ASSESSMENT OF SOIL EROSION IN BOLO KEBELE, MINJAR

SHENKORA WEREDA, NORTH SHWA ZONE, AMHARA REGION,

ETHIOPIA

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

PREPARED BY: Asrat Mamo

SUBMITTED TO: ALI GEBEYEHU (Associate Professor)

 NOVEMBER, 2020

Approval Board of Examiners

Chair Person ___________________________ _________ ________________

Name Sign Date

Examiner ___________________________ _________ ________________

Name Sign Date

Advisor ___________________________ _________ ________________

Name Sign Date

 Acknowledgement
First of all I would like to thank God the Almighty for his unlimited help in the course of this
study. I would like to extend my gratitude to my advisor instructor Ali Gebeyehu (Associate
Professor) for his valuable advice and constructive suggestion to develop this research paper. I
really thank my family who devote and support us in any means for accomplishing of this
research paper in particular and I would like thank the Bolo kebele Farmers, and all who helped
me a lot in giving necessary information need for my study.

Thank you all.

 List of Tables
Table I Page
Table 4.1 Sex of respondents ………………………………………………………… 16

Table 4.2 Age of respondents ………………………………………………………… 16

Table 4.3 Educational level of respondents ………………………………………… 16

Table 4.4 Marital status of respondents ………………………………………… 17

Table 4.5 Family size of respondents ………………………………………………… 17

Table 4.6 Soil fertility level in the study area ………………………………………… 18

Table 4.7 Productivity trend of land in the study area ………………………………… 18

Table 4.8 Prevalence of soil erosion ………………………………………………… 19

Table 4.9 Indicators of soil erosion ………………………………………………… 19

Table 4.10 Causes of soil erosion ………………………………………………… 20

Table 4.11 Effects of soil erosion in the study area ………………………………… 21

Key words: soil erosion, soil fertility, land management, cultivation, over cultivation
 List of Figures
Figures Pages
II
Figure 3.1 Location map of the study area ………………………………………… 11

Figure 3.2 Location map of the rail way ………………………………………… 12

 List of Acronyms
III
FGDs – Focus Group Discussions

SCM – Sustainable Cultivation Method

SLM – Sustainable Land Management

DAs – Development Agents

 Abstract
Data drawn from a global compilation of studies quantitatively confirm the long-articulated
IV
contention that erosion rates from conventionally plowed agricultural fields average 1-2 orders of
magnitude greater than rates of soil production, erosion under native vegetation, and long-term
geological erosion. The general equivalence of the latter indicates that, considered globally, hill-
slope soil production and erosion evolve to balance geologic and climate forcing, whereas
conventional plow-based agriculture increases erosion rates enough to prove unsustainable. In
contrast to how net soil erosion rates in conventionally plowed fields (approximately 1 mm/yr)
can erode through a typical hill-slope soil profile over time scales comparable to the longevity of
major civilizations, no-till agriculture produces erosion rates much closer to soil production rates
and therefore could provide a foundation for sustainable agriculture.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Pages
V
Acknowledgement ********************************************************** I

List of Tables ************************************************************** II

List of Figures ************************************************************* III

List of Acronyms *********************************************************** IV

Abstract ****************************************************************** V

Chapter One *************************************************************** 1

1. Introduction ********************************************************** 1
1.1 Background of the study ************************************************ 1
1.2 Statement of the problem *********************************************** 2
1.3 Objectives of the study ************************************************* 2
1.3.1 General objectives ********************************************** 2
1.3.2 Specific objectives ********************************************** 2
1.4 Research questions **************************************************** 3
1.5 Significant of the study ************************************************* 3
1.6 Scope of the study ***************************************************** 3
1.7 Limitation of the study ************************************************* 3
1.8 Organization of the paper *********************************************** 3

Chapter Two *************************************************************** 5

2. Literature review ****************************************************** 5

2.1 Definition of soil and soil erosion ***************************************** 5
2.2 Causes of soil erosion ************************************************** 7
2.3 Impacts of soil erosion ************************************************* 7
2.4 Solutions for soil erosion *********************************************** 9

Chapter Three ************************************************************** 11

3. Research methodology ************************************************* 11

3.1 Description of the study area ******************************************** 11
3.2 Sampling and data collection methods ************************************* 14
3.3 Methods of data analysis *********************************************** 15
Chapter Four *************************************************************** 16

4. Data analysis and interpretation ****************************************** 16

4.1 Demographic characteristics of respondents ******************************** 16
4.2 Soil fertility and trend of land productivity ********************************* 18
4.3 Prevalence and indicators of soil erosion *********************************** 19
4.4 Causes of soil erosion ************************************************** 20
4.5 Consequences of soil erosion in Bolo kebele ******************************** 21

Chapter Five **************************************************************** 21

5. Conclusion and recommendation ****************************************** 21

5.1 Conclusion *********************************************************** 21
5.2 Recommendations ***************************************************** 21

References ***************************************************************** 23

Appendix ****************************************************************** 25
Chapter One

1. Introduction

1.1 Background of the study

Soil erosion is recognized as one of the world’s most serious environmental problems (Shiferaw
and Holden. 1999). Globally, about 80% of the current degradation of agricultural land is caused
by soil erosion (Angima et al., 2003). Erosion by water, at a global scale, is the main soil
degradation process in agriculture areas (Bewket and Sterk, 2002). It generates strong
environmental impacts and major economic losses from decreased agricultural production and
from off-site effects on infrastructure and water quality by sedimentation processes (Zinabu et
al., 2002). Morgan (1996), summarized the maximum annual rates of soil erosion in cultivated
fields ranging from 200t/ha in China, to 30t/ha in Belgium.

Soil erosion creates severe limitations to sustainable agricultural land use, as it reduces on-farm
soil productivity and causes food insecurity (Bewket, 2007). In most developing countries,
including Ethiopia, human activities trigger these losses (Hurni et al., 2005). This is associated
with rapid population growth, inadequate attention to the basic natural resources (soils, water,
and vegetation), and the need to maximize production to meet the needs of the growing
population, and it is more serious in poor developing countries like Ethiopia where subsistence
production predominates (Bewket, 2002). The Ethiopian farmer, who on average cultivates one
hectare of food crops and keeps some livestock, is nowadays dependent on natural conditions
and cannot tolerate further deterioration of soil productivity (Sonneveld and Keyzer, 2003).
Increasing population, intense land cultivation, uncontrolled grazing, and deforestation often lead
to, or exacerbate, soil erosion. These factors undermine agricultural productivity and frustrate
economic development efforts, especially in developing countries where there is heavy farmland
dependence in low external-input farming systems (e.g., the Ethiopian highlands) (Shiferaw and
Holden, 2000).

