ANALYZING FACTORS AFFECTING ADOPTION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION PRACTICE IN EASTERN ETHIOPIA. Abstract

ANALYZING FACTORS AFFECTING ADOPTION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION PRACTICE IN EASTERN ETHIOPIA Abdi Abdela, Rural Development and Agricultural Extension, Madda Walabu University P.O. Box 247, Bale-Robe, Ethiopia Dereje Derso, Rural Development and Agricultural Extension, Madda Walabu University P.O. Box 247, Bale-Robe, Ethiopia Abstract Through the world today, depletion of natural resource is major coming problem facing human beings. Despite the fact that the agricultural sector of the world employees the largest segment of the population, its contribution to the Gross Domestic Product of the country is only 45% due to natural resource depletion. The adoption of soil and water conservation technology in developing countries has attracted much attention from scientist and police makers mainly because land degradation is a key problem for agricultural production. Land degradation, especially soil erosion, soil nutrient depletion and soil moisture stress is a major problem confronting the study area. Although the failure of soil and water conservation intervention can have many causes, the root causes for non adoption of soil and water conservations were not identified in study area. The main objective of this study was to analze factors that affect adoption of soil and water conservation in Dire Dawa, Eastern Ethiopia. In this study multistage sampling technique was employed. In the first stage two woreda were selected randomly. On the second stage six Kebels were selected randomly. Data were collected from (n=120) 52 adopter and 68 non adopter sample respondents using probability proportional to sample size method. In the study Econometric model (binary logit) was used to analyze data. Qualitative data were analyzed through interpretation, narration, and finally complement the econometric analysis. The key finding of this study revealed that socio-economic, institutional and natural physical factors were identified as major factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation in study area. Further the survey result reveals age of household head, education level of household head, farm income, farming experience, extension contact, plot area, slope of the plot, assistance, perception of land degradation, livestock holding, plot distance and distance from nearby villages have significant influence on adoption of soil and water conservation. The finding also reveals that physical and biological soil and water conservation were highly practiced in study area. The study recommends that alternative mechanisms should be developed to increase and diversify the farmers source of assistance and information in soil and water conservation in study area. Key words: adoption, soil and water conservation, physical conservation, biological conservation, Ethiopia, Farmers, developing country

INTRODUCTION In the predominantly agrarian societies of Africa, one of the most ominous threats to food supply is environmental degradation, the deterioration of croplands, grasslands and forests (Alemneh, 1990). The twin challenges that small holders facing in Ethiopia today are land scarcity and soil degradation. Small holders are still poor, degradation has continued, and food insecurity is a great problem. Serious soil erosion is estimated to have affected 25% of the area of the highlands are now seriously eroded that they will not be economically productive again in the foreseeable future. The capacity of the farming communities to sustain production is, therefore, under serious pressure (Hans-Joachim et al., 2010). In Dire Dawa the complex inter-linkages between poverty, population growth and environmental degradation offer the main dimension to the land degradation problems. In recent years, rapid population growth has brought several changes: farm holdings have become smaller due to constraints in land availability; holdings are more fragmented; farmers cultivate fragile margins on steep slopes previously held in pasture and woodlots; many households particularly those owning little land or with large families are in great problem, fallow periods have become shorter, with longer cultivation periods. Consequences of more intensive farming and farming on steep slopes are declining fertility and increasing the high incidence of soil loss due to erosion. Soil and Water conservation practices in Dire Dawa were introduced in the early 2000s. However, farmers are reluctant to adopt soil and water conservation practices and soil degradation is declining agricultural productivities. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to identify factors affecting soil and water conservation in Dire Dawa. Further the study also tried to assess participation of farmers on soil and water conservation practices. Conceptual Frame work A number of related literatures were reviewed to reveal factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation practices. Literature review on factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation indicates adoption of soil and water conservation by small holders farmers are influenced by overall economic factors, social factors, institutional factors and natural

physical factors in rural areas. Based on literature reviews and the researcher s observation in the study area, potential determinants which were assumed important in influencing adoption of soil and water conservation were identified as: socioeconomic factors and institutional factors and natural physical (Figure 1). Therefore, the researchers try to identify and analyze relationships among factors influencing adoption of soil and water conservation by small holder farmers in the study region.

