See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/360041065

Assessment of possibilities to establish model agricultural technology village in

Southern Ethiopia

Article in Journal of Innovative Agriculture · March 2022

DOI: 10.37446/jinagri/rsa/9.1.2022.49-61

CITATIONS READS
2 78

4 authors, including:

Asmera Adicha Kutoya Kusse

Southern Agricultural Research Institute (SARI) Southern Agricultural Research Institute
21 PUBLICATIONS 44 CITATIONS 15 PUBLICATIONS 16 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Asmera Adicha on 25 April 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Innovative Agriculture: 9(1) : 49-61, 2022
DOI: 10.37446/jinagri/rsa/9.1.2022.49-61
Research paper

Assessment of possibilities to establish

model agricultural technology village in
Southern Ethiopia
Asmera Adicha*, Dawit Darcho, Gedion Ermias, Kutoya Kusse

Southern Agricultural Research Institute Jinka Agricultural Research Center, P.O. Box 96 Jinka, Ethiopia.

The available technology demonstration approaches like farmers' training centers

in the region are very narrow with lots of technology deficiency, less capacity,
placed in inconvenience niches, and poor setup. Therefore, this study aimed to
assess the possibilities to establish a model technology village in the Agricultural
Growth Program implementing districts of the South Omo zone. The multi-stage
sampling procedure was employed to select six sample kebeles. Data for the study
were collected from 279 randomly selected households. Data collected were
Received: 13 January 2022
analyzed using descriptive statistics and a narrative approach. The major crop
Accepted: 2 March 2022 technologies identified were improved variety, inorganic fertilizer, seed rate, and
Published: 31 March 2022 spacing. Major livestock technologies identified were improved cattle, shoat,
poultry, and forage types. Major natural resource management technologies
*Correspondence
Asmera Adicha identified were soil and water conservation, soil fertility management, and
[email protected] agroforestry practices. About 54%, 84.2%, and 57.7% of sample respondents from
Semen Ari, Debub Ari, and Bena-Tsemay districts know the existing technology
demonstration approaches such as farmers' training center, model farmer-based,
and pre-extension demonstration approaches respectively. However, all types of
agricultural technologies demonstration approaches and farmers' demands were
not being taught, introduced, and demonstrated. Therefore, it can be concluded
that establishing a model agricultural technology village on selected kebele based
on farmers/agro pastoralists' demand for the crop, livestock, and natural resource
management technologies could improve the productivity of smallholder
farmers/agro-pastoralists.
Key words: crop, livestock, natural resource management, technology village

INTRODUCTION

As Ethiopia is a country following agriculture development Ethiopia is an exemplary and leading country in Africa in the
lead industrialization (ADLI) policy where more than 85% of production of some agricultural products. For instance, the
the total population are farmers living in rural parts of the country is leading in coffee production in Africa and 5th in the
country depending on agriculture. Agriculture accounts for world. Ethiopia is again leading in Africa in live cattle
42% of GDP and nearly 80% of employment (ATA, 2017). production and 10th in the world although the cattle of

