The Impact of Small Scale Irrigation on Household Food Security ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Irrigators have significantly more livestock thantheir rain-fed only farmers. <strong>The</strong>y also possessmore fertile land.Determinants <strong>of</strong> household food security: <strong>The</strong>significance <strong>of</strong> the lambda term in the secondstage <strong>of</strong> the Heckman procedure, confirms thepresence <strong>of</strong> selectivity bias (Table 6). Asexpected, access to irrigation had significantimpact on household food security. In the studyarea irrigation enable households to grow cropsmore than once a year, to insure increased andstable production, income and consumptionthereby improving food security status <strong>of</strong> thehousehold. This result is consistent with thefinding <strong>of</strong> Abebaw (2003). <strong>The</strong> other variablesthat significantly enhance household foodsecurity are experience (as indicate by farmersage in years), access to extension service, andsize <strong>of</strong> cultivated land. .<strong>The</strong> relationship between household size andfood security is non-linear (see the coefficientsfor household size and its square variable). <strong>The</strong>negative and significant coefficient <strong>of</strong> householdsize reveals that larger household size leads t<strong>of</strong>ood insecurity, but only up to a certain point.<strong>The</strong> coefficient <strong>of</strong> the variable indicates that asthe household size increases by one adultequivalent the food consumption expenditure <strong>of</strong>the household decreases by 391.9 Birr. Thisresult is consistent with the finding <strong>of</strong> Mulugeta(2002) and Yilma (2005). Contrary to othersimilar studies (Belayneh, 2005), in this studyfemale headed households had better foodsecurity status than the male headed households.<strong>The</strong> coefficient <strong>of</strong> the variable shows that whenthe head <strong>of</strong> the household is male, foodconsumption expenditure <strong>of</strong> the householddecreases by 331.1 Birr. <strong>The</strong> possiblejustification for this inverse relationship couldbe that though male headed households are in abetter position to pool resource to increaseproduction, they might spent more money onnonfood expenses rather than spending on fooditems to meet the household’s food needs.<strong>The</strong> regression result also shows that as thecultivated land size increases, a household isable to increase and diversify the quantity andtype <strong>of</strong> crop produced, which may in turn lead toincreased consumption and household foodsecurity. <strong>The</strong> coefficient <strong>of</strong> the land size variableshows that as the household gets one morehectare <strong>of</strong> land food consumption expenditure <strong>of</strong>the household increases by 85 Birr. This result isconsistent with the findings <strong>of</strong> Mulugeta (2002),Ayalew (2003), Abebaw (2003) and Yilma(2005).Access to extension service and nearness to thewater source are also found to have a positiverelationship with household food security. <strong>The</strong>positive effect <strong>of</strong> access to extension servicemay indicate that in the study area, thosehouseholds who get technical advice andtraining or those who participated in fielddemonstrations are well aware <strong>of</strong> the advantage<strong>of</strong> agricultural technologies and adopt newtechnologies and produce more, therebyimproving the household food security status.<strong>The</strong> nearness to the water source may be asurrogate variable for access to irrigation. It hasalready been shown that to the irrigationscheme, significantly improves household’s foodsecurity status. <strong>The</strong> possible other justificationcould be that the nearness to water source mayproxy the location <strong>of</strong> the farms in relation to theirrigation water source . <strong>The</strong>refore, householdswho are closer to the irrigation scheme do notincur much cost to access their farm so they canfollow up the farm activity closely andfrequently and may get a better yield.4. Conclusion and Implications<strong>The</strong> variables that significantly predict access toirrigation are: household size, size <strong>of</strong> cultivatedland, livestock holding, farmers’ perception <strong>of</strong>soil fertility status, access to credit, nearness tothe water source and household size square. <strong>The</strong>variables that reduce the probability <strong>of</strong> access toirrigation are large household size, largecultivated area and access to credit. Rain-fedfarmers tend to have large cultivated area. <strong>The</strong>negative relationship between access to creditand access to irrigation may be explained by thefact that: (1) in Ethiopia, the institutional creditsusually give priority to rain-fed agriculture, and(2) the demand for credit among farmers withaccess to irrigation may be lower for they cansatisfy cash needs through sales from theirirrigated crops.186
