Universiteit van Amsterdam
Second Semester 2009/2010
Graduate School of Social Sciences (GSSS)
International Development Studies (MSc.)
Master Thesis
Community Participation in Common Natural Resource
Management in the Lake Tana Watershed, Ethiopia
Supervisor:
Dr. William Critchley
Student Number: 6012310
Date of submission: 22/04/2010
Author:
Leidreiter, Anna
Rosenstieg 13
22850 Norderstedt, Germany
Anna@Leidreiter.net
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Acknowledgement
This thesis could not have been produced without a number of people who I would like to thank.
Firstly, I would like to give sincere thanks to my supervisor Dr. William Critchley. By giving me
professional advice, sharing personal experiences and having a great trust in my capabilities, he
supported me in every phase of my research. Despite his full schedule and travels, he always took my
requests and questions serious, giving me a quick and constructive feedback. In cooperation with my
second reader Sabina Di Prima, my supervisors showed great interest in my work and were very
cooperative in any matters.
A special word of gratitude I owe to the staff members of SWHISA (Sustainable Water Harvesting and
Institutional Strengthening in Amhara region), primarily Ato Dereje Biruk, Dr. Dev Sharma, Ato
Wobished, Ato Yelbie Aneley and Ato Aleazar . By providing me support in terms of research site
selection, logistics, assistance in survey design and giving me required reports and data, SWHISA
facilitated this research with a lot of effort and actually enabled me to carry it out. As the project is
connected with the main development actors in the region, the staff members acted as gatekeepers
and personally gave me the opportunity to get to know the practical side of development
cooperation. By showing a lot of interest in my work and integrating me in their team, I felt well
taken care of and want to thank everyone for the great time I had.
I further want to express my thankfulness to the GTZ staff members Dr. Ernst Mill, Dr. Zerfu Hailu and
At Leake Libanos. By taking me on field trips, facilitating participant observations at GTZ project sites,
providing me with information and giving me feedback on my work, they contributed greatly to the
outcome of this thesis. The opportunity to use a comparative approach increased not only the value
of the research but even more valorized my personal experience during my stay.
The same is true for the staff members from the Tana Belese project. I want to thank especially
Mikaela, Veli Pohjonen and Lakew Desta for the interest in my work and for sharing their experiences
with me.
Especially in the initial phase, I got great support from Dr. Irit Eguavoen (ZEF in Bonn). I want to thank
her for all the information that arouse my interest for Ethiopia, her helpful feedback throughout the
field work preparations and the unique opportunity to connect my research to the BMZ project
“Rethinking water storages”.
In a very personal way, a special word of gratitude belongs to Hanne and Tazebew. I want to thank
them warmly for giving me a place where I felt home. The opportunity to share my daily experiences,
impressions and feelings took away the loneliness and greatly enriched my stay in Ethiopia.
Lastly I would like to thank all informants who participated in this research for devoting their time for
me.