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 49

Ethiopia are low in quality. It is a home for Teff, Enset, and village is believed to improve production and productivity by
Durum wheat. supplying and demonstrating improved agricultural
technologies, no evidence indicates trials made to establish
The growth of agriculture is a major driver of poverty technology village in southern Ethiopia. Therefore, it was
reduction in rural Ethiopia. As a result, the government of found to be necessary to assess available possibilities that
Ethiopia has planned to increase agricultural productivity favor the establishment of a technology village before the
through the demonstration of agricultural technologies among work of the establishment, and this study is initiated to fill this
other strategies. However, the current rate of technology gap.
adoption is low compared to the efforts of various
governmental and non-governmental organizations working MATERIALS AND METHODS
in agriculture. According to Shita et al. (2018), from the total
crop area, on average nearly 50% of the land is covered by Description of study areas
fertilizers and 20% by pesticides whereas the area covered by
improved seed is less than 10% and irrigation is nearly 1% The study was conducted in three AGP-II districts of the South
respectively. Even though the supply of improved agricultural Omo zone. The study areas were namely Debub Ari, Bena-
technologies that help to increase agricultural production and Tsemay, and Semen Ari districts. The total population of the
productivity has increased over time, but still falls short of the Debubi Ari district is 161,268 people. The number of farm
target set to transform smallholder agriculture (MoFED, households in the districts is 23317 HHs of which 21287 are
2016). This is attributed to the approach being used for male and 2030 are female household heads. Average family
technology demonstration (Shita et al., 2018). In mid-April size and landholding (ha) per household are 6 and 0.25
2008, ECOSOC held Special Session on the Food Price Crisis. respectively. The number of kebele in the district is 28 kebele.
Combinations of short and long-term causes were identified Whereas the total population of the Semen Ari district is
for the crisis. To tackle this crisis, SG produced a 90,046 people and the number of farm households in the
Comprehensive Framework for Action (CFA) in July 2008 woreda is 30,182 HHs of which 28,743 are male-headed and
which encompasses Agricultural technology innovation and 1,439 are female-headed households -. Average family size
diffusion mechanism, particularly to smallholders, as a key to and landholding (ha) per household are 6 and 1.32
boosting yields' productivity sustainably (ECOSOC, 2015). respectively. Number of kebele’s in the woreda is 33 kebele.
Availability of area-specific technologies in farmers' vicinity On the other hand, the total population of the Bena-Tsemay
can improve their production and productivity conditions and district is 151,129 people. The number of farm households in
impact daily life. Means of such meaningful engagement with the district is 19632 HHs of which 10186 are male and 9446
stakeholders by the prior understanding of social settings are female household heads. Average family size and
assist village institutions/society towards enhanced adoption landholding (ha) per household are 8 and 1.21 respectively.
of technologies. An Agricultural Technology village is a wider Number of kebeles in the woreda is 32 kebele (SOZFEDD,
model area or village which is full of modern and improved 2018).
agricultural technologies established to demonstrate and
introduce the farming community with scientific, commercial, As per the traditional agroecology classification of the Debub
intense and simple, socialized, organized, cost-wise, and Ari district, 37% is 'dega, 3 % is 'Wirch' and the rest 60% is
integrated agricultural technologies and production systems. 'woina dega’. The area is situated between 5.67 to 6.19-North
It is a village where all types of agricultural technologies and latitude and 36.30 to 36.73 East longitude, Elevation ranges
cost-wise production systems are being taught, introduced, from 1200 m a.s.l to 3418 m. a.s.l. The average annual rainfall
and demonstrated (PRC, 2015). Establishing a model is 1450-mm. The mean annual temperature ranges from 10.1
technology village, where various improved agricultural – 27.5 oc and the mean annual temperature is 21 0c. On the
technologies (crop, livestock, and natural resource other hand, the traditional agro-ecology classification Semen
management practices) can be demonstrated is believed to be Ari district is woina dega (21%), kola (30%), and dega (39%),
very important. Knowing this importance, Southern wurch (10%). The administrative seat of the district is Gelila
Agricultural Research Institute commenced establishing a Town located 602 km southwest of the national capital. The
technology village around its centers with the help of the AGP total land area of the district is 60,040 hectares. Average
program. The program is operating in 157 woredas of annual rainfall and temperature in the district vary between
Ethiopia and 49 woredas in SNNPRS in line with the second 400 mm and 2600 mm, and 11⁰c and 22⁰c respectively. The
growth and transformation program (GTP-II) of the country altitude varies from 900 meters to 3,200 meters above sea
and the region. The research component of the AGP-II level. In terms of traditional agro-ecology classification, the
(component II) provides support to the agricultural research Bena-Tsemay is Weynadega (19%), dry kola (78%), semi-arid
system to enhance technology supply to develop and promote (3%). The altitude of the district ranges between 500m.a.s.l
agricultural technologies for inclusive and sustainable market- and 1558 m.a.s.l. and the latitude of 5.01 – 5.73 North and
oriented smallholder agricultural growth in potential areas of longitude 36.38 – 37.07 East. The study area receives bi-
the country in a manner that addresses the needs of women modal rainfall distribution; the first peak, from mid-March to
and youth. the end of April, is important for crop production, and the
second peak, from mid-October to the beginning of November,
The available farmers' training centers are very narrow with is short and important only for pasture. The mean annual rain
lots of technology deficiency, less capacity, placed in ranges between 200 and 578 mm and the mean annual
inconvenience niches, and poor setup. Though technology temperature ranges between 17.6 c0 and 27.5 c0.

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 50

Sources and Methods of Data Collection households. The multi-stage sampling procedure was
employed to select sample farm households. In the 1st stage,
Both primary and secondary data were used to conduct this three AGP beneficiaries Woreda’s were selected from the zone
study. Primary data was collected from farmers, and as a sample because only three were beneficiaries. In the 2nd
agricultural experts working in the woreda. Secondary data stage, 3 kebele’s were randomly selected from each sample
was collected from different organizational reports and woredas. In the 3rd stage, using the list of farmers in the
documents, and different published and unpublished sources. sample Kebele’s, the pre-determined size of representative
The data from primary data sources were collected using data households was randomly selected using a simple random
collection instruments such as observation, pre-tested semi- sampling technique. In the 4th stage, the required sample size
structured questionnaires, focus group guide questions, and in each Kebele was determined proportionally to the number
checklists. During observation, different types of available of households in each Kebele.
agricultural technologies, demonstration sites, available site
for technology village establishment, previously used methods Method of Data Analysis
of demonstration, and the way the organizations approach
beneficiaries to demonstrate was observed. A focus group The analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics.
guide question was set and data was collected from 8 Descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviations,
members (3 model farmers, 3 youth, and 2 females) to have a percentages, and frequency tables were employed to
clue about the overall scenario. Using checklists data were summarize the socio-economic and demographic
collected from agricultural experts working in the study characteristics related to sample respondents. A narrative
woreda to have the overall outlook on the available approach was employed to describe details of the issue at
technologies, the needs of beneficiaries, capacity and hand.
challenges of existing demonstration, previous experience in
technology village establishment, and available convenient RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
area/village for technology village establishment in the study
district. The interview was employed to collect data from Major crop, livestock, and NRM technologies available in
farmers using pre-tested semi-structured separate the study area
questionnaires.
Major Crop Productions in the Study Areas
Sample Size Determination and Sampling method
The major types of crops cultivated in Debub Ari are maize,
Regarding sample size, the sample size of farmers was sorghum, wheat and barley, common bean, onion, and tomato.
determined using the formula of Yamane (1968). The As key informants reported that their livelihood mainly
computational process will be as follows. depends on crop production. Whereas in the Semen Ari
district major crops cultivated are wheat, barley, faba bean,
n=N/(1+Ne2 ) enset, and cassava. On the other hand, in the Bena-Tsemay
district, the major type of crops cultivated include maize,
Where n = the sample size, N= Total number of households in sorghum, teff, finger millet, common bean, and groundnut.
the study district, e= the error term, and 10% (0.1) was taken. Thus, farmers/agro-pastoralists in the study districts produce
Using the above formula total sample size was 279 crops for home consumption, income generation, and as a
Table 1. Quantity produced and land allocated for major crops
Districts Major crops grown Land allocated (ha) Quantity produced (qt) Productivity(qt/ha)
Mean Mean Mean
Debub Ari Maize 0.38 20.0 40.63
Sorghum 0.20 3.70 18.5
Common bean 0.13 3.33 15.62
Wheat 0.41 5.28 12.9
Barley 0.20 3.43 17.15
Onion & Tomato 0.08 9.7 90.5
Semen Ari Wheat 0.24 3.2 13.33
Barley 0.22 3.7 16.81
Faba bean 0.15 2.2 14.67
Enset 0.15 Perennial
Fruits & Vegetables 0.42
Benatsemay Maize 0.41 17.61 38.95
Sorghum 0.20 5.77 22.85
Common bean 0.15 4.74 21.60
Teff 0.30 3.73 12.43
Finger millet 0.14 3.02 21.57
Groundnut 0.19 2.95 15.53
Source: own survey, 2019

