Figure 1: Location Map of the Study Area

Figure 2: Min, max and mean annual temperature and mean monthly rainfall (1995-2015) of the study area

Figure 3: Agro-ecological zone of the study area

Variable

Adopters (N = 191)

Non-adopters (N = 24)

Chi-square value

Asymp. sig (2-sided)

Number

%

Number

%

Access to credit service Yes
No

149
42

78
22

17
7

71
29

 

0.624

 

0.430

Rainfall reliability Yes
No

10
181

5
95

0
24

0
100

 

1.318

 

0.251

Educational status Literate Illiterate

51
140

27
73

8
16

33
67

 

0.471

 

0.493

Soil erosion incidence Yes
No

186
5

97
3

23
1

96
4

 

0.189

 

0.664

Gender of the household Male
Female

 

150
41

 

79
21

 

22
2

 

92
8

 

2.298

 

0.130

Land redistribution Yes
No

104
87

54
46

22
2

92
8

 

12.173*

 

0.000

Table 1: Summary of discrete variables

Variables

Definition and unit of measurement

Dependent variable

 

Y= HHTA, Technology adoption

1 if a household head adopts SLM practices, 0 otherwise

Independent variables

 

X1 = LO, Livestock ownership

Households livestock ownership in TLU

X2  = FS, Slope

1 if the slope of the farmland is gentle, 0 otherwise

X3= OFI, Off-farm income

1 if the income obtained from off-farm enabled the household to adopt SLM practices, 0 otherwise

X4 = LT, Land tenure security

1 if a household has land tenure security problem, 0 otherwise

X5 = HHA, Household head age

Age of household head in years

X6 = GHH, Gender of the household head

1 if a household head is male, 0 otherwise

X7 =HHP, Perception

Household head’s perception towards the profitability of the practices (1 if perceived profitable, 0 otherwise)

X8 =MFLA, Farmland acquisition

1 if a household head farmland acquisition mode is through inheritance from parents and purchase, 0 otherwise

X9 = FE, Farming experience

Household heads number of years of experience in farming

X10 = ALF, Agricultural labor force

Total number of household members participating in agricultural activities

X11=PSNP, Productive safety net program

1 if a household head is PSNP beneficiary, 0 otherwise

X12 = RS, Relief support

1 if a household head receives relief support/food aid, 0 otherwise

X13 = PS, Policy support

1 if a household head receives policy support, 0 otherwise

X14 = AEZ, Agro-ecological zone

1 if a household head adopts SLM practices because of his/her agro- ecological zone location, 0 otherwise

Table 2: Description of Variables used in the Logistic Regression Model

Type of SLM practices adopted

Number (N= 215)

Percentage

Water-harvesting

58

27.0

Terrace construction

74

34.4

Check-dam construction

8

3.7

Fallowing

3

1.4

Application of chemical fertilizer

5

2.3

Agroforestry

12

5.6

Using compost

23

10.7

Gully control

8

3.7

None

24

11.2

Total

215

100.0

Table 3: Types of SLM practices adopted by farmers.

 

 

B

 

S.E.

 

Wald

 

df

 

Sig.

 

Exp(B)

95% C.I.for EXP(B)

Lower

Upper

TLU (Tropical Livestock Unit)

-0.364

0.193

3.564

1

.059***

0.695

0.476

1.014

Slope

0.904

0.692

1.705

1

0.192

2.469

0.636

9.593

Off-farm income

-1.064

0.939

1.285

1

0.257

0.345

0.055

2.173

Land tenure

1.541

0.658

5.494

1

.019**

4.671

1.287

16.949

Age

0.184

0.074

6.286

1

.012**

1.202

1.041

1.389

Gender

-1.468

1.071

1.877

1

0.171

0.23

0.028

1.881

Perception

-4.714

0.93

25.681

1

.000*

0.009

0.001

0.056

Method of land acquisition

-1.798

0.852

4.449

1

.035**

0.166

0.031

0.881

Farming experience

-0.28

0.082

11.671

1

.001*

0.756

0.644

0.888

Agricultural labor force

0.64

0.485

1.741

1

0.187

1.896

0.733

4.905

PSNP

-3.053

1.313

5.41

1

.020**

0.047

0.004

0.619

Relief support/food aid

1.476

0.885

2.782

1

.095***

4.375

0.772

24.783

Policy support

-2.204

1.118

3.887

1

.049**

0.11

0.012

0.987

Agro-ecological zone

0.822

0.874

0.885

1

0.347

2.275

0.411

12.608

Constant

14.758

4.83

9.334

1

0.002

2565399.9

 

 

Table 4: Results of the binary logistic regression analysis