2
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Table of content
Preface............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Maps of research area..................................................................................................................................... 6
List of annexes ................................................................................................................................................. 7
List of figures and graphs ................................................................................................................................ 7
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................... 7
Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................... 8
Glossary ........................................................................................................................................................... 9
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................... 9
Chapter 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 10
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 10
1.2 Problem statement ....................................................................................................................... 11
1.3 Relevance of this research............................................................................................................ 12
1.4 Purpose of research ...................................................................................................................... 14
1.5 Structure of the thesis .................................................................................................................. 14
1.6 Definitions .................................................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 2
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................... 16
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 16
2.2 Theories........................................................................................................................................... 16
2.2.1 Postcolonialism .................................................................................................................... 16
2.2.2 Sustainability of common property resources .................................................................... 18
2.2.3 Sustainable Livelihood Approach and Vulnerability ............................................................ 19
2.2.4 Community Participation ..................................................................................................... 20
2.2.5 Institutions ........................................................................................................................... 25
Chapter 3
Research Methodology ............................................................................................................ 27
3.1 Conceptual Model ........................................................................................................................... 27
3.2 Research question and sub-questions ............................................................................................ 28
3.3 Operationalization .......................................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Research location ............................................................................................................................ 30
3.5 Unit of analysis ................................................................................................................................ 31
3.6 Epistemology, theoretical perspective and research methodology ............................................... 31
3.7 Research design and methods ........................................................................................................ 32
3.8 Limitations and ethical considerations ........................................................................................... 35
3
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 4
Research context ..................................................................................................................... 38
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 38
4.2 Research context............................................................................................................................. 38
4.2.1 Research location ................................................................................................................ 38
4.2.2 Historical and political context ............................................................................................ 39
4.2.3 Land Tenure ......................................................................................................................... 41
4.2.4 Agriculture and environmental conditions .......................................................................... 42
4.2.5 Socio-economic conditions .................................................................................................. 45
4.2.6 Decentralization, Community Participation and Institutions .............................................. 47
Chapter 5
Analysis of findings ................................................................................................................... 50
5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 50
5.2 Constitutional and legislative framework for common natural resource management .............. 50
5.3 Understanding of community participation ................................................................................. 52
5.4 Main risks for households and communities .................................................................................. 55
5.4.1 Natural capital ..................................................................................................................... 55
5.4.2 Financial capital ................................................................................................................... 58
5.4.3 Human capital ...................................................................................................................... 59
5.4.4 Physical capital..................................................................................................................... 60
5.4.5 Social capital ........................................................................................................................ 62
5.4.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 64
5.5 Farmer associations as coping strategies........................................................................................ 64
5.5.1 Sense of ownership among farmers .................................................................................... 65
5.5.2. Relation between members and non-members of farmer associations ............................ 68
5.5.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 69
5.6 Influencing factors of the success of farmer associations .............................................................. 71
Chapter 6
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 74
6.1 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 74
6.2 Reflections and recommendations ................................................................................................. 76
Bibliography .................................................................................................................................................. 78
Annex............................................................................................................................................................. 85
4
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Preface
In a one year master program, there is not much time to find a topic for the final thesis. I was lucky to
find the right people at the beginning of my studies, who were engaged in activities that centred on
my main interest. The question that struck me most, starting the program of International
Development Studies was how development cooperation can be framed in order to be more than
alms and airy constructs. Sub-Saharan Africa was hereby my region of interests, as earlier attempts
to travel to Africa did not work out and thus, I saw the opportunity to realize my aspiration.
Beginning my courses, I got very enthusiastic about the concept of community participation and
based on my elective “Environment and Development”, I started looking into the topic of
participatory resource management. I considered the participatory approach as the answer to my
main concern. Being sensitized for different cultural understandings and interpretations in my former
studies (BA Social Sciences focused on intercultural relations), I was mainly interested in the question
of how stakeholders with different backgrounds overcome these differences to achieve a common
goal. Literatures, varies case studies and personal experiences from lectures taught me that this issue
has not been solved yet. I discovered the complexity of the concept and realized that the challenge of
implementing participatory mechanisms is often a problem of intercultural communication. After
getting many information about the project on BMZ-project “Rethinking water storages”
(implemented by ZEF in Bonn), my interest arose to look further into the issue of participation in
Ethiopia.