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 51

 70
60
50
40 Maize

30 Sorghum

20 Common bean
Wheat
10
Barley
0
Onion and Tomato

Figure 1. Main challenges of major crop production in Debub Ari district

45 Wheat

40
Barly
35
30
Bean
25
20 Enset
15
10 Fruits and
Vegetables
5
0
No Disease Pest Logging Seed Seed Low Others
challenge price supply market
faced demand

Figure 2. Main challenges of major crop production in Semen Ari district

Source: own survey,2019

70
60
Maize
50
Sorghum
40
Common bean
30
20 Teff

10 Finger millet

0 Ground nut
Disease Logging Pest Seed Seed Others
Price Supply

Figure 3. Main challenges of major crop production in the Bena-Tsemay district

Source: own survey, 2019

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 52

seed for further production. Table 1 below shows the land rot, and root and tuber crops mole rat and bacterial wilt are
allocated for major crop production and productivity in Debub the main challenges of production. For those oil crops
Ari, Semen Ari, and Bena-Tsemay districts. In the Debub Ari (Groundnut) root rot is the main challenge of production. As
district maize, sorghum, wheat, and barley are the most shown in figure 1 below, in the Debub Ari district, the disease
important cereal crops which are grown in the study area with is the main challenge for the production of crops in the study
the mean land allocated of 0.38, 0.20, 0.41and 0.20 hectares area that about 15.8% of maize producers, 18.4% of sorghum,
and mean productivity per hectare of 40.63, 18.5,12.9 and 67.6% of common bean, 50% of wheat, 40% barley and 53.3%
17.15 quintal respectively. The national average productivity of onion and tomato producers responded their crops were
of maize, sorghum, wheat, and barley per hectare is 39.44, affected by the disease in the production season 2011 E.C. Pest
27.26, 27.36, and 21.57 quintals /hectare, and the regional is another main challenge for major crops in the study area
average productivity of maize, sorghum, wheat, and barley per that about 50.1% of maize producers, 32.7% of sorghum,
hectare is 38.06, 25.43, 26.6 and 19.04 quintals/hectare 2.7% of common bean, 4.5% of wheat, 14% barley and 15.2%
respectively (CSA, 2018). It is clear that maize productivity of onion and tomato producers raised pest as the main
per hectare in the study area and national/regional averages challenge of major crop production. In the study area about
is almost similar but others such as sorghum, wheat, and 5.3% of sorghum, 15.5% of wheat, and 10.5% of barley
barley are below the national/ regional average productivity. producers reported that logging is a problem in cropping
Common bean is the major pulse crop produced in the study season 2011 E.C. In the study area shattering is also the main
area in which the mean land allocated for it is 0.13 hectares problem that occurs on onion and tomato, and 8.5% of
and the mean productivity of 15.62 quintals. The mean land respondents reported shattering is the main problem. About
allocated for the production of onion and tomato in the study 7.5% of maize, 10.5% of sorghum, 8.5% of common bean,
area is 0.08 hectares and the mean productivity of 90.5 6.5% of wheat, 11.5% of barley, and 4.5% of onion and tomato
quintals in the year 2011 E.C. producers reported that seed price is the main challenge for
production in the study area. In the study area about 5% of
In the Semen Ari district, wheat and barley are the most maize, 19.4% of sorghum, 10.4% of common bean, 10.2% of
important cereal crops which are grown in the study area with wheat, 8.6% of barley, and 6.5% of onion and tomato
the mean land allocated of 0.24, 0.22 hectares, and mean producers reported that seed supply is the main problem for
productivity of 13.3 and 16.81 quintals respectively. Faba bean production. About 3.5% of maize producers, 5.3% of sorghum
is the major pulse crop produced in the study area in which producers, 2.7% of common bean producers, 7.4% of wheat
the mean land allocated for it is 0.15 hectares and the mean producers, 9% of barley producers, and 8.2% of onion and
productivity of 14.67 quintals. Among the root crops, enset is tomato producers reported that low market demand is the
one of the major crops produced in the study area, in which major problem for the production of the crop in the area.
the mean land allocated for enset production is 0.15 hectares. Lastly, 8.1% of maize, 18.4% of sorghum, 8.1% of common
Finally, the mean land allocated for the production of bean, 5.9% of wheat, 6.4% of barley, and 3.6% of onion and
perennial crops particularly fruits and vegetables in the study tomato producers reported that the production of major crops
area are 0.42 hectares in the year 2011E.C. was affected by climatic factors such as; drought and erratic
rainfall in the study area.
In the Bena-Tsemay district maize, sorghum, teff, and finger
millet are the most important cereal crops which are grown in As shown in figure 2 below, in the Semen Ari district about
the study area with the mean land allocated of 0.41, 0.20, 0.30, 18.4% of wheat producers, 16.2% of barley, 9.2% of faba bean,
and 0.14 hectares and mean productivity of 38.95, 22.85, 10.3% of enset, and 11.5% of fruits and vegetables responded
12.43 and 15.57 quintals respectively. Common bean is the that no challenges were faced them during the production