Ethiopia has a total surface area of 112 million hectares of which 60 million hectares is estimated
to be agriculturally productive. Out of the estimated agriculturally productive lands, about 27
million hectares are significantly eroded, 14 million hectares are seriously eroded and 2 million
hectares have reached the point of no return, with an estimated total loss of 2 billion m 3 of top
soil per year (Bewket and Sterk 2002). Estimation of soil erosion in Ethiopian highlands 2
million hectares of lands have been severely degraded and hence annually, Ethiopia loses over
1.5 billion tons of topsoil from these highlands by erosion. Particularly, in the highlands of
Ethiopia, the degradation of agricultural land creates a serious threat to current and potential food
production (Sonneveld and Keyzer, 2003, Bewket and Sterk, 2002). With fertile soils and good
rainfall, these highlands (>1500 masl) hold the highest agricultural potential in the country
(Shiferaw and Holden, 2001). Soil erosion from unsustainable land use practices in Ethiopia is
not a new phenomenon. It is as old as the history of agriculture itself. However, it is only very

Page 1 of 40
recently, in the past three decades that the Ethiopian government recognized the impact of soil
erosion after the devastating famine in 1970s (Bewket and Sterk, 2002). To address this problem,
considerable efforts have been made since that time to rehabilitate degraded environments and
stop further degradation by the government (Bewket, 2006). By this action, huge areas were
covered with terraces, and millions of trees were planted (Yeraswork, 2000). Water action during
soil erosion comprise the following processes: splash erosion, which occurs when soil particles
are detached and transported as a result of the impact of falling raindrops; sheet or inter-rill
erosion, which removes soil in thin layers and is caused by the combined effects of splash
erosion and surface runoff; rill erosion, which is the transport or detachment of soil particles
caused by concentrations of flowing water; and gully erosion, which occurs when flow
concentration increases and the incision becomes deeper and wider than rills (Mitiku et al.,
2006).

1.2 Statement of the problem

Over the last decades, agricultural production and income growth in Ethiopia have lagged behind
population growth consequently; per capita food production, income and savings have dropped
(Yirga, 2007). Disturbingly, in the highlands, soil, the basic natural resource on which the
livelihood of the majority of the population is based, has been progressively impoverished. Swift
and Wooms as quoted by Amedeet al (2001) note that “the main threat to the sustainability of
smallholder farmers is the depleted soil organic matter caused by soil erosion”. Most of the
Ethiopian cultivated lands fall prey to soil erosion as the traditional farming system is still in use
and sustainable land management systems have not been adopted at scale it would have been.
The major problem caused by soil erosion in Ethiopia is the quantity of soil removed each year
and detrimental effects on the region and the population.

Like other part of the country, Menjarna Shenkora wereda in general and Bolo kebele in
particular faced a problem of soil erosion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate
the soil erosion in Bolo kebele, Menjarna Shenkora wereda, Amhara region, Ethiopia.

1.3 Objectives of the study

1.3.1 General objectives

The general objective of this study was to assess of soil erosion in Bolo kebele, Menjarna
Shenkora wereda.

1.3.2 Specific objectives

The specific objectives of this study were:

 to identify the cause of soil erosion.

 to identify the trend production of the area Bole kebele.
 to know the trend of population growth of Bolo kebele.
Page 2 of 40
  to investigate the impact of soil erosion.

1.4 Research questions

1. What are the causes of soil erosion in the study area?
2. What are the impacts of soil erosion in the study area?
3. What is the population growth of Bolo kebele per year?
4. What conservation practices taken by the community and local government to avert the
effect of soil erosion in the study area?

1.5 Significance of the study

This research has various significances for the research practitioner and for other researchers.
Thus, it is believed that this study has the following significances.

 It provides information about causes of soil erosion.

 It gives proposed solution to different stakeholders who concerned with soil resources
conservation.

1.6 Scope of the study

This research was conducted in Bole kebele, Menjarna Shenkora wereda, Amhara region,
Ethiopia because of limitation of resources and time. Content-wise, it was restricted to assess the
soil erosion of the study area.

1.7 Limitation of the study

When the researcher conducted this study, he faced some limitations. These limitations are
money and time. For disturbing questionnaires in questionnaire survey, the researcher faced
financial problems. Since, the researcher is a teacher conducting a research needs additional time
and hence the researcher faced time limitations. But by overcoming both problems the researcher
collected important data from the respondents.

1.8 Organization of the paper

The research was organized in to five independent chapters.

Chapter one was introduction which in turn comprises background of the study, statements of the
problem, objectives of the study, research questions, significance of the study, scope of the
study, and limitation of the study.

Chapter two is review of related literature about the concepts, causes and consequences of soil
erosion.

Page 3 of 40
Chapter three is methodology part. It includes the study area description, methods of data
collection, instruments of data collection, sampling techniques, sources of data, and methods of
data analyses.

Chapter four was results and discussions which was socio-cultural background of the
respondents, the causes and consequences of soil erosion.

The last chapter is conclusion and recommendations of the study.

Page 4 of 40
 Chapter Two

2. Literature review

2.1 Definition of soil and soil erosion

Soil is one of the important aspects of an ecosystem. Green plants that are the sources of food
production take up minerals and water from the soil. A plant takes up minerals and water from
the soil. A plant that grows in a favorable soil texture brings much fruit or production. One of the
main reasons for poor quality of soil is a natural cause of soil degradation due to erosion
(Anteneh, 2014).

Soil erosion refers to the wearing-away of a field’s topsoil by the natural physical forces of water
and wind. It can be a slow process. It is relatively unnoticed or can occur at an alarming rate,
causing serious loss of topsoil. Soil compaction, low organic matter, loss of soil structure, poor
internal drainage, salinization and soil acidity problems are other serious soil degradation
conditions that can accelerate the soil erosion process. Soil erosion, whether it is by water, wind
or tillage, involves three distinct actions – soil detachment, movement and deposition.
Accelerated erosion is largely the consequence of human activity. The primary causes are tillage,
grazing, and cutting of timber. The rate of erosion can be increased by activities other than those
of humans. Fire that destroys vegetation and triggers erosion has the same effect
(Balasubramanian, 2017).