Figure 1: Analytical framework Internal Context Natural Physical Factors HH- Socio economic factors Personal characteristics + Farmers Decision on adoption of SWC Practices - SWC Institutional Factors Institutional factors Source: Adapted from Wagayehu 2006 External Context

MATERIAL AND METHODS Data types and Data Sources Data for this study were collected from households using a semi structured interview schedule. The study focused on both primary and secondary sources of data. Moreover, both qualitative and quantitative types of data were collected. Sampling Technique and Procedures A multi stage sampling technique was used to select sampled households. In the first stage, Dire Dawa Administrative council selected randomly. In the second stage based on probability sampling two woreda were selected from woredas of Dire Dawa Administrative council. In the third stage based on probability sampling technique six PAs from identified two Woreda were selected. Households in the selected PAs were stratified into adopter and non adopter of soil and water conservation based on information from Agriculture and Rural Development office. On the final stage, based on probability sampling techniques specifically based on probability proportional to sample size (PPS), 120 respondents from each household category were selected. Data Collection Methods Data were collected by employing interview schedule, which was administered by enumerators to collect data on various factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation by small holder farmers. Data Analysis Methods The available data was compiled using stata11. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as mean; standard deviation and econometric analysis were made to compare adopter with non adopter of soil and water conservation in study area. Model Specification The logit model can be specified as follows:

The logistic regression model is econometrically specified as follows where p i donates the probability of the adopting soil and water conservation by farmers that is Y i = 1 and exp (Z i ) stands for the irrational number e to the power of Z i. The model can be written as: For the case of explanation we write (1) as; The probability that a given household adopt soil and water conservation is expressed by (2) while the probability of not adopting is; Therefore, we can write; Now (P i /1-P i ) is simply the odds ratio in favor of adopting soil and water conservation. The ratio of the probability that a household will adopt soil and water conservation to the probability of that he will not adopting. Finally, taking the natural log of equation (4) we obtain: Where P i = is a probability of adopting soil and water conservation ranges from 0 to 1 Z i = is a function of n explanatory variables (x), is an intercept

are slopes of the equation in the model L i = is log of the odds ratio, which is linear in the parameters. X i = is vector of relevant household characteristics If the disturbance term (U i ) is introduced, the logit model becomes (6) In this study, the above econometric model was used to analyze the data. The model was estimated using the interactive maximum likelihood estimation procedures. This estimation procedure yields unbiased, efficient and constant parameter estimation.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Soil and Water Conservation Practice in the study Area In the study area, as other parts of the country, improved soil and water conservation measures were introduced from different sources, through food for work program. The survey result indicates that the use of improved structures in the study area have been in use since 1978. This period coincides with time when improved soil and water conservation were introduced in drought prone regions of the country through food for work program. During group interviews, farmers have revealed that improved soil and water conservation measure was introduced by food for work program in the area. However, the focus of the program was on construction of hillside terraces on communal lands. Construction of conservation structures on farm plots was very limited. The most widely and intensively used improved structures in the study area were physical and biological conservation. More specifically 36.67% and 63.33% of farm households were practicing physical and biological conservation respectively. Furthermore, out of the total farm plots covered in this study about 36.2%, 29.1% and 8.4% were covered with improved soil bunds, stone bunds and check dams respectively. According to researcher observation farmers were using stone check dam on farm plots on gentle and very steep slopes of narrow valleys where the land is not normally suitable for farming. This is because of shortage of farm land in the study area. This finding were supported by Berhanu et al (2011) traditional ditches are constructed every cropping season and run diagonally over the cultivated land. Farmers make ditches using ox plough. Depending up on the slope gradient of farm plots, farmers make ditches with certain interval. The distance between two consecutive ditches decreases with slope gradient. However the distance is not based on scientific measurement and varies from plot to plot. The main purpose of traditional ditches is to protect the soil from erosion.