major crop produced in the study area with mean land time of 2011 E.C. Disease is the main challenge for the
allocated of 0.15 hectares and a mean productivity of 21.60 production of crops in the study area that about 42.6% of
quintals. Lastly, the mean land allocated for the groundnut in wheat producers, 38.1% of barley, 39.1% of faba bean, 42.5%
the study area is 0.19 hectares, and the mean productivity of of enset and 29.9% of fruits and vegetable producers
15.53 quintals in the year 2011 E.C. responded their crops were affected by the disease in the
production season 2011 E.C. Pest is another the main
Main challenges of major crop production challenge for major crops in the study area that about 11.5%
of wheat producers, 8% of barley, 13.8% of faba bean, 26.5%
During the focus group discussion, and key informant of enset and 9.2% of fruits and vegetable producers raised
interviews with district office experts, development agents, pest as the main challenge of major crop production. On the
and farmers/agro-pastoralists the main challenge they raised other hand, logging sometimes happens on wheat and barley
for major crop production in the areas were diseases, pests, in the study area about 2.3% of wheat producers and 3.4% of
logging, seed price, seed supply, low market demand, climatic barley producers reported that logging is happened on these
variability, drought, and erratic rainfall and others. Several two crops in cropping season 2011 E.C.
insects/pests groups attack the flowers, fruits, stems, and
roots of different crops. The major diseases and pests affecting About 4.6% of barley, 10.3% of faba bean, 3.4% of vegetables
maize, sorghum, teff, finger millet, wheat, and barley in the and fruit producers reported that seed price is the main
area fall armyworms, wag, and bacterial blight. For pulse challenge for production in the study area. In the study area
crops, leaf miners and pod borers are the main diseases and about 13.8% of wheat, 11.5% of barley, 9.2% of faba bean,
pests. For those of fruit and vegetable crops fruit fly and root 11.5% of enset, and 13.8% of fruit and vegetable producers

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 53

reported that seed supply is the main problem for production. such as; climate variability, drought and erratic rainfall in the
Low market demand is also one of the major problems for study area.
agricultural product marketing in the study area. About 3.4%
of wheat producers, 9.25% of barley producers, 6.9% of faba Major Livestock technology/Breeds in the study area
bean producers, 9.2% of enset producers, and 18.4% of fruits
and vegetable producers reported that low market demand is The major types of livestock found in the study areas of Debub
the major problem for the production of the crop in the area. Ari, Semen Ari, and Bena-Tsemay districts are cattle, shoat,
Lastly, 8% of wheat, 12.6% of barley, 11.5% of faba bean, and poultry, and horse. Livestock is the second most important
13.8% of fruit and vegetable producers reported that the measurement of wealth for smallholder farmers in the Debub
production of major crops was affected by climatic factors and Semen Ari districts. But in the Bena-Tsemay district, it is
such as; drought and erratic rainfall in the study area. the first important measurement of wealth for agro-
pastoralists. The local livestock breeds are dominant in the
As shown in figure 3 below, in the Bena-Tsemay district study areas but there are also some improved breeds such as
disease is the main challenge for the production of crops in Holstein Fersie, Jersey, and breeds. As reported in a group
the study area that about 10.4% of maize producers, 9.8% of discussion with farmers/agro-pastoralists there is a difference
sorghum, 33.8% of common bean, 9.1% of teff, 17.3% finger in production and productivity and also in size between local
millet and 10% of groundnut producers responded their crops and Holstein Fersia, Jersey, and Borana breeds. Due to the low
were affected by the disease in the production season 2011 milk productivity of local cow farmers in Debub and Semen
E.C. Pest is another the main challenge for major crops in the Ari districts are interested to cross local with improved
study area that about 60.3% of maize producers, 45.9% of breeds. Crossed breeds gave better milk and butter than local
sorghum, 7.4% of common bean, 9.2% of finger millet and ones. However, farmers/agro-pastoralists kept livestock for
30% of groundnut producers raised pest as the main different purposes such as milk, meat, butter, hide, and skin.
challenge of major crop production. On the other hand, Selling of butter and live animals are common sources of
logging sometimes happens on sorghum, teff, and finger millet income for their livelihood in the area. Milk is used for home
in the study area about 4.9% of sorghum producers, 40.9% of consumption whereas other products like skin are being used
teff, and 31.6% of finger millet producers reported that for a bed.
logging is happened on these three crops in cropping season
2011 E.C. Livestock feed in the Debub Ari district is mainly grazing on
their farm (45%) and communal land (20%), and crop
About 8.5% of maize, 6.5% of sorghum, 18.9% of common residues (35%). The water sources for their livestock are
bean, 12.6% of teff, 4.5% of finger millet, and 10% of rivers and ponds near their home. There are haymaking