Numerous reports conclude that soil losses will reduce future agricultural production. Most soil
and water conservation programs begun in the 1930s remain in place today, although in modified
form. The history of the soil erosion issue as follows: Following major technological advances in
the 1940s, the farm public's concern over soil erosion and degradation declined during the 1950s.
However, because of environmental concerns over increasing runoff that caused water pollution
and siltation of dams and waterways, concern over soil erosion returned in the late 1960s and
early 1970s. Most recently, there has been growing concern within the general public about
increasing soil erosion and loss of soil productivity because of high exports and all-out grain
production. Thus, in contrast to the previous decade, when public concern over soil loss was
environmental, recent concern is over the soil productivity aspects. The ability of agriculture to
produce increasing amounts of crops while restraining soil erosion and sustaining long-term soil
productivity depends largely upon the willingness of society to invest in research and for the
farm sector to use improved soil conservation and crop production technology in the future. Soil
productivity basically is the ability of soil to produce crops. Specifically, it is defined as "the
capacity of soil, in its normal environment, for producing specified plant, or sequence of plants,
under specified system of management". Productivity is function of the soil's chemical, physical,
and biological properties as well as climate, management, and other non-inherent factors used to
produce crops. Under good management, maximum use is made of soil's fertility status, whether
natural or artificial, and physical properties, such as available water holding capacity, bulk

Page 5 of 40
density, and permeability. Recent research indicates that as erosion occurs soils with unfavorable
subsoil and parent material characteristics exhibit drastic reductions in productivity through the
loss of each erosion increment. On other soils, erosion does not rapidly damage their non-
replaceable attributes as rooting medium, even though they are eroding at extremely high rates.
One of the more dangerous characteristics of the soil erosion-soil productivity problem is the
difficulty of detection and whether or not technological advancements have masked soil
productivity declines resulting from soil erosion. Erosion may reduce the productivity of soil so
slowly that it is not recognized until the land becomes economically unsuitable for crop
production. At the same time, technologies, such as fertilizers or improved hybrid varieties, may
mask soil productivity losses. (Kenneth G. Renard and Ronald F. Follett)

Soil is a key component of the Earth System that control the bio-geo-chemical and hydrological
cycles and also offers to the human societies many resources, goods 20 and services (Keesstra et
al., 2012; Berendse et al., 2015). Land degradation is the major problem in many regions of the
world (Bisaro et al., 2014; Hueso-Gonzalez et al., 2014; Lieskovsky and Kenderessy, 2014;
Srinivasarao et al., 2014), specially in ´ East Africa, where Ethiopia show the highest erosion
rates (de Mûelenaereet al., 2014; Gessesse et al., 2014; Lanckriet et al., 2014), and where the
agriculture, particularly the 25 highlands, is facing new strategies to combat desertification
(Mekonnen et al., 2015). Land degradation manifests itself through soil erosion, nutrient
depletion and loss of organic matter, acidification and salination (Bewket and Teferi, 2009; Haile
and Fetene, 2012). The soil loss rate by water ranges from 16 to over 300 Mg ha−1 yr−1 in
Ethiopia, mainly depending on the degree of slope gradient, intensity and type of land cover and
nature of rainfall intensities (Tamrie, 1995; Tesfaye et al., 2014). Studies made in 5 different
parts of Ethiopia also reported that annual soil loss show spatial and temporal variations. Based
on field assessment of rill and inter-rill erosion, Bewket and Teferi (2009) estimated annual soil
loss 93 Mg ha−1 yr−1 for the entire Chemago watershed. Haile and Fetene (2012) estimated that
about 97.04 % of Kilie catchment, East Shoa, have 0–10 Mg ha−1 yr−1 erosion rate. Studies
suggested that high rates of soil erosion in Ethiopia is mainly caused by extensive deforestation
due to the prevalence of high demand for fuel wood collection and grazing into steep land areas
(Amsalu et al., 2007; Haile and Fetene, 2013). 20 Ethiopia is a country of great geographical
diversity with high and rugged mountains, flat-topped plateau, deep gorges, incised river valleys,
rolling plains, a wide range of temperature and rainfall regimes, a variety of agricultural crops
and land uses (Mutua et al., 2006; Tesfahunegn, 2015). About 43 % of the country is classified
as highland (above 1500 m a.s.l.), where most of the populations (about 88 %) carry out mixed
25 crop-livestock agriculture (Bewket and Teferi, 2009). Deforestation, population growth,
overgrazing and use of marginal lands intensify erosion, and the intensification of the agriculture
production also results in high erosion rates (Cerdà et al., 2009).

Page 6 of 40
2.2 Causes of soil erosion
A physical cause involves a combination of the following physical factors; steepness of slope,
the intensity, duration and seasonality of rain fall, soil type (example texture), and vegetation
cover. Human causes have to do with human interference with natural process, including
deforestation, overgrazing, and bad farming practices which deplete plant cover, leaving the land
exposed and vulnerable to erosion. Activities that lead to deforestation include the burning of
forests and cutting down of trees faster than forests can regenerate (Chuchu et al, 2011).

Water erosion is the main cause of soil erosion in Ethiopia. People left the soil unprotected when
they removed protective plant cover by farming, burning crop residuals, overgrazing, and cutting
trees. (Chuchu et al, 2011).

Rivers are the most important of all natural agents which help in shaping the earth’s surface. The
work of running water includes eroding, transporting and depositing eroded material. Soil
erosion by running water are of three types; sheets, rill, and gully erosions (Chuchu et al, 2011).

2.3 Impacts of soil erosion

The chief impact of soil erosion, namely depletion of productive capacity of land under
cultivation, is its effect on food security. Cultivating marginal land exacerbates the problem
through further altering of land forms and changing land use. Soil erosion means that households
have to invest additional expenses to purchase chemical fertilizers. Withdrawing children from
school exacerbates the impact of soil erosion on livelihoods of the rural population in that
children who lack access to education will be dependent on the land resources available to their
parents and further fragmentation of the land, thereby exacerbating land degradation (Kassu,
2011).

2.3.1 Impact of soil erosion on agricultural resources

Erosion changes soil characteristics by the loss of organic matter; decreases soil depth and
reduces water holding capacity of soil and sort zone department. All these factors adversely
affect plant growth. As a result, soil erosion disturbed the ecological balance causing further
degradation in productivity. Productivity is the productive potential in terms of vegetative
biomass on a soil system (Stocking and Peak, 2009).

Productivity actually includes the potential for further production which cannot be only assessed
by a historical crop yield. It follows that yield can be maintained, even though the real soil
productivity declining by use of fertilizers or labor inputs. The two concepts should be
distinguished even though yield levels are often taken as indicators of soil productivity.

The erosion process begins usually by sorting out the fine particles selectively and leaves the
coarse lands which have little water retaining capacity (Stocking, 2005).