5
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Maps of research area
Map of Ethiopia
West Belisa
Map of Lake Tana Watershed
(ARNS 2008)
6
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
List of annexes
(1) Questionnaires for focus group disussions ........................................................................... 85
(2) Questionnaire for survey with farmers in Gurumbaba and Menti ....................................... 87
(3) Tables of results of survey with farmers ............................................................................... 99
(4) List of semi-structured interviews with experts and institutional members ...................... 106
(5) List of farmer focus groups.................................................................................................. 106
(6) List of participant observations ........................................................................................... 106
(7) Questionnaire for semi-structured interviews with institutional members ....................... 107
List of figures and graphs
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Graph 1
Graph 2
Graph 3
Graph 4
Graph 5
Graph 6
Graph 7
Graph 8
Graph 9
Graph 10
Graph 11
Graph 12
Eight Rungs on a ladder of citizen participation (Arnstein 1969: 217) .................................. 21
Basic framework for describing and analyzing rural development participation
(Uphoff et al 1979, in Eng et al 1990: 1351) .......................................................................... 24
Conceptual model (own figure) ............................................................................................. 27
Operationalization scheme (own figure) ............................................................................... 28
Five step analysis (own figure) .............................................................................................. 56
Size of total land per household (own figure) ....................................................................... 55
Perception of productivity of soil in % (own figure) .............................................................. 56
Perception of soil productivity compared to ten years ago in Menti and 56
Gurumbaba (own figure) ....................................................................................................... 56
Size of rain-fed land in % (own figure) .................................................................................. 56
Size of irrigated land in % (own figure).................................................................................. 56
Sufficiency of amount of available wood for fuel and shelter in Gurumbaba and
Menti (own figure) ................................................................................................................. 56
Perception of households´ income compared to one year ago in Menti and
Gurumbaba (own figure) ....................................................................................................... 58
Percentage of households in which one or more member cannot contribute
labour (own figure) ................................................................................................................ 59
Health problems in the households (own figure) .................................................................. 59
Amount of available water per day per household (own figure) .......................................... 61
The distance to the next water source in Menti and Gurumbaba (own figure) ................... 61
Conceptual framework for influencing factors for Community Participation in Lake
Tana Watershed, Ethiopia (own figure)................................................................................. 73
List of Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Exchange entitlement mapping of food (own figure) ........................................................... 55
Source of food (own figure) ................................................................................................... 57
Income variations in Menti and Gurumbaba (own figure) .................................................... 58
Distribution of household members according to their age (own figure)............................. 59
7
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Distribution of people according to their level of education in Menti and
Gurumbaba (own figure) ....................................................................................................... 60
Distance to the next market in Menti and Gurumbaba (own figure).................................... 61
Membership in institutions according to the perception of farmers in Menti and
Gurumbaba (own figure) ....................................................................................................... 62
Perception of support in times of crisis in Menti and Gurumbaba (own figure) .................. 63
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACSI
Amhara Credit and Saving Institute
IPCC
ADLI
IWMI
BoWRD
Agricultural Development-Led
Industrialization
Amhara National Regional State
Agricultural and rural development office
German Ministry for Development and
Cooperation
Bureau of agricultural and rural
development
Bureau of water resource development
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
SWHISA
CoSEARAR
Commission for Sustainable Agriculture
and Environmental Rehabilitation in
Amhara Region
Cooperative Promotion Agency
Common property resources
Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia
UN
Ensuring sustainable anvironmetal
Protection Process
Farmer Focus Group
SSA
SLA
FAs
Ethiopian People's Revolutionary
Democratic Front
Farmers associations
FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization
SWHISA
GEF
GTZ
UN
UNDP
IADP
Global Environment Facility
German Development Cooperation
(Gesellschaft für technische
Zusammenarbeit)
Irrigation Application Development Process
IC
Irrigation Cooperative
WUA
IFAD
International Fund for Agricultural
Development
International Labour Organization
ZEF
ANRS
ARDO
BMZ
BoARD
CPA
CPR
CSE
ESEPP
FFG
EPRDF
ILO
LTW
Masl
Mbsl
International Panel on Climate
Change
International Water Management
Institute
Lake Tana Watershed
Meter above sea level
Meter below sea level
NGO
Non-governmental organization
OECD
Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development
Sustainable Water Harvesting and
Institutional Strengthening in
Amhara Region
United Nations
UNDP
PAs
PIK
SDPRP
SUN
WME
United Nation Development Program
Peasant Associations
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact
Research
Sub-Saharan Africa
Sustainable development and
poverty reduction program
Sustainable Livelihood Approach
Sustainable Utilization of Natural
Resources (GTZ Program)
Sustainable Water Harvesting and
Institutional Strengthening in
Amhara Region
United Nations
United Nation Development Program
Watershed Monitoring and
Evaluation
Water User Association/ Watershed
User Association
Centre for Development Research
(Zentrum für Entwicklungsforschung)
8
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Glossary
Edir
communal support system for funeral issues
Ekube
communal support system for funeral issues
Grain mill
labour sharing system for agricultural activities like trashing and harvesting
Kebele
lowest administrative unit
Killil
regional state
Rist
descent system of land rights
Tef
traditional cereal crop
Woreda
administrative district
Abstract
The discourse of participation in rural development has been present for the past two decades. It
became orthodoxy for all stakeholders that are involved in development activities across the world.