Table 2. Livestock technology available in the study area

Districts Debub Ari Semen Ari Bena-Tsemay
Livestock technology Type of livestock Number Average Number Average Number Average
available technology owned owned owned
Cow 190 3 160 2 271 6
Ox 130 2 35 0.4 180 3
Local Heifer 39 2 18 0.2 50 2
Sheep 141 4 453 5 39 2
Poultry/hens 174 5 68 1 210 6
Goat 44 3 55 1 337 8
Honey bee 21 4 2 0.2 12 0.7
Improved Cow 29 1 20 0.2 6 0.4
Ox 5 0.2 4 0.1 3 0.3
Poultry/hens 183 4 54 1 190 6
Sheep 9 0.3 5 0.1 - -
Goat 6 0.2 - - 6 0.7
Honey beehive - - - - 2 0.1
Source: own survey, 2019
groundnut producers reported that seed price is the main practices from crop residues during crop harvesting season in
challenge for production in the study area. In the study area Debub and Semen Ari districts. They provide mostly crop
about 7.1% of maize, 12.4% of sorghum, 17.4% of common residues for milking cows and ploughing oxen. There is a
bean, 15.6% of teff, 10.2% of finger millet, and 20.5% of practice of planting improved forage such as elephant grass,
groundnut producers reported that seed supply is the main pigeon pea, Rhodes, panicum, and desho grass. The district
problem for production. Lastly, 13.7% of maize, 20.4% of office, Jinka agricultural research center, and NGOs supplied
sorghum, 22.5% of common bean, 21.7% of teff, 27.3% of chicken breeds specifically, koek-koek, saso, and leghorn to
finger millet, and 29.5% of groundnut producers reported that the farmers/agro-pastoralists but they are susceptible to
the production of major crops was affected by climatic factors disease and died for most farmers/agro-pastoralists. Local
hens are dominant and more resistant to disease than

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 54

improved. The purpose of rearing hens is to get income, to the type of agroecology of the study area favoring goats
especially in selling eggs. In this area, females have a decisive over other livestock. Some samples of respondents have a
role in the production and marketing of products. As shown in modern beehive and majorities have local honeybee colonies.
Table 2 below the average local livestock holding (cow, ox,
heifer, sheep, hen, goat, and honey bee) of sample respondents Main challenges of livestock technology
in the study are 3, 2, 2, 4, 5, 3, and 4 respectively. Whereas
average improved livestock/breed holding (cow, ox, hen, As discussion made with key informants, the main challenges
sheep, and goat) of sample farmers in the study area are 1, 0.2, for livestock production and management in the study area
4, 0.3, and 0.2 respectively. Improved chicken is more are diseases, shortage of feeds, shortage of grazing land due to
introduced than other livestock. In general indigenous expansion of agricultural land and fragmentation of land for
livestock, types are dominant in the study area. Chicken is the children, and marketing problems. The death of livestock is
largest class of livestock owned by sample households due to a lack of/less veterinary services and less support from
followed by cows. This could be due to the type of agroecology extension agents on timely vaccination. And also feed was a
of the study area favoring chicken and cows over other great challenge for improved cows (Holstein, Jersey, and
livestock. The majority of sample respondents have a local Borana), Boar goat, and Bonga sheep because they need a high
honeybee colony in the Debub Ari district. In the Semen Ari amount of forage. As shown in figure 4 below, about 82%,
district, the average local livestock holding (cow, ox, heifer, 17%, and 1% of respondents said the main challenges for
sheep, hen, horse, and honey bee) of sample respondents in livestock production and management are disease, feed, and