Page 7 of 40
This process brings high strength soil layers closer to the most common parameter used in
explaining productivity losses. There is a direct association between soil strength and
productivity. Because of hard soil limits root development. Splash erosion in the tropics causes
surface crusting and compact in which often prevent plant generation. In addition, a compacted
soil has lower organic matter, reduced infiltration and less available water for plants. The soil
strength and compactness definitely play an active role. Erosion removes nutrients from the soil
and lower down the productivity of a soil which varies according to soil type and the degree of
erosion. Thus, it can be seen that soil nutrient losses decrease the productivity levels which can
be partially restored by application of fertilizer. The eroded sediments usually contain a
proportionally large amount of organic matter and nutrients than that of the topsoil from which
they are derived. This difference is called the “enrichment factor”. Erosion also affects the
structural stability of the soil which can have harmful effect on seedbed preparation, organic
matter, type and amount of clay, surface water storage and other physical and chemical aspects.
All these in turn affect the soil productivity (Stocking, 2005). In addition toxicities, physical
related deficiencies may occur. Acidification in eroded soils causes aluminum toxicity and
renders other nutrients unavailable to plants (Stocking, 2005). The erosion can take places of
various reasons and forms. The problem of erosion is attaining a critical limit in Rajasthan and
needs check at the earliest.

Finally, erosion affects the use of machinery, fertilizers; pesticides and herbicides, applications.
It also affects the timing of farming operations. Late planting leads to delayed germinations etc
in soil the edaphologically inferior sub-soil and a shallow rooting depth, crop yield will decline
as surface soil thickness is reduced. Furthermore, fertilizers cannot compensate for surface soil
loss whose mismanagement can lead to irreversible soil degradation and loss of the natural
resource base (Lal, 1990). Technology and additional inputs may mark the decline in
productivity. Productivity decline is greatest in an old highly weathered, low fertility, tropical
soil here there is a high concentration of organic matter in the top soil. In the tropics, yield
decline in most rapid for the first 10 – 20 cm of soil loss. After which the rate of reduction
decreases exponentially. Thus, the erosion yield relationship is generally exponential in form. If
this negative exponential relationship is confirmed, it follows a decrease in the yield. In that case,
an area with little prior erosion is further allowed to erode. Therefore, it would be safer to invest
in conservation of resources in an area where productivity is still high (Stocking, 2005).

Erosion leads to larger productivity losses which in turn leads to more erosion at an accelerating
rate bring about various detrimental effects on the soils natural nutrient balance, structure, and
sustainability. Although, improved technology increased production and the potential
productivity of the resources (i.e long term soil productivity) actually decreases. There is a close
link between erosion productivity and changes in the farming system (Stocking, 2005) shift in
pastoral practices often leads to overgrazing thereby leading to further erosion. Increased
intensity of land use in which a larger quantity of agrochemical is used to compensate for the

Page 8 of 40
loss in productivity lead to more erosion. On the other hand, increasing the intensity and duration
of cropping (shorter rest period) also leads to further drop in soil fertility.

2.3.2 Impact of soil erosion on biotic resources

Sheet erosion is soil movement from raindrop splash resulting in the breakdown of soil surface
structure and surface runoff; it occurs rather uniformly over the slope and may go unnoticed until
most of the productive topsoil has been lost. Rill erosion results when surface runoff
concentrates forming small yet well-defined channels. These channels are called rills when they
are small enough to not interfere with field machinery operations. The same eroded channels are
known as gullies when they become a nuisance factor in normal tillage (Stocking, 2005).

Gully formations can be difficult to control if remedial measures are not designed and properly
constructed. Control measures have to consider the cause of the increased flow of water across
the landscape. There where the multitude of conservation measures come into play. Operations
with farm machinery adjacent to gullies can be quite hazardous when cropping or attempting to
reclaim lost land (Stocking, 2005).

2.4 Solutions for soil erosion

Traditionally through time, farmers have developed different soil conservation and land
management practices. With those practices, the 7 farmers are able to sustain their production for
centuries. Until now, those technologies are playing a significant role in the production of
subsistence agriculture. Among the traditional land management techniques that have been
practiced by Ethiopian farmers, the major ones include ploughing of narrow ditches on sloping
fields to control run-off, farmland terraces, traditional ditches and furrows, contour ploughing,
following crop rotation, farmyard manure, and agro-forestry (Betru, 2003).

Large scale efforts for implementing natural resources conservation and development programs
had taken place to reverse the problem of land degradation in Ethiopia starting from the 1970s.
The programs mainly focused on soil and water conservation and restoration of degraded land
through building physical structures and afforestation measures (Alemneh, 2003). It was
replaced by food for work projects that were funded by World Food Program (WFP) in 1974,
commenced primarily due to drought and famine of 1973/74. The main activities under those
projects were reforestation and soil and water conservation in the drought prone areas of the
country (Betru, 2003).

Indigenous soil conservation techniques can be divided into "ethno-engineering", agroforestry

and agronomic practices. Quite frequently, a combination of these practices exists. The term
"ethno-engineering" covers indigenous practices such as terracing, harnessing of runoff, and
development of small drainage systems (Jodha, 1990). The potential of these indigenous soil and
water conservation practices have very often been ignored or underestimated by researchers, soil
conservationists and government staff (IFAD, 1992). The objectives of traditional practices give

Page 9 of 40
us an understanding of farmers' way of thinking (Hudson, 1992). The aim of farmers does not
necessarily correspond with the aim of the scientist. Some practices are simply good farming
practices that happen to reduce soil erosion. At other times, conservation practices are applied
where there is no recognition of erosion as a reducer of yields, but they are used for other
purposes (Hallsworth, 1987). Physical conservation practices Bench terraces are widely applied
in the tropics in indigenous conservation systems. Terracing may have developed in western Asia
and then spread southwards to Africa, westward to the Americas, and eastward to Southeast
Asia, largely by known sea routes (Hallsworth, 1987). More likely, it may have evolved
independently in several areas as farmers were forced to cultivate steep lands for several reasons,
e.g., to escape hostile tribes on the plains, to avoid malaria at lower and warmer altitudes, and
due to increasing population density (Hudson, 1992). The construction of terraces is not new to
Ethiopia (Hurni, 1984b). The Konsos of southern Ethiopia are well known for their traditional
soil and water conservation practices. Their farming is based on an elaborate system of terraces,
a variety of other soil and water management practices and the integration of livestock and
forestry with the rest of their agriculture (FAO, 1990). Stone bunds are generally quite common
in the dry zones of the tropics, since they are relatively easy to construct during the dry season.
Sloping terraces are present in several parts of Ethiopia. Hunting (1976) reported that most of the
terraces seen in Minjar Shenkora (Bole kebele) are only half formed so that the walls only rise
about one third of the vertical interval between benches, and thus are largely ineffective in
controlling soil erosion. Other physical conservation structures traditionally built by farmers in
Minjar Shenkora (Bole kebele) include check dams and cut-off drains. Agronomic conservation
practices In a field study among 52 farmers in the Bole kebele uplands of Minjar Shenkora, 48 of
them were practicing crop rotation (Vagen, 1996; Tilahun, 1996). Many of the farmers used crop
rotation as a means to conserve soil fertility by planting legumes one year and non-legumes the
following cropping season, e.g., bean or lentil, then barley or wheat. Farmers also incorporate
legumes in their crop rotations approximately every four years. Other traditional soil
conservation practices are contour ploughing, grass strips and tree planting. The traditional way
of ploughing graded contours is used by nearly all farmers. Due to the population increase,
traditional fallow periods have become very short and rare, if existent at all. Manure is used by
some farmers, but due to the shortage of fuel wood, it is most commonly dried and used for
cooking and heating purposes