Table: 1 Soil and Water conservation practices in Study area (n=120) Soil and Water conservation Adopter (N=) Non adopter(n=) Total (N=120) Practices N % N % N % P-value Biological conservation 17 32.69 27 39.71 44 36.67 Mulching* Area closure* Strip cropping*.0485** Crop rotation* Mean 0.299 Physical conservation 35 67.31 41 60.29 76 63.33 Contour** Ploughing** 0.001*** Check dam** Mean 0.410 *** Significant at 1%, **5% and *10% probability level, NS=not significant Factors Affecting Adoption of Soil and Water Conservation in study area Socio Economic Factors The survey result indicates social status, perception of erosion problem and fertility, number of economically active household members, farm size, non farm income, livestock owned, farm experience have influence on adoption of soil and water conservation in study area. Furthermore, there were percentage difference between adopter and non adopter of soil and water conservation in study area with regard to socio-economic characteristics. This is supported by diffusion of innovation school (Rogers, 1995) opened up a lot of studies in the area of adoption and human behaviors, a number of socioeconomic studies have been carried out to identify factors affecting the adoption of soil and water conservation among farmers (Tesfaye, 2003). Socio economic factors affect the decision of farmers on SWC and determine households interest and acceptance to use conservation practices.

Institutional factors The finding indicates that Farmers make decisions within a broader environment or context. One of the elements in the environment consists of institutions. These can be seen at the local and national level. Local labor organizations, social institutions such as kin networks and cultural norms are identified factors affecting soil and water conservation. The farm household justified that since soil and water conservation activities are highly labor intensive they may need labor more than available in the household. They replied that Agricultural extension services are the major institutions operating in the rural area. It is necessary to provide information and enhance the knowledge and skills of farmers, and other institutional changes made. The information obtained and the knowledge and skills gained through training accelerates farmer s decision on soil and water conservation practices. The land tenure pattern of the nation also affects the decision of farmers on soil and water conservation practices. Farmers are reluctant to invest on soil and water conservation if they are land insecured. The incentives given by external organizations to farmers through food for work encourage or discourage farmers to use improved soil and water conservation measures. This finding is supported by Semgalawe (1998), Tesfaye (2003), Wegayehu, (2006) and Yitayal (2006) suggested that households with access to institutional support such as extension services and soil and water conservation program, tend to acquire subsidized inputs, information and better understanding of the land degradation problem and soil conservation practices and hence may perceive soil and water conservation to be profitable. Also, households that participate in labor sharing groups and receive recourses (e.g. implements) through soil and water conservation program are expected to have more incentives to adopt conservation measures than others. Natural Physical Factors The survey result shows that the natural physical factors such as topography, rainfall intensity, and soil type and farm location influence adoption of soil and water conservation. The adoption potentials of farm households were determined by the location (slope) of the household s farms and other factors such as soil type, and land use practices. Those households who have most of their farms in areas which are more prone to soil erosion such as steep slopes, are