The paradox lying behind it is the implied demand to acknowledge local conditions as a resource but
at the same time to overcome heterogeneity and differences and consequently to change local
conditions. This study attempts to understand the process in Lake Tana Watershed, Ethiopia in which
the discourse comes into practise. Through the lenses of postcolonialism and constructivism, it looks
at farmer associations as a mechanism for community participation in natural resource management
and hereby reveals potentials and constrains for the participatory approach in the specific context.
The qualitative research shows that farmer associations in the studied areas are not a coping strategy
for farmers to sustain their livelihoods, but an instrument for institutions to organize resource
management in line with the international discourse.
The agency of farmers, the understanding of participation among stakeholders, the sense of
ownership among farmers, the informal social structures that imply the sense of authority and the
legal framework influence the success of farmer associations as coping strategy. A five step analysis
points out the reasons for this conclusion and indicates the necessity to interpret the theoretical
concept from a local context. Participation is understood as an intercultural communication process
where stakeholders face the challenge of balancing heteronomy and self-determination. The case
study was conducted in two command areas of irrigation schemes in West Belisa woreda. It further
uses a comparative approach by taking findings from participant observations in Libo-Kemkem,
Gonda zuria and Dera woreda into account.
Key words: Community participation, discourse, farmer associations, sustainable natural resource
management, Ethiopian highlands
9
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
In current development cooperation the aims and methods are focused on participatory
development. Independently from actual local contexts and possible differences between interacting
stakeholders, the discourse promotes a process in which development workers and beneficiaries
come to a consensus concerning the targets and methods of the cooperation. Critical scholars claim
participation as the “new orthodoxy” (Henkel and Stirrat 2001; Mohan 2007) in development,
meaning that participation became an unreflective principle that is perceived as the true way for
sustainable development. Following the international discourse the Ethiopian Constitution (FDRE
1995) asserts that decentralized administration and people’s participation are the two major
elements for sustainable development and ensures that “Nationals have the right to participate in
national development and in particular, to be consulted with respect to policies and projects affecting
their community.”
Ethiopia is currently the eleventh poorest country in the world with a GDP per capita of 700
US$. 2009 agriculture accounted for almost 45% of the GDP and about 85% of the export (Factbook
2010). 38,7% of the 85 million people in Ethiopia lived below the poverty line (Indexmundi 2009). In
the last 30 years there have been five droughts with tremendous consequences for the population.
The largest one in 1984/5 killed one million people. Food insecurity is an integral part of poverty in
Ethiopia and the Government admits that in times when conditions are poor, up to 15 million people
will face severe food shortages (Rahmato 2008: 136). Experts estimate that food poverty incidence in
Ethiopia is about 50% at national level, 37% in urban and 52% in rural areas (Negatu 2008: 1,
Government of Ethiopia 1999: 15). It shows that food insecurity is a chronic and structural problem.
However, climate change is projected to reduce yields of the wheat staple crop by 33% (World Bank
__: 2) and will bring additional seasonal or transitory food insecurity.
At present, agriculture dominates the Ethiopian economy, accounting for nearly half of GDP
and for the vast majority of employment. Most Ethiopians live in rural areas which are unusually
undiversified. Small farmers account for over 90% of the total crop area and agricultural output
(Devereux 2000: 4). According to African standards, the country is with 17% largely under-urbanized
(Factbook 2010). In Amhara National Regional State (ANRS), where the Lake Tana Watershed (LTW) is
located, 89% of the population lives in rural areas and is engaged in agricultural activities. The people
depend on traditional livelihood strategies, meaning combining rainfed agriculture with animal
husbandry. This renders Ethiopia highly vulnerable to climate variability and thus to climate change.