Page 10 of 40
 Chapter Three

3. Research methodology

3.1 Description of the study area

3.1.1 Location
Bolo is one of the kebeles found in Menjarna Shenkora wereda, Amhara region of Ethiopia.
Menjarna Shenkora ("Menjar and Shenkora") is one of the woredas in the Amhara
Region of Ethiopia. It is named in part after a historic district of Shewa, Menjar, which was the
southernmost district of Shewa and near the location of the modern woreda. Located at the
southern end of the Semien Shewa Zone, Menjarna Shenkora is bordered on the east, south and
west by the Oromia Region, on the northwest by Hagere Mariamna Kesem, and on the northeast
by Berehet; the Germama (or Kesem) river forms the boundary between this woreda and Hagere
Mariamna Kesem and Berehet. The administrative center of this woreda is Arerti; other towns in
the woreda include Balchi and Eranbuti.
This woreda is served by the Addis Ababa - Djibouti Railway with a station at Malka Jilo. It is
the only woreda in the Amhara Region with a train station.

Page 1111of 40
 Minjar Shenkora
Wereda

Page 12 of 40
12
Page 13 of 40
3.1.2 Climate
The climate of Bole kebele has three main agro ecological zone which include 90% of
weneadega, 9% of qolla, and 1% dega, the average annual temperature of the kebele range from
20 – 30 oC, and annual rain fall extent from 600 – 800 mm. (Abuhay etal, 2001) (Minjar
Shenkora District Agriculture and Rural Development Bureau) and A research project by:
African Biodiversity Conservation and Innovations Centre (ABCIC) in collaboration with the
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT) and Institute of
Biodiversity Conservation (IBC)
3.1.3 Topography
The topography of the project site consist slight and slop land north to south. The elevation is
above 1600 – 1800m above sea level. (Minjar Shenkora District Agriculture and Rural
Development Bureau)
3.1.4 Land use
The studied area total land coverage is 2628.8 hectare. Out of these 840 hectares only farmers
used the land for farming purpose that means 32% and the rest of 68% of the land covered by
rain feed.
3.1.5 Soil type
The soil types of Bolo kebele was 46% brown, 25.5% black soil, 17% red soil, 9% sand soil, and
1.5% other soil types. So, brown soil type account more covered the study area.

Page 14 of 40
3.1.6 Demographic characteristics
Based on the Bolo kebele administrative office source of data 2010, the total population of Bolo
kebele is 4723. From these, 2384 are males and 2339
13
are females. The majority of the population
is young and a few are old age structure.
3.1.7 Economic activity

According to the 2007 Population and Housing Census, the term economic activity status refers
to the size and distribution of the work force of economically active and non-active population.
Persons aged ten years and over who were engaged or available to be engaged in the production
of economic goods and services during a given reference period were classified as economically
active, while those who were neither engaged nor available to be engaged in the production of
economic goods and services during a given reference period were considered as economically
non-active. In the 2007 census, information on economic activity status was collected from all
persons selected for the long questionnaire and those aged ten years and over. The lower age
limit was fixed at ten years realizing that children start to participate in the production of
economic goods and services at earlier ages in both urban and rural areas. The long questionnaire
was administered only on selected households.

There is the industrial parks (IP) that is in operation or under construction. The Arerti IP after
completion, it has employed for 1000 workers. (Lifang, Song (13 July 2017). "Ethiopia plans to
have 15 industrial parks by June 2018". Xinhua. Retrieved 24 February 2018)

It is characterized by mixed types of agriculture systems, both in crop production and animal
husbandry. They accounts 95% of income and consumption earning for total population.

The major crop types such as teff, sorghum, barley, wheat, while live stoke include cattle, camel,
sheep, and goat.

3.2 Methods of data collection

3.2.1 Sampling design

In the kebele, there are about 1000 households. Based on the Nasuirma (2000) formula for
sample size the researcher took 90 households for the study. For the study, systematic sampling
method was applied by taking the nth element of the sample frame. But, first lottery method was
used to select the first element with a specified gap samples from the sample frame were picked.
The sample frame will be taken from the kebele administrative office.

3.2.2 Sampling size

The total households in the kebele are 1300. Using Nasuirma (2000) model of determining the
sample size. The Nasiurma model asserts that a sample size (n) can be determined by the

Page 15 of 40
 [ N ( CV )2 ]
equation, n= ; where N – was the target population, CV – was the coefficient
[ (CV )2 +( N −1)e 2 ]
of variation, and e – was tolerance at desired level of confidence, at 95% level.

To get the required data from the primary sources, questionnaire survey, in-depth interviews,
focused group discussions (FGDs), and field observations were employed. These techniques
were used to collect data. Structured questionnaire with close-ended and open-ended questions
were used to collect primary data from sample households. The questionnaires were design to fit
with the objectives of the study.

3.2.3 Data collection methods

Focus group discussions (FGDs)

A focus group discussion with open-ended questions was done in the kebele. Focus group
discussion facilitators were selected. Individuals for the discussion were selected by facilitators.
About two groups each having 6 members were held in the kebele with farmers. Therefore, a
total of 12 individuals were participated in the study kebele.

Interview

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with few individuals. The participants were
informants such as the DA (Development Agent) of the kebele, experts from the agriculture and
rural development office of Menjarena Shenkora wereda, elder/experienced farmers were
selected for interview and the number of farmers for interviewee farmers in the kebele is eight.
The total number of interviewees in the kebele were therefore eight (1 DA, 3 from the wereda
agricultural and rural development office, 5 farmers).

3.3 Method of data analysis

The data analysis process was done after the desired data were collected from different sources
through various tools of information gathering. Data collected through questionnaire were
categorized and tabulated in percentages, frequencies and finally interpreted and analyzed
quantitatively. After the collection of all the necessary data, analysis was followed for the study.
The responses from focus group discussion and interviews were compiled, summarized, and
interpreted qualitatively by cross checking with responses of questionnaires.