expected to experience more soil erosion and therefore recognize the impact of top soil loss due to erosion more easily than households with most of their farms located on gentle slopes and low lands and therefore adopt soil and water conservation. This finding were related with Tesfaye, (2003), Wegayehu, (2005) and Yitayal, (2006) indicates the natural physical factors such as topography, rainfall intensity, soil type and farm location influence the level or degree of soil erosion (erosion potential) and level of erosion damage. The erosion potential is determined by the location (slope) of the household s farms and other factors such as soil type, and land use practices. Those households who have most of their farms in areas which are more prone to soil erosion such as steep slopes, are expected to experience more soil erosion and therefore recognize the impact of top soil loss due to erosion more easily than households with most of their farms located on gentle slopes and low lands. The erosion potential of the land is likely to encourage households to put more effort into soil erosion control. Econometric Results In the preceding section of this paper the qualitative analysis of important constraints that were expected to affect adoption of soil and water conservation, were presented. In this section, the selected explanatory variables were used to estimate the binary logistic regression model to analyze the factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation among farmers. A binary logistic regression model was fitted to estimate the effect of hypothesized explanatory variables on the probability of being adopter or non adopter of soil and water conservation by among farmers. As discussed earlier, the logit model was used to analyze factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation by farmers. The sample households were adopter or non adopter of soil and water conservation. Consequently, the variable which shows adoption of soil and water conservation by farmers was a binary dependent variable, taking a value 1 for adopters of soil and water conservation, and 0 otherwise. Fifteen explanatory variables (fourteen continuous and one dummy) were included in the model. The summary of the variables hypothesized to affects adoption of soil and water conservation are presented here below (Table 2).

Prior to running the logistic regression analysis, both the continuous and discrete explanatory variables were checked for the existence of multi-colinearity using Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). As can be seen from the results presented in (Table 2) there is no strong association among the variables. For this reason, all of the explanatory variables were included in the final analysis. Table 2: Summary of explanatory variables included in the logistic regression model (n=120) Variable Total Sample T-value Mean SD Age of household head 44.71 12.33 7.087*** Education level of household head 3.53 3.79-10.92*** Family size 7.40 3.18 6.36*** Farming experience 2.70 2.48-1.95* Farm income 3354 2112-4.70*** Perception of Land Degradation 1484 2165-2.43** Extension contact 1.95 1.17 1.60NS Plot area 2.41 1.10-2.43** Slope of the plot 2.52 2.08-1.21NS Assistance 1.78 2.25-6.51*** Livestock holding 2.34 1.01 2.34** Plot Distance 1.05 1.12 1.34* Once the decision was made regarding the variables to be included in the model, the Maximum Likelihood method of Estimation (MLE) was used to elicit the parameter estimates of the binominal logistic regression model. Out of the fifteen explanatory variables hypothesized to affect adoption of soil and water conservation in the study area, twelve were found to be significant at less than or equal to ten percent probability level, shows the signs, magnitude and statistical significance of the estimated parameters and how much the observed values were correctly predicted by the logistic regression model (Table 3).

Table 3: Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) for continuous explanatory variables (n=120) Variables R-squared Tolerance VIF Age of household head 0.509 0.491 2.04 Education level of household head 0.335 0.665 1.50 Family size 0.330 0.670 1.49 Farming experience 0.325 0.675 1.48 Farm income 0.283 0.717 1.40 Distance from nearby village 0.265 0.739 1.35 Extension contact 0.247 0.753 1.33 Plot area 0.224 0.776 1.29 Slope of the plot 0.218 0.782 1.28 Assistance 0.216 0.784 1.27 Access to credit 0.162 0.838 1.19 Perception of Land Degradation 0.141 0.859 1.16 Livestock holding 0.133 0.867 1.15 Plot Distance 0.120 0.880 1.14 The likelihood ratio test statistic exceeds the Chi-square critical value with 16 degree of freedom. The result is significant at (P<0.01) probability level indicating that the hypothesis that all the coefficients except the intercept are equal to zero is rejected. The goodness of fit of the model was found to be 80.42 percent. Another measure of goodness of fit used in logistic regression analysis is the count R 2 that indicates the number of sample observations correctly predicted by the model. The count R 2 is based on the principle that if the estimated probability of the event is less than 0.5, the event will not occur and if it is greater than 0.5 the event will occur. In other words, the i th observation is grouped as user if the computed probability is greater than or equal to 0.5, and as a non-user otherwise. The model results show that the logistic regression model correctly predicted 115 of 120, or 92.4 percent of the sample households. The sensitivity (correctly predicted soil and water conservation adopter) and the specificity (correctly predicted non-adopter) of the logit model are 94.7 and 94.2 percent, respectively. Thus, the model predicts both groups accurately (Table 3).