90
80
70
60
50
debub ari
40
semen ari
30
benatsemay
20
10
0
disease feed no market shortage
shortage problem problem of graing
land
Figure 4. Main challenges of livestock production and management
Source: own survey result, 2019
the study are 2, 0.4, 0.2, 5, 1, 1, and 0.2 respectively. Whereas shortage of land respectively in the Debub Ari district. And
average improved livestock/breed holding (cow, ox, sheep, also about 43%, 24%, and 14% of sample respondents said
and hen) of sample farmers in the study area are 0.2, 0.1, 0.1, the main challenges for livestock production and management
and 0.1 respectively. Improved hens are more introduced than are disease, feed, market problems, and respectively in the
other livestock. In general indigenous livestock, types are Semen Ari district but 19% of respondents said there was no
dominant in the study area. Sheep are the largest class of problem for livestock production. Moreover, about 79%, 18%,
livestock owned by sample households followed by cattle. This and 3% of respondents said the main challenges for livestock
could be due to the type of agroecology of the study area production and management are disease; feed shortage
favoring sheep over other livestock. Horses provide transport during drought season, and price fluctuation respectively in
of farm input. The majority of sample respondents have local the Bena-Tsemay district during survey time. As sample
honeybee colonies. In the Bena-Tsemay district, the average respondents revealed, chickens from extension are very
livestock holding (cow, ox, heifer, sheep, hen, goat, and honey sensitive to disease/bacterial, viral, and parasites and die daily
bee) of sample respondents in the study are 6, 3, 2, 2, 6, 8, and if they are not continuously provided feed and vaccination.
0.7 respectively. Whereas average improved livestock/breed
holding (cow, ox, Boar goat, hens, and honey bee) of sample Major natural resource management technologies
farmers in the study area are 0.4, 0.3, 0.7, 6, and 0.1 practiced Soil and water conservation practices
respectively. Improved hens are more introduced than other
livestock. In general indigenous livestock, types are dominant In the districts, there is a problem of land degradation due to
in the study area. Goat is the largest class of livestock owned inappropriate land-use systems, erosion, and deforestation. As
by sample households followed by poultry. This could be due a result, the land of farmers/agro-pastoralists was susceptible

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 55

to soil erosion and which causes the loss of upper fertile soil. the physical SWC structures practiced are soil and stone bund.
Community participation in soil and water conservation About 59.5% and 40.5% of sample respondents practice soil
structures is increasing from time to time and it has greater and stone bund on individual farmland respectively.
importance in protecting losses of soil and water. Some
individual farmers/ agro-pastoralists planted desho and Soil fertility enhancement methods
elephant grass to conserve soil and to use it as feed for
livestock. As revealed in a focus group discussion with experts and
farmers/agro-pastoralists, the soil fertility status in the study
In the Debub Ari district, about 45.3% of respondents area decreased from time to time due to the repeated
revealed that they practice physical SWC on farmland whereas cultivation of land followed by population increment. Different
about 54.7% do not practice but they participate in watershed introduced soil fertility improvement technologies or inputs
management. Thus, the physical SWC structures practiced are are supplied to farmers by the district office. Of those, the
soil bund, stone bund, half-moon, and fanyajuu. As shown in most common currently in use are NPSB, NPS, NPSZN, and
Table 4 below, about 74.4% and 20.9% of sample respondents Urea, MOP (potassium chloride) fertilizer is used in highland
practice soil bund and stone bund on individual farmland parts of the districts mainly in Debub and Semen Ari. Recently
respectively. In the Semen Ari district, different SWC practices the trend of using these fertilizers increased but the price of it
have been carried out at individual or community levels. is highly increasing.
About 73.6% of respondents revealed that they practice
physical SWC on their farm whereas about 26.4% were not About 49.5%, 22.1%, 17.9%, 6.3% and 4.2% of sample
practicing physical SWC on communal land. Physical SWC respondents use inorganic fertilizer, crop rotation,
practices widely implemented on farmland in the area are soil intercropping, fallowing and compost & FYM respectively to
and stone band and half-moon. About 81.3% and 17.2% of enhance soil fertility in Debub Ari district whereas, in Semen
sample respondents practice soil bund and stone bund on Ari district sample respondents use crop rotation (44.8%),

Table 3. Physical SWC practice in the area

Attributes of SWC Districts
Debub Ari Semen Ari Bena-Tsemay
Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %
The practice of physical SWC Yes 43 45.3 64 73.6 18 18.6
No 52 54.7 23 26.4 79 81.4
Types of physical SWC Soil bund 32 74.4 52 81.3 47 59.5
Stone bund 9 20.9 11 17.2 32 40.5
Source: own survey, 2019

Table 4. Soil fertility enhancement in the area

Soil fertility enhancement in the area Districts
Debub Ari Semen Ari Bena-Tsemay
Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %
Intercropping 17 17.9 1 1.1 53 54.6
Inorganic fertilizer application 47 49.5 10 11.5 35 36.1
Crop rotation 21 22.1 39 44.8 1 1
Fallowing 6 6.3 25 28.7 5 5.2
Compost and FYM application 4 4.2 11 12.6 2 2.1
Source: own survey, 2019

Table 4. Practice of tree planting & management

The practice of tree planting & management Districts
Debub Ari Semen Ari Bena-Tsemay
Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %
Reforestation 73 76.8 50 57.5 44 45.2
Afforestation 16 16.8 37 42.5 14 14.4
Area closure 6 6.3 - - 39 40.2
Nursery site Yes 41 43.2 22 18 18 18.6
No 54 56.8 65 79 79 81.4
Source: own survey, 2019
their farmland respectively. On the other hand, in the Bena- fallowing (28.7%), compost and FYM(12.6%),
Tsemay district, about 18.6% of respondents reported that intercropping(1.1%), inorganic fertilizers (11.5%) to enhance
they practice physical SWC on their farmland whereas about soil fertility. As sample respondents revealed farmers
81.4% do not but practice physical SWC (Table 3)on degraded intercrop maize with common bean, maize with sorghum, etc.
communal lands and agro-pastoralists training centers. Thus, to enhance soil fertility. Moreover, they use inorganic