Page 16 of 40
 Chapter Four

4. Data Analysis and Interpretation

4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

The demographic characteristics of respondents by sex, age, education, and marital status are
presented below.

4.1.1 Sex
Table 4.1 below indicates that out of the total 90 respondents; 41(45.56%) were males and the
rest of 49(54.44%) were females.

Table 4.1: Sex of respondents

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Male 41 45.56
Sex of respondents Female 49 54.44
Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

4.1.2 Age
Table 4.2 below reveals that the dominant are group among the samples are 31 – 40 (27.78)
followed by 18 – 30, 41 – 50, 51 – 60, and above 60 years old which comprise, 22.22%, 21.11%,
16.67%, and 12.22% respectively.

Table 4.2: Age of respondents

Item Category Frequency Percentage

18 – 30 20 22.22
31 – 40 25 27.78
41 – 50 19 21.11
Age of respondents
51 – 60 15 16.67
Above 60 11 12.22
Total 90 100

Source: Own Survey, 2020

4.1.3 Educational Background

As can be seen in the table below, table 4.3 shows educational level of respondents the dominant
respondents (33.33%) with regard to educational background are illiterate(which is to mean
those who cannot read and write). Next one is who are primary school (grades 1 – 8) (22.22%)

Page 17 of 40
followed by secondary school (grades 9 – 12) (20%), diploma (13.33%), and degree and above
(11.11%).

Table 4.3 Educational level of respondents

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Illiterate 30 33.33
Grade (1 – 8) 20 22.22
Educational level of Grade (9 – 12) 18 20
respondents Diploma 12 13.33
Degree and above 10 11.11
Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

4.1.3 Marital Status

As it is depicted in the table below, majority of the respondents (75.6%) are married followed by
single (21.1%), and 3.3% are divorced while no one of the respondents are widowed.

Table 4.4 Marital status of respondents

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Single 68 75.6
Married 19 21.1
Marital status of
Divorced 3 3.3
respondents
Widowed 0 0
Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

4.1.4 Family size

Table 4.5 below depicts that the dominant (43.3%) are having a family size of 5 and 6. About
33.3% of the respondents are having a family size of 2 to 4. While 21.1% of the respondents are
single, and the rest 2.2% have above six family sizes.

Table 4.5 Family size of respondents Source: own survey, 2020

Item Category /family size Frequency Percentage

1 19 21.1
2–4 30 33.3
Family size of
5–6 39 43.3
respondents
Above 6 2 2.2
Total 90 100

Page 18 of 40
4.2 Soil fertility and trend of land productivity
According to the respondents, the interviewees and focus group discussions, the soil fertility of
the land particularly their farmland shows a decreasing fertility levels. They explained that the
soil becomes year to year and they primarily put the reason is that the use of chemical fertilizers.
Similarly, as indicated in table 4.6 below, most of the respondents agreed that soil fertility level
is low which comprises 50% (45 in number). Next one is medium which is 17 (18.89%) followed
by high, very low and very high which contains 13%, 9%, and 6% respectively. This shows that
the level of soil fertility is low.

Table 4.6 Soil fertility level in the study area

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Very high 6 6.67
High 13 14.44
Soil fertility level in Medium 17 18.89
the study area Low 45 50
Very low 9 9
Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

In relation to land productivity trend, more than half (61.11%) of the respondents in the
questionnaire survey indicates that it is a decreasing trend while 17.78% of the respondents
believe that it is constant (neither decreasing nor increasing). About 11.11% and 10% of the
respondents respectively agreed that they do not know whether increasing or decreasing and
increasing trend. This shows that there is a decreasing trend of land productivity. Similarly, in
the focus group discussion dominant ones agreed by decreasing trend of productivity of farmland
while some members in the group are agreed that there is increasing trend. Other some of the
respondent agreed that the increasing and decreasing of land productivity is not visible.

Table 4.7 Productivity trend of land in the study area

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Increasing 9 10
Decreasing 55 61.11
Land productivity
Constant 16 17.78
trend in the study area
Do not know 10 11.11
Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

4.3 Prevalence and indicators of soil erosion

Page 19 of 40
Most of the respondents (61.4%) agreed that there is prevalence of soil erosion in Bolo kebele;
while only 38.9% disagreed with prevalence of soil erosion in the area.

Table 4.8: Prevalence of soil erosion in the study area

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Prevalence of soil Yes 55 61.1
erosion in the study No 35 38.9
area Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

Farmers have a rich experience of knowing the soil erosion levels that they got in centuries.
Those respondents who said there is soil erosion in the area have chosen some indicators which
they think that there is soil erosion. 90% of respondents now the prevalence of soil erosion while
they see the development of gullies rills on their farmland. 83%, 81.8%, 81.8%, 74.5%, 70.9%,
61.8%, and 9.1% of respondents know the prevalence of soil erosion while observe absence of
fertile top soil, stoniness of top soil, change in the color of the soil, root exposure, poor root and
grass growth, accumulation of dump near valleys, and slope steepness respectively. Focus group
discussions showed that farmers mostly know whether soil erosion or not by many ways. For
instant if the color of the soil is brown and blank there is no soil erosion whereas if the color is
changed either yellow, red or white there is soil erosion. They also indicated that if there are
gullies and rills on their farmland definitely there is erosion. Similarly if many stones are
observed in their farmlands which were not available previously, then this indicates that there is
erosion of the top soil which was underling by the bottom stone.

Table 4.9: Indicators of soil erosion in the study area

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Rill and gully development 50 90.9
Observing the color of the soil 45 81.8
Accumulation of dump near the valley 34 61.8
Indicates of soil Stoniness of soil 45 81.8
erosion in the Steepness of soil 5 9.1
study area Absence of fertile top soil 46 83.6
Root exposure 41 74.5
Poor crop and grass growth 39 70.9
Total 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

4.4 Causes of soil erosion

Page 20 of 40
According to Gizaw et al., (2009), soil erosion in association with inappropriate land
management practices is one of the main factors causing degradation. Poor land and water
management practices and lack of effective planning and implementation approaches for soil
conservation are responsible for accelerating degradation on agricultural lands.

In the study area, 90% of the responses of farmer put carelessness of farmers’ cultivation and
absence of following farmland is one the major reasons for soil erosion in the study area. Next,
about 86.7% of the respondents (farmers) reason out the causes of soil erosion in Bolo kebele is
steepness of the land while 84.4% of the farmers believe that high rainfall intensity is the causes
of soil erosion. The others 63.3%, 54.4%, 17%, and 6.7% of the farmers believe that the reasons
(causes) of soil erosion are over grazing, deforestation, and desertification, absence and
sustainable cultivation methods, and the type of soil and its erodability respectively.

