NBDC site updates: Jeldu, Diga and Fogera
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


NBDC site updates: Jeldu, Diga and Fogera

Uploaded on

Presented by Alan Duncan, Gerba Leta, Beth Cullen and Kebebe Ergano at the NBDC Stakeholder Forum, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, 5 October 2011.

Presented by Alan Duncan, Gerba Leta, Beth Cullen and Kebebe Ergano at the NBDC Stakeholder Forum, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, 5 October 2011.

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. Site updates - Jeldu, Diga & Fogera Alan Duncan, Gerba Leta, Beth Cullen and Kebebe Ergano NBDC Stakeholder Forum 5 October 2011
  • 2.  
  • 3. Rainfall, altitude & agro ecology Woreda Mean annual RF (mm) & its distribution Altitude (m asl) Agro-ecology (%) Jeldu 900-1350 (unpredictable with erratic & erosive nature) 1325-3200
    • Lowland (25),
    • Midland (30) &
    • Highland ( 45 )
    Fogera 974-1516 (Poor distribution/erratic) 1774-2400
    • Midland/plain( 75 )
    • Highland (25)
    Diga 1376-2037 (well distributed and some high intensity events) 1140-2342
    • Midland (40)
    • Lowland ( 60 )
  • 4. Predominant crops and farming systems of the sites Source: WoARD Woreda Predominant crops along agro-ecology Highland Midland Lowland Jeldu Barley, wheat, potato-livestock Wheat, barley, teff-livestock Sorghum, maize, teff-livestock Fogera Barley, Niger seed, wheat, –livestock Rice, maize, millet, teff-livestock ---- Diga --- Teff, millet, maize-livestock Maize, sorghum, sesame-livestock
  • 5. Crop-livestock contribution to the livelihood (source of income) Woreda Percent contribution (on average) Livestock Crop Jeldu 30 70 Diga 30 70 Fogera 33 67
  • 6. Livestock numbers
  • 7. Historical trends in land use/cover
    • High population growth
    • Forest clearing for cultivation is a dominant trend particularly in Jeldu & Diga
    • Soils are fragile
    • Land degradation has become the critical problem in all three woredas
    • NRM interventions were introduced during the Derg regime as part of the response to the great Ethiopian famine. The approach has been top-down.
    • Other than in Fogera, the current efforts to arrest and reverse the growing land degradation problem is marginal
  • 8. Land feature & soil types * Specific soil types will be verified in the future Woreda Land feature Soil types Jeldu Undulating /rolling/
    • Diverse shallow soil (Leptic)*
    • Growing acidity
    • Poor fertility mng’t practices
    Fogera Flat plain and steep highland Utric vertisol (plain) & leptosol (highland)* Diga Undulating midland to relatively flat lowland
    • Dynamic soil types b/c changes in landuse- Histic Nitosols *is common
    • Acidity is widespread problem
    • Low fertility mng’t practices
  • 9. Innovation platform updates
  • 10. Platforms based around NRM Action 2 NBDC Local Research NGO Private sector Woreda extension Woreda water Woreda admin Champion farmers Woreda offices NBDC research outputs National research Indigenous knowledge Business ideas Comm Comm Comm Action 1 Action 3
  • 11. Diga
    • First meeting on 21/07/11
    • Actors: Government line departments, Bako Agricultural Research Center, HUNDEE-Oromo Grassroots Development Initiative
    • Key land and water management constraints identified
      • Population increase leading to cultivation of steep slopes and land deforestation, soil erosion etc.
      • Limited understanding of land and water management problems and potential solutions
      • Poor farming practices
      • Very short land use planning horizon by farmers.
      • Farmers’ limited knowledge of improved manage land and water practices
      • Limited use of improved land and water management technologies
  • 12. Fogera
    • First meeting held on 19/07/11
    • Participants: Government line departments, Adet Agricultural Research Center, Ethio-Wetlands and Natural Resources Association, etc
    • Key land and water management constraints identified
      • Free grazing featured strongly by many stakeholders
      • Soil erosion due to the absence of upstream afforestation
      • Improper use of new technologies
      • Limited access to markets
      • Under-developed markets for fruits and vegetables
      • Plant diseases
  • 13. Jeldu
    • First meeting on 26/09/2011
    • Participants: Ambo university, GIZ-SLM Oromia, farmers, Holetta Agricultural Research Center, Office of Agriculture, RIPPLE, Woreda Office of Administration, Woreda office of Environmental Protection and Land Administration, Woreda Office of Livestock Agency, Woreda Office of water, mining and Energy office
    • Key land and water management constraints identified
      • Population pressure
      • Land shortage
      • Deforestation
      • Declining soil fertility
      • Water scarcity
      • Lack of awareness
      • Limited market access
      • Limited use of new technologies
  • 14. Baseline diagnosis update
    • Looked at planning, implementation, innovation and livelihoods issues
    • Worked with researchers from ARARI, Bahir Dar University, Bako Research Centre, Wollega University, Ambo University and Holetta Research Centre (EIAR)
    • Preliminary research orientation workshop  development of research methods  data collection  analysis workshop  site reports  synthesis report
  • 15. Highlights from Diga report
  • 16. System failures
      • Top-down implementation and lack of farmer/community participation seem to be major historical factors in deteriorating NRM practices.
      • Community based institutions may have been weakened due to strong government intervention during the Derg regime.
      • Despite having an improved overall NRM policy, present government implementation shows room for improvement
      • Although current approaches are said to be participatory, this is debatable which has implications for long-term sustainability.
  • 17. NRM base in flux
    • NRM base has changed radically
      • Floods in rainy season, drought in dry season
      • Rivers drying up
      • Eucalypt planting along rivers  problems
      • Scope for reforestation but distrust of govt to do this
  • 18. Collective action not working
    • Planning and implementation
      • Most successful NRM activities are on farm and initiated and carried out by farmers
      • Those requiring collective action are not working due to previous efforts in which farmers have been co-opted and ownership has been lacking.
  • 19. Farmer awareness
      • Many govt respondents stated that “farmer awareness” was a major stumbling block to progress – such attitudes are not conducive to building farmer engagement.
  • 20. Implementation Land and water management interventions Quotas Campaigns
  • 21.
      • Farmers often destroy the results of their work under collective schemes which is perhaps indicative of their feelings towards these activities.
  • 22.
      • There are prominent local traditional institutions and these demonstrate that collective action is possible if initiated by community members themselves. Potential for harnessing these.
  • 23. The DA Crisis
      • DA’s have most contact with farmers but training is inadequate
      • They are stuck in the middle of farmers and higher level govt. They pass info down to farmers but info flow back does not happen easily.
      • They are not listened to in planning process
      • They are de-motivated and transmit this to farmers
      • Capacity building for DAs and developing greater communication between DAs and higher level actors could be important
  • 24. Different perspectives on way forward Govt needs to step in with NRM approach which is strictly enforced in order to address the severity of the problems There are issues with sustainability due to lack of participation and motivation of farmers and DAs at lower levels