10
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
To solve these problems, the federal and regional governments follow the Agricultural
Development-Led Industrialization (ADLI) policy. Hereby, agricultural extension is especially regarded
to be the key to development and improved natural resource management.
The difficult situation forces farmers to exploit the natural resource base through
deforestation for fuel wood, expanding cultivation into forests and wetlands which simultaneously
reduces grazing land and fragile areas, reed harvesting and selling and localized over-fishing. The
Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia (CSE 1997) concludes that Ethiopia is rich both in human and
natural resources, but the resources are not utilized sustainably and the environment is not given
proper care. Consequently, resource degradation and poverty have created a mutually reinforcing
vicious cycle.
When resources become scarce, equal distribution and sustainable management is
fundamental in terms of conflict and problem solving. The international consensus to alleviate
poverty directly associated with an inadequate management of resources for basic purposes suggests
focusing on governance at the local level to deliver the necessary instruments in resource
management.
Ownership,
empowerment,
public
participation,
partnerships,
stakeholder
involvement and inclusive governance instead of government are key terms of this discourse that
most development actors promote (World Bank 1996, UN 1891, OECD 1996). Nevertheless, there is a
lack of knowledge about mechanisms and instruments to implement the participatory approach.
1.2 Problem statement
To curb the described Ethiopian situation, policies, strategies and action programs have been
formulated. They all recognize the importance of involving stakeholders on all levels and stress the
great role of communities. For example is one of the objectives of the Environmental Policy (1997) to
ensure people´s participation in environmental management. Furthermore, the first poverty
reduction program (SDPRP 2002) suggests a better agricultural extension system as key for
agricultural development. One of the main objectives hereby is building organizational capacity of
farmers to better organize themselves and using the participatory approach to provide effective,
efficient and equal communication (Kassa 2008: 154). In line with that the Food Security Strategy
(2002) stresses the role of grassroots institutions such as farmer associations and farmers´
cooperatives in the attempt to ensure food security through participation in capacity building and
delivery of goods and services. As the agricultural strategy regards rural cooperatives to play an
important part in rural development, the number of cooperatives has increased in the last years.
However, increasing poverty and resource degradation in Ethiopia show that despite the progress in
terms of awareness and legal frameworks, grassroots institutions are not successful enough
(Rahmato 2008). The participatory approach as it is promoted by the Government, NGO´s and
11
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
international organizations needs mechanisms and instruments, so it can be implemented and used
in practice. The concept has to be defined for a specific social and cultural context. So far,
governmental strategies and policies do not adequately articulate the means of implementation of
the participatory approach in LTW. The only specific mechanisms that exist in Ethiopia are the
cooperatives and farmer´s associations, such as Water(shed) User Associations, but their role in the
execution of the development programs is not sufficiently defined or carried out poorly.
“Cooperatives are still burdened by shortage of funds, lack of management expertise and effective
leadership.” (Rahmato 2008: 135) This is where this research comes into the picture.
1.3 Relevance of this research
This research has scientific as well as social relevance. By adopting a critical approach, this
study offers new insights, possibilities and knowledge about the concept of community participation.
It attempts to contribute to debates about sustainable resource management through the
participatory approach among academics, politicians and development cooperation.