Table 4: Parameter estimates of the logistic regression model (n=120) Variables Odd ratio st.err z p > z Age of household head 0.886* 0.062-1.72 0.086 Sex of household head 6.806NS 11.911 0.99 0.438 Education level of household head 1.807*** 0.302 2.63 0.009 Family size 0.427*** 0.133 2.72 0.006 Farming experience 2.801** 1.072 2.69 0.068 Farm income 0.258** 0.1666-2.10 0.036 Distance from nearby village 1.000NS 0.000-0.39 0.695 Extension contact 1.001** 0.000 2.12 0.034 Plot area 0.033* 0.062 1.83 0.007 Slope of the plot 1.070** 0.395 0.18 0.055 Assistance 1.503** 0.293 2.09 0.036 Access to credit 0.757NS 0.409 0.51 0.607 Perception of Land Degradation 121.985* 325.798 1.80 0.072 Livestock holding 0.058* 0.093 1.79 0.073 Plot Distance 322.477** 760.606-2.45 0.014 LR chi2(16) 164.80 Probability > chi2 Pseudo R 2 Log likelihood Number of observation *** Significant 1%, ** 5% and * 10% probability level, NS= not significant 0.0000 0.8042-17.288271 120 Significant explanatory variables in logit model In this study, fifteen explanatory variables were used. Based on the model results, Education level of household head, Farming experience, Extension contact, Plot area, Slope of the plot, Assistance, Perception of Land Degradation, Livestock holding, Plot Distance had a positive sign of association with adoption of soil and water conservation. Out of the 15 proposed variables, twelve of them were statistically significant in the model while the rest were not significant at (P<0.10) probability level. Despite their differences in relative weighting of factors, most researchers came up with different results as to what factors can affect adoption of soil and water conservation. Tesfaye (2000), Yitayal, (2003), Wagayehu (2003) and FAO (2004, 2005 and 2010) considered the socioeconomic, cultural and technological characteristics as the decisive factors that affect adoption of soil and water conservation. To mention some, household characteristics (age, sex, family size, education level, and so on), farm characteristics (farm size, off, non and on farm income), and

institutional arrangements (distance from market, frequency of town visiting, frequency of development agent contact, availability and adequacy of credit facility, etc) are to be considered. The significant variables included age of household head, education level of household head, family size, farming experience, farm income, extension contact, plot area, slope of the plot, assistance, perception of land degradation, livestock holding, and plot distance. The interpretations of the significant explanatory variables are given below. Education: The model result reveals that education affect adoption of soil and water conservation positively and significantly at (p<0.01). The odd ratio of 1.807 indicates under constant condition, the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 1.807 as the education status of household head increases by one year of schooling. Age: The variable is significant at (p<0.1) and related negatively with adoption of soil and water conservation. This trend has significant implication for adoption of technology as elderly people might be less interested in the use of technology. The odd ratio of 0.886 shows that under constant assumption the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation decreases by a factor of 0.886 as the age of household head increase by one year. Family size: The variable is significant at (p<0.01) and negatively related with the use of IC adoption of soil and water conservation by farmers. The result is consistent with the hypotheses in that those farmers who have more number of family members have the probability to feed his/her family members than funding soil and water conservation practices. The odds ratio of 0.427 indicates that under constant assumption the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation decreases by factor of 0.427 as the number of family member increases by one unit. Assistance: The model result indicates that assistance from soil and water conservation project affects the decision of farmers to positively and significantly at (P<0.05). This means that as the member of the household participates in soil and water conservation project activities and other information services they acquire sufficient knowledge and skill about soil and water conservation. The odds ratio of 1.503indicates that under constant assumption, the odd ratio in