In the FGDs, farmers explained that most of the time farmers do not use contour ploughing
(which is carelessness while cultivating their land) which caused the soil to be eroded. As per
their explanations the type of soil is one factor for erosion because the soil is sandy soil which
can be easily eroded and transported by the rainfall.

Table 4.10: causes of soil erosion in the study area

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Slop steepness of the cultivation land 78 86.7
Careless cultivation and absence of following 81 90
Causes of soil Type of soil and erodibility 6 6.7
erosion in the Rainfall intensity 76 84.4
study area Absence and delay of SCM 15 17
Deforestation and desertification 49 54.4
Overgrazing 57 63.3

Source: own survey, 2020

4.5 Consequences of soil erosion in Bole kebele

Accelerated soil erosion causes adverse agronomic, ecologic, environmental, and economic
effects both on-site and off-site environments. Soil erosion does not only affect agricultural lands
but it also adversely influence the quality of forest, pasture, and rangeland resources. Farmland
soils are, however, more susceptible to erosion because these soils are often left bare or with
little residue during the cropping seasons. Even during the growing season, row crops are
susceptible to soil erosion.

In the study area, all farmers (100%) believe that the consequences (effect) of soil erosion is the
yield reduction year by year and desertification and out migration. In the FGDs also the farmers
reflected that year after year there is reduction in production and productivity, which has resulted
the out migration of the population particularly the youth and women migrate out towards

Page 21 of 40
Middle East countries particularly Saudi Arabia and Yemen. About 98% of the farmers believe
that one of the major effects of soil erosion in the study area is that the soil required high input
and land management practices to restore its fertility and productivity whereas 86.7% of the
farmers believe that lack of farmland and grazing field are the effects of soil erosion in the area.
Others 72.2%, 62.2%, 32.2%, and 16.7% believe that the effect of soil erosion are managed in
soil color, development of gullies, loss of vegetation cover and loss of top soil respectively.

Table 4.11: effects of soil erosion in the study area

Item Category Frequency Percentage

Loss of top soil 15 16.7
Reduction in yield over time 90 100
Production of gullies 56 62.2
Effects of soil
Loss of vegetation cover and grasses 29 32.2
erosion in the study
Change in soil color 65 72.2
area
High input required 89 98.9
Lack of farmland and grazing land 78 86.7
Desertification and out migration 90 100

Source: own survey, 2020

Chapter Five

5. Conclusion and recommendation

5.1 Conclusion
According to the study, most of the respondents agreed that soil fertility level is low which
comprises. In relation to land productivity trend, more than half (61.11%) of the respondents in
the questionnaire survey indicated that it is a decreasing trend.

Most of the respondents agreed that there is prevalence of soil erosion in Bolo kebele. Farmers
have a rich experience of knowing the soil erosion levels that they got in centuries. Those
respondents who said there is soil erosion in the area have chosen some indicators which they
think that there is soil erosion. They know the prevalence of soil erosion while they see the
developments of gullies rills on their farmlands. While others know the prevalence of soil
erosion while observe absence of fertile top soil, stoniness of top soil, change in the color of the
soil, root exposure, poor root and grass growth, accumulation of dump near valleys, and slope
steepness respectively. Focus group discussion showed that farmers mostly know whether soil
erosion or not by many ways. For instant if the color of the soil is brown and black there is no
soil erosion whereas if the color is changed yellow, red or white, there is soil erosion. They also
indicated that if there are gullies and rills on their farmland definitely there is erosion. Similarly
if many stones are observed in their farmlands which are not available previously, then this
indicates that there is erosion of the top soil which was underling by the bottom stone.
Page 22 of 40
Carelessness of farmers’ cultivation, absence of following farmland, steepness of the land, over
grazing, deforestation and desertification, absence and sustainable cultivation methods, and the
type of soil and its erodability are the dominant causes of soil erosion in the study area as
indicated by the farmers.

Yield reduction year to year, desertification and out migration, the soil required high input, and
land management practices to restore its fertility and productivity, lack of farmland and grazing
field, change in soil color, development of gullies, loss of vegetation cover and loss of top soil
are major impacts of soil erosion in the area.

5.2 Recommendation
After analyzing the causes and consequences of soil erosion in the study area, the researcher
proposes the following recommendations that could be considered by different stakeholders.

 The local community widely practices traditional farming. Due to this reason soils are
eroded. So the kebele administrative and the kebele development agents need to create
awareness to the society through education and training.
 The awareness of the society is low about the impact of soil erosion in the study area.
Therefore, awareness creation should be given emphasis mainly by development agents
of the kebele.
 The effect of soil erosion in the study area is high and thus the local government should
give attention to alleviate the problem and enhance agricultural production.
 There should be awareness creation training regarding sustainable cultivation methods so
that the fertility of the soil will be maintained.

References
Amede. T, Belachew. T, and Geta. E, (2001) Reversing degradation of arable lands in Southern

Page 23 of 40
 Ethiopia; Research paper, Addis Ababa Ethiopia.

Angima S.D., Stott, D.E., O’Neill, M.K., Weesies, G.A., (2003) Soil erosion prediction using

RUSLE for central Kenya highland conditions. Agricultural ecosystem and envi. 295 –

308.

Anteneh Tesfaye, (2012). Biology Guide, Aster Nega publishing enterprise Addis Ababa,

Ethiopia.

Balasubramanian A. (2017) Soil Erosion – Causes and Effects, Center for Advanced Studies in

Earth Science, University of Mysore, Mysore.

Belayaev V., P.J. Wallbrink, V. Golosov, A.S Murray and A. Sidorchuk, 2004. A comparison of

methods for evaluating soil redistribution in the severely eroded Stavropol region,

southern European, Russia, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University, Russia.

Bewket W., 2002. Land Cover Dynamics since the 1950s in Chemoga watershed, Blue Nile

Basin, Ethiopia, Mountain Research and Development Vol 22 No 3 August 2002: 263 –

269

Bewket W., 2007. Soil and water conservation intervention with convention technologies in

northwestern highlands of Ethiopia: Acceptance and adoption by farmers. Land use

policy papers 24, pp 404 – 416, Development of Geography and Environmental Studies,

Addis Ababa University.

Bewket W., Sterk, G., 2002. Farmers’ participation in soil and water conservation activities in

Chemoga watershed, Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Dev. 13, 189 – 200

Brazier Richard, 2004. Quantifying soil erosion by water in the UK: a review of monitoring and

modeling approaches, Progress in Physical Geography 28, 3, pp 340 – 365.

Casali J., Loizu J., Campo M.A, De Santisteban L.M and Alvarez-Mozos J., 2006. Accuracy of

methods for field assessment of rill and ephemeral gully erosion, Public University of

Navarre, Development of Projects and Rural Engineering, Campus de Arrosadia s/n,

Page 24 of 40
 31006, Pamplona, Navarre, Spain.