In Amhara National and Regional State this issue is form high interest for many development
actors as sustainable resource management is the major topic in LTW. Two examples are the Koga
Irrigation and Watershed Management Project and the Chara Chara Weir which are both large-scale
water storage systems that aim to improve irrigation systems and agricultural productivity. In 2007, a
stakeholder analysis was conducted by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) to
assess the opinions, interests, and concerns of various stakeholders in relation to the project’s socioeconomic and environmental impacts. The results were clear:
“It is apparent that decisions pertaining to the construction of the dam and the
associated irrigation infrastructure have been made with little or no public consultation
and with insufficient explanation of the intended project outcomes. It is also clear that
there have been many irregularities in the handling of compensation. The combination
of these factors, in conjunction with the delay in construction, has led to controversies
and resulted in wide-spread rumours and speculation about the project and whether or
not it will really bring tangible benefits. The survey has shown that the social complexity
of schemes such as this requires that social components should be given as much, or
even greater, consideration than technical aspects in project planning. It is clear that to
minimize unwarranted social stress, requires that all stakeholders understand the
scheme and participate in decision-making from an early stage. Mechanisms that lead
to increased cooperation and consensus building between different stakeholders are
required.” (Gebre et al 2008: 43)
12
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The examples reflect the necessity to conduct more research that recognizes social dynamics and
diversities. Indeed, the watershed approach itself is an integrated approach aiming at involving all
stakeholders and empowering beneficiaries to take over the control of their natural resources.
Therefore several initiatives, international organizations and governmental programs have picked up
this framework. Two of them are the Canadian-Ethiopian project “Sustainable Water Harvesting and
Institutional Strengthening in Amhara Region (SWHISA) and the GTZ-project “Sustainable Utilization
of Natural Resources” who facilitated this research. The findings will inform the experts about the
understanding of community participation in their local context and show them the potential of
farmers associations as a mechanism of community participation for their project areas.
As the Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development (BoARD) is currently working on
guidelines for farmers associations, this research may also be a useful source for the experts.
Additionally, the findings will be a relevant input for further research projects. “Re-Thinking Water
Storage for Climate Change Adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa” is an initiative of the German Ministry
for Development and Cooperation (BMZ) in cooperation with the Centre for Development Research
(ZEF), the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), the International Water Management
Institute (IWMI) and local partners in Ghana and Ethiopia as it will be carried out in both countries.
They aim at increasing resilience of rural poor vulnerable to climate change related risks in subSaharan Africa through better water storage mechanisms, improved investment strategies and
institutional support. This research contributes a useful overview over social dynamics in the
watershed and people´s priorities. The second project is an initiative of the Amhara National Regional
State of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia in collaboration with Global Environment Facility (GEF) and
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and is called “Community-Based Integrated
Natural Resources Management in the Lake Tana Watershed, Ethiopia”. “The goal of the project is to
contribute to poverty eradication in the watershed through improving ecosystem integrity and
livelihood. The immediate objective is to increase household incomes through sustainable land
management practices in the LTW.” (ARNS et al 2008). Scholars from both projects will use these
findings for their own purpose.
To conclude, this study has relevance for policy makers and practitioners as well as
academics because it contributes to fill the gap of knowledge in terms of the required mechanisms.
As such it can offer a critically informed policy-relevant approach and contribute to discussion and
dialogue between policymakers and researchers.
13
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
1.4 Purpose of research
This study attempts to gain insight into how community participation can reduce the
vulnerability of people’s livelihoods. Apparently, despite the overwhelming amount of literature
about this topic (Midgley 1986, Kirkby et al 1995, Chambers 1997, Nelson and Wright 1997;
Kleemeier 2000, Kumar 2002, Henkel and Stirrat 2001; Olivier de Sardin 2001; Mosse 2001;
Gebremedhin et al 2003, Fraser et al 2005, Mohan 2007; Uphoff __) and positive intentions in using
the participatory approach, there is a practical struggle to translate this knowledge into successful
projects and policies (Cooke and Kothari 2001). Development processes in Ethiopia are an example of
that. The purpose of this research is therefore to provide knowledge for development actors about
how to enhance cooperation between communities and institutions in the LTW in order to reach
sustainable development. It helps to target external interventions more effectively by recognizing
social dynamics and diversities and implement mechanisms that increase cooperation and consensus
building between different stakeholders. Instead of taking the positive effect of community
participation on sustainability for granted, it critically examines the influencing factors that
determine the process in this specific social and cultural context. The overall interest is to understand
the processes that happen in situations in which the discourse of participation comes into practise.