<strong>The</strong> variables that increase the probability <strong>of</strong>participation <strong>of</strong> farmers in irrigation farminginclude large livestock holding size, ownership<strong>of</strong> relatively fertile land and nearness to watersource. Obviously, those households that aresituated near the water source are more likely toparticipate in irrigation scheme. However, itdoes not mean that placement <strong>of</strong> an irrigationscheme in the village is solely governed byhydrological considerations. It involves politicalprocess and power relations.In the study area the use <strong>of</strong> small-scale irrigationcontributes significantly to improve householdfood security. In addition to access to irrigation,access to irrigation, household size, sex <strong>of</strong> thehousehold head, size <strong>of</strong> cultivated land, andaccess to extension service significantlyinfluence the food security status <strong>of</strong> a farmhousehold.<strong>The</strong> relationship between a household foodsecurity status and household size is non-linear(see the signs for the variables household sizeand the square <strong>of</strong> household size). As the size <strong>of</strong>a household increases the per capita foodexpenditure decreases, but up to a point, afterwhich the per capita food expenditure starts toincrease as the household size increases.Contrary to expectation, female headedhouseholds are less likely to be food insecure ascompared to male headed households. Thisneeds further investigation, however, tentativelyit may be explained by differences in theexpenditure behavior <strong>of</strong> male and femalefarmers-female members <strong>of</strong> a farm householdtend to spend more on food items to guaranteethe food needs <strong>of</strong> the family before anythingelse. Another possible explanation may be thatthe male members <strong>of</strong> a female-headed householdmay have gainful employment elsewhere thuscontributing to household food security.Size <strong>of</strong> cultivated land and household foodsecurity are positively related indicating largerfarm size improves household food security.Households with large farm size are found to befood secure; however, there may not be apossibility <strong>of</strong> expanding cultivated land size anymore because <strong>of</strong> increasing family size anddegradation <strong>of</strong> the existing farm land. <strong>The</strong>refore,household must be trained as to how to increaseproduction per unit area (productivity).Access to extension service is also positivelyrelated to household food security. Extensionworkers could play a key role in transferringknowledge to the rural people easily there byimproving production and consumption.Capacity building <strong>of</strong> the existing ones andtraining more extension workers might helpaddress the issue.ReferenceAbebaw, Shimeles. 2003. Dimensions anddeterminants <strong>of</strong> food security among ruralhouseholds in Dire Dawa, Eastern Ethiopia. AnMSc <strong>The</strong>sis Presented to the School <strong>of</strong> GraduateStudies <strong>of</strong> Alemaya University. 152p.Awulachew, B., Merrey, J., Kamara, B., VanKoppen, B., Penning de Vries, F., andBoelee, E. 2005. Experiences andopportunities for promoting small scale microirrigation and rain water harvesting for foodsecurity in Ethiopia. Working paper 98.IWMI (International Water ManagementInstitute) Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Belayneh Belete. 2005. Analysis <strong>of</strong> foodinsecurity causes: the case <strong>of</strong> rural farmhouseholds in Metta woreda, easternEthiopia. An MSc <strong>The</strong>sis Presented to theSchool <strong>of</strong> Graduate Studies <strong>of</strong> AlemayaUniversity. 130pChamber, R. 1994. <strong>Irrigation</strong> against RuralPoverty. pp. 32-33. In Socio- EconomicDimension and <strong>Irrigation</strong>, ed., R.K. Gujar.Jaipur. India: Printwell.Cho, S., D. Newman and J. Bowker. 2005.Measuring rural homeowners’ willingness topay for land conservation easements. Forestpolicy economics 7:757-770CBE (Commercial Bank <strong>of</strong> Ethiopia). 2006.International Banking Division.Dardis, H., Soberon and D. Patro. 1994.Analysis <strong>of</strong> leisure expenditure in the United187
Page 1 and 2: The Impact
Page 3 and 4: implications for future planning <s
Page 5 and 6: The variables incl
Page 7: % of the household
Page 11 and 12: WSDP (Water sector Development Prog
Page 13 and 14: Table 5. Estimation result

The Impact of Small Scale Irrigation on Household Food Security ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?