favor of adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 1.503 as member of a household is gained assistance on soil and water conservation practices. Extension contact: The model result indicates that it affects the decision of farmers to adopt soil and water conservation positively and significantly at (P<0.05). This means that as the member of the household contact with extension agents they gain sufficient knowledge and skill about soil and water conservation. The odds ratio of 1.001indicates that under constant assumption, the odd ratio in favor of adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 1.001 as member of a household contact with extension agents. Plot area: plot area was positively related to adoption of soil and water conservation and significant at (P< 0.05). This Constitute with what was expected earlier in the logical framework that a farmer require relatively large plot constitute to adopt soil and water conservation as farm size affect income of household. The odds ratio of 0.033 for availability of farm size implies that, other things being constant, the odd ratio in favor of adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 0.033 as farm size increases by one unit. Farm Experience: farm experience has positive relation with adoption of soil and water conservation (P< 0.05). This is related with hypothesis that farm experience affects adoption of soil and water conservation positively and significantly. The odds ratio of 2.801for farm experience indicates that other thing being constant, the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 2.801 as farm experience increases by year. Farm income: Reasonable household on-farm income implies that the sampled farmers with the higher amount of on-farm income can adopt soil and water conservation better than the sampled household with the lower amount of on-farm income and the variable is significant at (p<0.05). The odd ratio of 0.258 indicates, other thing being constant, the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation increases by factor of 0.258 as on farm income of sampled household increases by one birr. Slop of the plot: Econometric result indicates that slop of the plot has positive relation with adoption of soil and water conservation (P< 0.01). The odds ratio of 1.070 for slop of the plot

indicates that other thing being constant, the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 1.070 as slop of the plot increases by one unit. Plot distance: The variable is significant at (P< 0.05) and related negatively with the farmers adoption of soil and water conservation practices. The plausible explanation is that if households leave at a remote place from farm place, getting inputs and produce from and to the plot place is costly. The odds ratio of 322. 477 indicates that under constant assumption, the odd ratio in favor of adoption of soil and water conservation decrease by a factor of 322.477 as the distance of the homestead from the farm plot center increases by 1 km distance. Livestock holdings: Econometric result indicates that livestock holding has negative relation with adoption of soil and water conservation (P< 0.01). The odds ratio of 0.058 for livestock holdings indicates that other thing being constant, the odd ratio in favor of the adoption of soil and water conservation farmers decreases by a factor of 0.058 as livestock holding increases by one unit. Perception of land degradation: perception of land degradation has positive relation with adoption of soil and water conservation (P< 0.05). This is related with hypothesis that perception of land degradation affects adoption of soil and water conservation positively and significantly. The odds ratio of 121.985 for perception of land degradation indicates that other thing being constant, the odd ratio in favor of the use of adoption of soil and water conservation increases by a factor of 121.985 as perception of land degradation increases by one.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The study, inter alias, concludes and recommends the following points: Assistance from soil and water conservation project matters to adopt soil and water conservation by farmers. Therefore, alternative mechanisms should be developed to increase and diversify the farmers source of assistance and information; The study concluded that perceptions of land degradation enhance the adoption of soil and water conservation practices in study area. Therefore, the study recommends that training programs should be arranged to address the challenge in a sustainable manner. On top of this, rural development strategy should give utmost attention for the awareness creation on soil and water conservation in rural areas; The study concluded that farm size affect adoption of soil and water conservation negatively and significantly. This implies that to adopt agricultural technologies, first and foremost farmers should have enough land to do so. Therefore, it is need less to mention that effective land management should be provided for farmers in the rural area. Put differently, the rural land allocation among farmers is also indirectly facilitated by the effectiveness of concerned sectors, like rural land and natural resource management sectors; The study concluded that there are a number of socio economic, institutional and natural physical factors that affect adoption of soil and water conservation. Therefore, the study recommends that concerned stakeholders and partners found at different levels should attempt to address those factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation; This study also recommends that policymakers at different levels should recognize that farmers are traditionally practicing soil and water conservation. Hence, this fact should be taken as an input for policy formation of soil and water conservation in agriculture and rural development in particular and for its usability among farmers.

