Location
Mazengia.G, (2010). Land Degradation in Ethiopia
Melville, K. (2006). Increasing Soil Erosion Threatens World’s Food Supply: Cornell
University, New York, USA.
MOARD (2005) guid line for integrated watershade management adiss abeba,ethiopia
Mushier, (2010).Status of soil and water conservation practices in Tigray region, Ethiopia: case
study, [Link] Eastern Africa.
National level, Statistical Report, Gambella, Ethiopia. (2007)
Nations, New York. (1997). Glossary of Environment Statistics, Studies in Methods, Series
Nill,D.,U.,Schwert manda,U.,Sabel-keschella,M.,Berhards,and J.,[Link]
erosion by
Oldeman, L. (1992). Global Extent of Soil Degradation: International Soil reference and
information center; Wageningen, the Netherlands pp. 19-36.
Pimental,D.,C.,Harvey,P.,Resosudarmo,K.,Sinclair,D.,Karz,[Link],S.,crast,L.,Fitto
nandR.,Bla
Pimentel, D.C. (2006). Soil Erosion: a Food and Environmental Threat; Environment,
Pimentel. D and Burgess, M.( 2013). Soil Erosion Threatens Food Production. College of
Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA;
Proceeding of the work shop in agro forestry in the Philippines. Los Ba
Philippines.
Rico, [Link], F. (1980).Indigenous forest Dwellers in forest development planning. In
Sanchez, P.A, and J, Logant.(1992).Myths and science about the use of chemistry and fertility of
Semgalawe, Z.M. (1998). Household Adoption Behaviour and Agricultural sustainability in the
Northern Mountaines of Tanzania:The case of soil; conservation in the north pares
and wastUsambara Mountains. Published PhD Thesis, Wageningen University
Wageningen, The Nether lands.
Shield’Ato R., Aboho, S.Y., Oketunde, F.O., Enegy, I.S, Unazi, G. and Agwa, S, (2007).
Stark, M.(2000). Soil management strategies to sustain continuous crop production
between vegetative contour strips on humid tropical hillsides. International center
for research in agro forestry, Southeast Asia. Stone Terraces for Soil and Water
Conservation in an Ethiopian Highland Watershed: Ecological economics 61, pp
[Link] 1:323-336.
Tegegne Tatek. (2014). Perception of Farmers on Soil Erosion and Conservation Practices in
Dejen District, Ethiopia. International Journal of Environmental Protection and
Policy. Vol. 2, pp. 224-229. doi: 10.11648/[Link].20140206.15
Teklewold, H., and Kohlin, G. (2011). Risk Preferences as Determinants of Soil Conservation in
Ethiopia. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Journal of Soil and water
Conservation 66(2): 87-96 97.
Teklu, E and Gezahegn, A. (2003). indignes knowledge and practice for soil and water
conservation management in east wollega, Ethiopia. conferance on international
agricultural research for development (Octobers 8-10, 2003).
Thomas Tolcha,(1991). Aspects of soil degradation and conservation measures in the soil in
tropics. PP34-46. [Link].29 [Link], WI, USA.
Tibabe and Mitiku. (2002), Addisu, (2011) Soil and Water Conservation, facilitate optimum
level of production
Toness, S., Thomas, L, Thurow, R, Hector, and Sierra. (1998). Sustainable management of
tropical steep landsman assessment of terraces as a soil and water conservation
technology
Tripathi, R. (1993). Soil erosion and conservation. New International publisher, New Delhi.
United
Wagayehu Bekele and Darke, L. (2003). Soil and Water Conservation Decision behavior of
Subsistence Farmers in the Eastern Highlands of Ethiopia: a case study of the
HundeLafto. Water in Africa principle. Prediction and protection, Germany,
[Link] View press USA.
Woldeamlak Bewket. (2003). Land Degradation and Farmers’ Acceptance and Adoption of
Conservation Technologies in the Digil Watershed, North western Highlands
Ethiopia. Social Science Research Report Series –no [Link]. Addis Ababa.
World Resources Institute, UN Environment Program me, UN Development Program me, and
the World Bank. (1996). World Resources 1996-97: The urban
Yeshambel, (2013).Indigenous knowledge practices in soil conservation at konso people, south
western Ethiopia journal of agriculture and end environmental sciences, [Link].2.
Yonuis, S. (1993). Land and Soil Management Technology, Economics and Institutions.
Wani, S. P, Wangkahart, T., Dixin, Y., Li, Z. and Thang, N., 2010. Community watersheds for
food security and coping with impacts of climate change in rain fed areas. Global Theme on
Agro ecosystems, International Crops Research institute for the Semi Arid Tropics (ICRISAT),
Patancheru.
 7. APPENDIX
Questionnaires to be completed by Household Heads
Dear Sir/Madam,
You have been selected to participate in the study designed to collect information on assessing
soil and water conservation practices in Heyse kebele Lemo Woreda. As a result, we kindly ask
you to share with us for your opinion and experiences, taking few minutes from your schedule of
time. Your genuine cooperation is very important, because you represent many other farmers
who have similar experiences. The genuine response you provide is highly valuable and
determines the effectiveness of this investigation. Please, be assured that I will treat your
responses confidentially and will not be used for any purpose other than research. You are not
expected to write your name on the questionnaire.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation!
I. Information on socio demographic characteristics of household heads
1. Kebele, ________________________ 2. Sex, ________________________
3. Age of household heads
A. 20- 30 B. 31-45 C. 46-64 D. Above 64
4. Marital status
A. Single B. Married C. Divorced D. Widowed
5. Level of education
A. Can read and writes B. Can’t read and write C. Grade1-8 D. Grade 8-10 E. Above grade10
6. Number of household size
A. 1-3 B. 4-6 C.7-9 D. over 10
II. Households labor availability
7. Do you have labor shortage for your farm activities? A. Yes B. No

8. If your answer for question number 7 is yes, how do you solve labor shortage?

A. By hiring labor C. By cooperating with other farmers

B. Both hiring and cooperating with other D. Others specify

9. Do you involved in off-farm activities? A. Yes B. No

10. If your answer for question number 9 is yes, in which type of work involved?
A. Handicraft B. Petty trading C. Selling of fire wood
D. Laborer E. Brewing F. Others specify---------------------------
11. If you are participated on off-farm activities do you think this is obstacle for soil and water?
A. Yes B. No
III. Land tenure security and land holding characteristics.
12. How could you involve in the land currently while cultivating?
A. Through cultivation their own land C. Through renting

B. Through share cropping

13. How many hectares do you own?

A. < 0.5 ha B. 0.5-1.0 ha C.1.0-1.5 ha D. > 2ha
14. How do you perceive the productivity of your land?
A. Poor B. Moderate C. Good D. Very good
15. If the productivity of your land is declining, what could be the cause?
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
V. Soil and water conservation practices
16. Do you participate on public SWC practices? A. Yes B. No

17. Do you participate on the following traditional SWC practices?

Types Yes NO
of Biological Physical Biologica
SWC Biological Physical l Physical
Vegetative
Terracing
1 strip
Protecting Check
2 bush land dam
 Control
Reforestation
3 bund
Cut of
Crop residue
4 drain

18. Do you think soil erosion is a problem in your area? A. Yes B. No

19. Do you believe SWC measures are effectively practiced in your area? A. Yes B. No

20. If your answer for question number 19 is no, what are the possible factors? (More than one
choice is possible)
A. Information gap between house hold and the expert B. Shortage of time planned to
SWC
C. Lack of knowledge and awareness D. Others please specify

THANK YOU!!!