in northern Ethiopia. In line with this notion,
previous reports estimated that the burning of
dung as fuel instead of using it as a soil conditioner
has caused a reduction in grain production by
550,000 t annually (Ethiopia Environmental Protection Authority 2003; Gashie 2005).
Poor rainfed and irrigation water management
coupled with overgrazing instead of zero grazing
(Fig. 6a), diseases and parasites that cause high
animal mortality, lack of sufficiently wellmanaged pasture land in terms of nutritional
quality and quantity (Fig. 6b), and drinking
water shortage during the dry season challenged
the wider dissemination of technologies to
address the nexus approach. Livestock energy
wastage (animals walking long distances), the
land degradation problem (crusting and erosion)
due to animal trampling (Fig. 6b), high chances
of disease spread as large numbers of animals use
the same water points (Fig. 6d), and unreliable
rainfall (frequent drought) were also identified as
impediments to the adoption of the best watershed interventions in northern Ethiopia. Uncontrolled and open grazing on communal land is a
common practice in Ethiopia, even on sloppy
lands and this increases soil erosion relative to
the effects of the restoration measures. Moreover,
farmers may be reluctant to implement SWC
measures on communal land because they are
inclined towards short-term benefits such as
livestock feed, timber, and fuel wood sources
(Mekonnen and Fekadu 2015).
3.3.2 Area of Degraded Land Versus
Managed Watershed
The existence of a large area of communal
marginal land and the associated problem of
sedimentation of water bodies including manmade reservoirs and the slow process of rehabilitation (Fig. 7a–f) challenges the adoption of
sustainable watershed interventions in Ethiopia.
Degraded marginal land needs huge conservation
efforts in terms of labor and materials (Mekonnen
and Fekadu 2015). Tackling this challenge
demands considerable harmonized efforts (technical, financial, and policy strategies for resource
mobilization) targeted to the extent of the problem to be addressed in each watershed. Degraded
land can be used as an opportunity to adopt
sustainable watershed management practices;
however, the degraded land area has strong
connectivity with the landscape under intervention, and remediation can demand considerable
labor and time. The linkages between landscapes
under intervention and those without intervention
discourage the hope and vision of local people as
they learn that landscape interventions demand
considerable labor and time and have no immediate or short-term benefits. Such limitations
slow the uptake of watershed management
practices and dissemination by farmers in
northern Ethiopia.
3.3.3 Socioeconomic and Institutional
Challenges
Socioeconomic factors such as the lack of market
information, agricultural processing technologies, capital, poor infrastructure, and gaps in the
research–extension–farmer linkages have challenged the wider adoption of successful sustainable watershed management interventions.
Farmers lack interest in long-term SWC investments and prefer interventions and watershed
technologies that offer benefits over a short period of time. While farmers have been implementing SWC practices on the ground through a
campaign (local people mobilization), the standard design cannot be implemented directly for
every slope, soil type, and orientation of the
landscape. In addition, financial constraints for
frequent technical supervision, monitoring,
evaluation, and discussions of feedback activities
are restricted, which partially challenges the
quality and sustainability of work (Mekonnen
and Fekadu 2015). There is no sufficiently well
institutionalized system to regulate the issue of
timely maintenance of the implemented SWC
structures because the development agents tasked
with coordinating the practices focus more on the
seedling plantation and constructing new physical structures than on maintaining the existing
structures.
In addition, resources such as land, water,
agricultural input, and labor competition between
crops, livestock, and natural resources in a
landscape (e.g., afforestation, exclosure)
176
G. B. Tesfahunegn and E. T. Ayuk
previous reports estimated that the burning of
dung as fuel instead of using it as a soil conditioner
has caused a reduction in grain production by
550,000 t annually (Ethiopia Environmental Protection Authority 2003; Gashie 2005).
Poor rainfed and irrigation water management
coupled with overgrazing instead of zero grazing
(Fig. 6a), diseases and parasites that cause high
animal mortality, lack of sufficiently wellmanaged pasture land in terms of nutritional
quality and quantity (Fig. 6b), and drinking
water shortage during the dry season challenged
the wider dissemination of technologies to
address the nexus approach. Livestock energy
wastage (animals walking long distances), the
land degradation problem (crusting and erosion)
due to animal trampling (Fig. 6b), high chances
of disease spread as large numbers of animals use
the same water points (Fig. 6d), and unreliable
rainfall (frequent drought) were also identified as
impediments to the adoption of the best watershed interventions in northern Ethiopia. Uncontrolled and open grazing on communal land is a
common practice in Ethiopia, even on sloppy
lands and this increases soil erosion relative to
the effects of the restoration measures. Moreover,
farmers may be reluctant to implement SWC
measures on communal land because they are
inclined towards short-term benefits such as
livestock feed, timber, and fuel wood sources
(Mekonnen and Fekadu 2015).
3.3.2 Area of Degraded Land Versus
Managed Watershed
The existence of a large area of communal
marginal land and the associated problem of
sedimentation of water bodies including manmade reservoirs and the slow process of rehabilitation (Fig. 7a–f) challenges the adoption of
sustainable watershed interventions in Ethiopia.
Degraded marginal land needs huge conservation
efforts in terms of labor and materials (Mekonnen
and Fekadu 2015). Tackling this challenge
demands considerable harmonized efforts (technical, financial, and policy strategies for resource
mobilization) targeted to the extent of the problem to be addressed in each watershed. Degraded
land can be used as an opportunity to adopt
sustainable watershed management practices;
however, the degraded land area has strong
connectivity with the landscape under intervention, and remediation can demand considerable
labor and time. The linkages between landscapes
under intervention and those without intervention
discourage the hope and vision of local people as
they learn that landscape interventions demand
considerable labor and time and have no immediate or short-term benefits. Such limitations
slow the uptake of watershed management
practices and dissemination by farmers in
northern Ethiopia.
3.3.3 Socioeconomic and Institutional
Challenges
Socioeconomic factors such as the lack of market
information, agricultural processing technologies, capital, poor infrastructure, and gaps in the
research–extension–farmer linkages have challenged the wider adoption of successful sustainable watershed management interventions.
Farmers lack interest in long-term SWC investments and prefer interventions and watershed
technologies that offer benefits over a short period of time. While farmers have been implementing SWC practices on the ground through a
campaign (local people mobilization), the standard design cannot be implemented directly for
every slope, soil type, and orientation of the
landscape. In addition, financial constraints for
frequent technical supervision, monitoring,
evaluation, and discussions of feedback activities
are restricted, which partially challenges the
quality and sustainability of work (Mekonnen
and Fekadu 2015). There is no sufficiently well
institutionalized system to regulate the issue of
timely maintenance of the implemented SWC
structures because the development agents tasked
with coordinating the practices focus more on the
seedling plantation and constructing new physical structures than on maintaining the existing
structures.
In addition, resources such as land, water,
agricultural input, and labor competition between
crops, livestock, and natural resources in a
landscape (e.g., afforestation, exclosure)
176
G. B. Tesfahunegn and E. T. Ayuk