REFERENCES Ayalneh B (2002). Land Degradation, Impoverishment and Livelihood Strategies of Rural Households in Ethiopia, Humboldt University, Berlin. Azene B (2010). Status and Dynamics of Natural Resources in Ethiopia. In Food Security Through Sustainable Land Use: Population, Environment and Rural Development Issues for Sustainable Livelihoods in Ethiopia. Addis Abeba, Ethiopia. pp. 165-184 Berhanu G, Swinton S M (2011). Investment in Soil Conservation in Northern Ethiopia: The Role of Land Tenure Security and Public Programs. Agricultural Economics.29:pp. 69-84 Constable M (1984). Degradation of the Ethiopian Highlands and Actions to combat it: Economic Implications, Costs and Benefits. FAO/MOA Joint Project, EHRS Report, Addis Ababa. Dire Dawa Administrative Council Agricultural Office (2012). Land Use Development Potential Study of the DDAC, Addis Abeba, Ethiopia. Dire Dawa Administrative Council Water, Energy andmines Office (2002). Integrated Resource Development Master Plan Study. Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise,Addis Abeba, Ethiopia. FAO (2004). Land Degradation in South East Asia: Its Severity, Causes and Effects up on the People, Rome FAO (2005). Towards Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development in Ethiopia Highland Addis Abeba, Ethiopia. FAO (2010). Ethiopian Highland Reclamation Study, Final Report (Volume I and II). FAO. Rome Feder G, Just R E, Zilberman D (1985). Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries. Economic Development Cultural Change. 33: 255-298. Francis D, Anim K (1999). A note on the Adoption of Soil Conservation Measures in the North Province of South Africa Hans Joachim K, Berhanu F, Yohannes G, Kefeni K (2010). Creating an Inventory of Indigenous Soil and Water Conservation Measures in Ethiopia. In: Sustaining Soil: Indigenous Soil and Water Conservation in Africa. Maddala G S (1997). Limited Dependent and Quantitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge University Press.

Nkonya E T, Schroeder T, Norman D (1997). Factors Affecting Adoption of Improved Maize Seed and Fertilizer in Northern Tanzania. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 4: 1-11 Paulos Asrat, Belay K, Hamito D( 2012). Determinants of Farmers' Willingness to Pay for Soil Conservation Practices in the Southestern Highlands of Ethiopia. Rogers E M, (1995). Diffusion of Innovation. The FreeUniversity Press. Fourth edition New York. Samel B (2012). Peasant Agricultural and Sustainable land use in Ethiopia. Economical analysis of constraints and incentives for soil conservation. Agricultural University of Norway. Semgalawe Z M (1998). Household Adoption Behaviour and Agricultural sustainability in the Northern Mountains of Tanzania:The case of soil conservation in the North pares and Waste Usambara Mountains. Published PhD Thesis, Wageningen University Wageningen, The Netherlands. Wagayehu G (2006). Determinants of Farmers Decision on Soil and Water Conservation Practices in Dire Dawa Administration, A MSc thesis, School of Graduate study, Haramaya University, Ethiopia Wegayehu B (2003). Economics of Soil and Water Conservation. Theory and Empirical Application to Subsistence Farming in the Eastern Ethiopian Highlands: A doctoral Thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Uppsala, 2003 Wood A (2013). Natural Resource Management and Rural Development in Ethiopia. In Rural Development Options. Pausewang et al. (eds). Yitayal A (2003). Determinants of Use of Soil Conservation Measures by Smallholder Farmers in Jimma Zone: The Case of Dedo District, A MSc thesis, School of Graduate study, Haramaya University, Ethiopia