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 56

fertilizers such as NPSB and urea by purchasing from the to shifting cultivation or deforestation of forest land for
extension. On the other hand, in the Bena-Tsemay district agricultural purposes. This year as the government agenda
about 54.6%, 36.1%, 1%, 5.2%, and 2.1% of sample reforestation of degraded lands and afforestation was done on
respondents use intercropping, inorganic fertilizer, crop communal lands. But most seedlings were purchased from
rotation, fallowing, compost & FYM, and respectively to private nursery sites and nursery establishment in the district
enhance soil fertility. itself is very weak. About 76.8%, 57.5%, and 45.2% of sample
respondents in Debub Ari, Semen Ari, and Bena-Tsemay
Irrigation practices districts revealed that there was high community mobilization
to reforest the previously degraded areas respectively. And
In study districts, traditionally, farmers/agro-pastoralists also about 16.8 %, 42.5%, and 14.4% of respondents in Debub
practice irrigation, and their primary sources of water are Ari, Semen Ari, and Bena-Tsemay districts have participated in

Table 5. Crop technology demand of selected kebele’s for technology village establishment
Crop technology Type of crop variety in Reasons for preferring this technology The rank of
the order of crop
importance technology

Maize BH140 High yielding and Consumption 1

Sorghum Lalo, Dano, and Dekeba Consumption, High yield, and high price 4
Common bean Hawassa dume and Consumption, high price, and High yield 2
Nasir
Alga Cassava Kule and Kello Consumption, High yield, and Source of 3
income
Sweet Potato Improve Variety Consumption, high yield, and Source of 6
income

Onion and Tomato Improve Variety High yielding and Source of income 5
Maize Melkassa 2, Melkassa 4 Consumption, high yield, income 1
and BH 140 generation, and early maturity
Sorghum Dekeba and Dano Consumption and High yield early maturity 2
Common bean Nasir and Hawassa Consumption, income generation, and 3
dume drought resistance
Goldia Teff Kuncho, Asnakech, and High yield, income generation, and Suitable 4
Boset for the agro-ecology
Finger millet Improved Variety Income generation, high yield, and suitable 5
for the agro-ecology
Source: own survey, 2019
Table 6. Practice of tree planting & management
The practice of tree planting & Districts
management Debub Ari Semen Ari Bena-Tsemay
Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %
Reforestation 73 76.8 50 57.5 44 45.2
Afforestation 16 16.8 37 42.5 14 14.4
Area closure 6 6.3 - - 39 40.2
Nursery site Yes 41 43.2 22 18 18 18.6
No 54 56.8 65 79 79 81.4
Source: own survey, 2019
rivers and springs. The method of application to this afforestation of watershed and mountainous areas whereas
indigenous irrigation scheme in the areas was conventional 6.3% and 40.2% of respondents in Debub Ari and Bena-
small furrow irrigation. By using this irrigation practice Tsemay districts participated in area closure respectively. But
farmers/agro-pastoralists commonly produce horticultural most seedlings were purchased from private nursery sites and
crops such as onion, tomato, cabbage, etc. There are no nursery establishment in the district itself is weak because
modern irrigation practices in the study area/districts. currently there is no model nursery site. About 56.8%, 79%,
Forest resource management, Agroforestry, and Tree planting and 81.4% of sample respondents in Debub Ari, Semen Ari,
practices . and Bena-Tsemay districts revealed that there was no site in
their area, and 43.2%, 18%, and 18.6% of respondents said
As per key informants' interviews and discussions with the that there is nursery site but not equipped with materials.
district office, in the past decades there was a very dense
forest in the districts but now a day it is highly decreasing due

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 57

Technology demand of farmers/agro-pastoralists in management technologies. Farmer's/agro pastoralist's natural
selected woreda's resource technology demand in the study area is shown below
in table 10.
Crop technology demand of farmers/agro-pastoralists in
the study area Farmer's/agro pastoralists' perception of the existing
technology demonstration approaches
During the focus group discussion, district experts and kebele
agents reported a shortfall in seed supply which doesn't meet For the appropriate implementation of any new technology,
the demand of farmers, and also the long channel of supply of farmers/agro-pastoralists/pastoralists need to be conscious
improved variety that comes through the regional, zonal, and and responsive to effectively use the given technology. In the
district extension. So it is better to assess farmers/agro- study area, the farmers/agro-pastoralists/pastoralists'
pastoralists demand for improved crop variety to be supplied perceptions about the importance of the existing technology
in the coming season are based entirely on official forecasts demonstration approach were somehow good and
that are developed at the local (kebele) level and then information through extension agents and some NGOs was
transmitted through official channels to zonal and regional also available. As can be seen from Table 11 below about 54%,
levels. Accordingly, farmers/agro pastoralists' demand for 84.2% and 57.7% of sample respondents from districts know
improved crop technology in Debub Ari (Alga kebele) and the existing technology demonstration approaches
Bena-Tsemay (Goldia) districts is presented in table 8 below. respectively. The existing technology demonstration
approaches which are commonly known by respondents in
Livestock Technology demand of farmers/agro-pastoralists the districts are FTC/APTC, a Model farmer-based, PED, and
in the study area FREG demonstration approaches. Sample respondents in the
Semen Ari district prefer FTC and pre-scaling up approaches
Sample respondents in the study area indicated different of demonstration because it is simple to share experience and
reasons for preferring different types of livestock technology-. knowledge from farmers, experts and others support each
The demand of farmers/agro-pastoralists for local or other at the same time whereas respondents from Debub Ari
improved livestock technology/breed varies with a relative and Bena-Tsemay districts preferred FTC/APTC, Model
advantage of livestock technology/breed type in terms of farmer-based, PED and pre-scaling up approaches because all
disease-resistant and productivity. Sample respondents highly they are important to transform farmers/ agro-pastoralists
demanded improved livestock breeds than locals in the study gradually. About 91.4%, 98.8%, 75% of sample respondents
areas. Moreover, their preference is directly related to the who know the existing technology demonstration approach
importance they have in their livelihood improvement. are involved in technology demonstration approaches in
Semen Ari, Debub Ari, and Bena-Tsemay districts respectively.
Natural resource management technology demand of
farmers/agro-pastoralists Convenient area to technology village establishment