Chuchu Ayalew, Fentahun Alemayehu, and Muluneh Weldesemait (2012) Geography Guide for

Grade 10 Aster Nega Publishing Enterprise Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Hurni H.; Kebede T.; Zeleke G., 2005. Implications of Changes in Population, Land Use and

Land Management for surface runoff in the upper basin area of Ethiopia. Mountain

Research and Development; May 2005; 25, 2; 147 – 154.

Mitiku H., Herweg, K., Stillhardt, B., 2006. Sustainable land management- a new approach to

soil and water conservation in Ethiopia. pp 79 – 89, Mekele University, Ethiopia.

Moges A. and Holden N.M., 2006. Farmers’ perceptions of soil erosion and soil fertility loss in

southern Ethiopia, land degradation, and development.

Morgan R.P.C., 1996. Soil Erosion and Conservation, second ed. Longman Silsoe College,

Cranfield University.

Nyssen Jan, Jean Poesena, Jan Moeyersonsc, Josef Deckersd, Mitiku Haileb, Andreas Lange,

2004. Human impact on the environment in the Ethiopian and Eritrean highlands – a state

of the art Earth-science reviews 64, 273 – 320.

Shiferaw B. and Holden S., 1999. Soil Erosion and Smallholders’ Conservation Decisions in the

Highlands of Ethiopia. World Development Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 739 – 752.

Sonneved B. G. J. S. and Keyzer M. A., 2003. Land under pressure: soil conservation concerns

and opportunities for Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Develop. 14: 5 – 23.

Stocking A. (2005) Causes, Mechanism, and impacts of soil erosion in west bank. Cambridge

University Press.

Wainwright, J., Parsons, A.J. and Abrahams, A. 2000: Plot-scale studies of vegetation, overland

flow and erosion interactions: case studies from Arizona and New Mexico Hydrological

Processes 14, 2921 – 2943.

Yeraswork, A. (2000). Twenty Years to Nowhere: Property Rights, Land Management, and

Page 25 of 40
 Conservation in Ethiopia. Lawrenceville, New Jersey: Red Sea Press.

Yirga C. 2007. The dynamics of soil degradation and incentives for optimal management in the

central highlands of Ethiopia. PhD thesis. Pretoria, South Africa.

Zinabu G. M., Elizabeth Kebede-Westhead and Zerihun Desta 1, 2002. Long term changes in

chemical features of waters of seven Ethiopian rift valley lakes Hydrobiology 477.

Betru Nedessa (2003). Principles and techniques for biological soil conservation, soil water

conservation division. Guidline No. 3, MoA. ETH/2488/III.

Alemneh Dejene (2003). Integrated natural resource management to enhance food security; the

case of community based approaches in Ethiopia, Environment and natural resources

working paper No. 16, FAO, Rome.

APPENDIX

DEBRE BIRHAN UNIVERSITY

Page 26 of 40
 COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

Appendix A: Questionnaire survey questions prepared for household heads

Dear respondents
This instrument is designed for the purpose of gathering information regarding the cause and
consequences of soil erosion to Bolo kebele, Minjarna Shenkora Woreda. The final paper that
will be written based on the information you have provided is intended to serve for research and
development purpose. Therefore, you are kindly requested to provide accurate information as
much as possible.

Instruction: No need of writing name and you can answer the question by

circling your choice.

Part I: Back ground information of sample respondents.

1. Sex A. Male B. Female
2. Age
A. 18 – 30 C. 41 – 50
B. 31 – 40 D. 51 – 60 E. Greater than 60
3. Educational status
A. Illiterate C. Secondary school (9 – 12)
B. Primary school (Grades 1 – 8) D. Diploma E. Degree and above
4. Marital status
A. Single B. Married C. Divorce D. Widowed
5. Religion
A. Orthodox Christianity B. Muslim C. Protestant D. Other
6. Family size
A. 1 B. 2 C. 4, 5, and 6 D. Above 6

Part II: Issue related to cause and consequences of soil erosion

7. How do you perceive the fertility of your farmland?
A. Very high B. High C. Medium D. Low E.Very low
8. How do you perceive the productivity of your land?
A. Increasing B. Decreasing C. Constant D. Do not know
9. If the yield from land is decreasing, what could be the reason behind? (More than one
answer is allowed)
A. Absence of following D. Removal of soil by erosion

Page 27 of 40
 B. High coast of chemical fertilizer E. Rainfall fluctuation
C. Over cultivation F. Other reason
10. Do you know what soil erosion is? 1. Yes 2. No
11. Based on question #10, if you yes what are the indicators of soil erosion in your land?

Indicators Put tick (‫ )ر‬parallel to your choice

Rills and gully development
Observing the color of soil
Accumulation of dump near to valleys
Stoniness of soil
Slope of steepness
Root exposure
Poor crop and grass growth

12. How do you describe the degree of soil erosion in your farmland?
A. Severe B. Moderate C. Minor D. No erosion risk
13. Which type of erosion is severe in your land? (More than one is allowed)
A. Sheet erosion B. Rill erosion C. Gully erosion
14. What are the predominant causes of soil erosion in your area?

Causes of soil erosion Put tick (‫ )ر‬parallel to your choice

Slope steepness of the cultivation land
Ceaseless cultivation and absence of following
Types of soil and erodibility
Intensity of rainfall
Absence and delay of SCM
Deforestation and desertification
Overgrazing
Terms of land preparation for cropping

15. What is the effect of soil erosion on your land?

Effects of soil erosion Put tick (‫ )ر‬parallel to your choice

Loss of top soil
Reduction in yield over time
Reproduction of gullies
Loss of vegetation cover and grasses
Change in soil color
Require high input and management
Lack of farm land and grazing field
Desertification and out migration

Appendix B: Interview guide questions

Page 28 of 40
1. Do you think that there is soil erosion?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. What is the indicator of soil erosion?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. What is the awareness of your community on soil erosion?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. What would you think are the causes of soil erosion in your kebele?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. What effects do soul erosion is having in your kebele?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. What has to be done to resolve the effect of soil erosion?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

7. Is there any attempt done to resolve soil erosion?

Page 29 of 40
 ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Appendix C: FGD questions

1. Do you think that there is soil erosion?

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. What is the indicator of soil erosion?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. What is the awareness of your community on soil erosion?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. What would you think are the causes of soil erosion in your kebele?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Do you think that there are impacts of soil erosion? If yes, what are the impacts of soil
erosion in your kebele?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. What effects do soil erosion is having in your kebele? ____________________________

Page 30 of 40