Sample respondents in the study area indicated different The study assessed three kebele of each AGP-II district in the
reasons for preferring different types of natural resource study area. One convenient kebele was selected from each

Table 7. NRM technology demand of selected kebele’s for technology village establishment
NRM technol- NRM practices in order of importance The reasoning for this technology Rank NRM
ogies practices
SFM NPS and urea, intercropping, and crop Increase soil fertility & increase produc-
2
rotation tivity
SWC Soil and stone bund, pigeon pea, and Decrease soil and water loss, increase
4
elephant grass planting productivity, and used as forage
Agroforestry Mixed farming of crops with wanza, Manage land efficiently, used as forage,
Goldia
grevillea, moringa, pigeon pea, and shade and increase soil fertility, and 1
cowpea high-income source
Irrigation Watering of crops from river and Reduce the dependency on rainfall, two-
spring (traditional) and water harvest- season harvest, and increase income 3
ing
SFM NPSB, urea, intercropping Increase soil fertility & increase produc-
1
tivity
SWC Soil bund, watershed development, Decrease soil and water loss, increase
alfalfa, desho, and elephant grass plant- productivity, and used as forage 3
ing
Alga
Agroforestry Mixed farming of crops with wanza, Manage land efficiently, used as forage,
grevillea moringa, banana, coffee, en- shade and increase soil fertility, and 2
set, and mango high-income source
Irrigation Traditionally by hand watering from Reduce the dependency on rainfall, two-
4
rivers season harvest, and increase income

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 58

 district for technology village establishment CSA (Central Statistical Agency). (2018). Agricultural Sample
Survey (2010 E.C.), Area and Production of Major Crops,
CONCLUSION Statistical Bulletin, May 2018, Addis Ababa.

The major types of crops cultivated in the study are maize, ECOSOC. (2015). Agricultural Technology for Development.
sorghum, common bean, wheat, barley, faba bean, enset, Secretary-General’s Report to the 64th General Assembly: Old
cassava, finger millet, and groundnut. The major types of Issue, New Context.
livestock technologies available in the study area are cattle,
shoat, poultry, and horse. Livestock is the second most PRC. (2015). Study on Modern Agriculture Demonstration
important measurement of wealth for smallholder farmers in Area Planning and Financial Support Mobilization: Technical
the Debub and Semen Ari districts. But in the Bena-Tsemay Assistance Consultant’s Report. Policies on the Construction of
district, it is the first important measurement of wealth for Modern Agricultural Demonstration Areas to Achieve
agro-pastoralists. Major natural resource management Agricultural Modernization.
practices available are soil and water conservation practice,
soil fertility enhancement, and agroforestry practices. The SOFEDB. (2009). South Omo zone statistical abstracts 2009,
demand of farmers/agro-pastoralists/pastoralists for Jinka, Ethiopia, pp10.
improved technology and perceptions about the importance
of the existing technology demonstration approach was
Yemane, T. (1967). Statistics, an introductory analysis. ed.,
somehow good and also information was addressed through
New York: Harper & Row.
extension agents and some NGOs. However, all types of
agricultural technologies and farmers' demands were not
being taught, introduced, and demonstrated. As result, it can
be concluded that establishing a model agricultural
technology village on selected kebele based on farmers/agro
pastoralists' demand for the crop, livestock, and NRM
technologies could improve the productivity of smallholder
farmers/agro-pastoralists.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

The authors developed concept, initiated the research

proposal, conducted the research in the field, reviewed and
edited the research proposal and manuscript; collected data,
analysis and writing the full manuscript. All are equally
contributed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge Southern Agricultural

Research Institute, Jinka Agricultural Research Center, AGP-II
project for financial support.

COMPETING INTERESTS
The authors have no conflict of interests.

ETHICS APPROVAL

Not applicable

REFERENCES

ATA (Agricultural Transmission Agency). (2017). Ethiopian

Agriculture and Strategies for Growth Presented to Ethiopia -
Norway Agribusiness Seminar.

Shita, A., Kumar, N., & Singh, S. (2018). Agricultural technology

adoption and its determinants in ethiopia: a reviewed paper.
Asia Pacific Journal of Research, 1(55), 99-104.

www.jinagri.com Adicha et al., 2022 59

View publication stats