This research is concerned with the origins of the community participation approach, will
critically reflect on it and attempt to understand how it manifests itself within the governance of
common natural resources in LTW. By using the theoretical perspective of postcolonialism, it aims at
investigating the role of farmer´s associations to offer new ways of understanding the reality of
community participation for both academic knowledge and policy practice.
1.5 Structure of the thesis
After the introduction, chapter two will set out the theoretical framework which informs this
study. Even though Ethiopia has never been colonised, the theoretical perspective, which enlightens
the entire thesis, is postcolonialism. Taking the non-colonial history of the country into account, the
theory however serves as a general view on societies by criticizing development processes for
ignoring social diversities and dynamics that result from power relations and historical events.
Chapter three deals with the research methodology and methods that were applied under this study.
Further, chapter four shapes the research context and gives background information about the local
situation. This helps to assess the research results accordingly. The main results are presented in
chapter five which consequently gives answers to the research questions. A final conclusion in
chapter six summarizes the findings. Lastly, the personal reflection and further research and policy
recommendations finalizes the thesis.
14
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
1.6 Definitions
As the term “farmers’ associations is not yet clearly determined in the Ethiopian context, it
needs more clarification. In this study, `farmers’ associations´ include Cooperatives, Water User
Associations and Watershed User Associations. The three terms are used interchangeably as
scholars, politicians and practitioners in LTW do not clearly distinguish between them. Cooperatives
have a long history in Ethiopia, going back to the 1970s, and are meant to provide in- and output
supply and take over marketing and business activities. After being discredited under the communist
regime, a “cooperative renaissance” (ILO 2005: 8) can be observed since the late 1990´s. Increasing
numbers, new forms and more power made cooperatives, especially in the Oromia coffee industry,
to an instrument of local development (ILO 2005).
The term Water User Association was introduced by international scholars. In the 1980s, the
international development discourse promoted the turn over of irrigation management from
Government Agencies to organized Water User Associations (Vermillion 1996) as it goes in line with
the discourse of decentralization, privatization, participation and democratization. This idea also
applies for the integrated watershed approach. Based on the consensus that watershed management
has to be participatory to be successful and sustainable, the concept Watershed User Association as
a mechanism to involve all beneficiaries has been developed and recently introduced in Ethiopia.
The three concepts have the same purpose: They are all institutions that aim at helping
farmers to manage themselves and their livelihoods in a sustainable and well-organized way.
"Cooperative means a society established by individuals on a voluntary basis to collectively solve
their economic and social problems and to democratically manage the same." (Proclamation No.
134/2006). Primarily “they allow their members easy access to farming equipment, and added value
through further processing and marketing the farmers´ produce” (ILO 2005:9). “A water user
association (WUA) is a non-profit organization that is initiated and managed by a group of water
users along one or more hydrological sub-system, regardless of the type of farm involved. [...] A WUA
is established by the water users for the management, operation and maintenance of the water, its
source, and its infrastructures.” (Ejigu 2009) Watershed User Associations is basically the same as the
WUA but includes all natural resources. The command area is the watershed and not only the
hydrological system. Concluding, Cooperatives, Water User Associations and Watershed User
Associations have the same intention and are therefore used interchangeably in this study. The term
farmers´ association includes all three terms.
15
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 2
Theoretical Framework
2.1 Introduction
This research draws upon four theories and related concepts that build the theoretical
framework. Postcolonialism serves hereby as a general perspective on societies by criticizing
development processes for ignoring social diversities and dynamics that result from colonial times.
Whereas the overview of sustainable management of common property resources (CPR) summarizes
the discourse of how community participation leads to sustainability, the sustainable livelihood
approach (SLA) helps to critically analyze how people sustain their livelihoods, how external factors
create vulnerability and how participation can be used as a coping strategy. As vulnerability plays a
central role in the SLA and is important in terms of changes (social transformations, Climate Change
etc.), it is the focus of the section. Further, the insights of the concept of community participation
inform about relevant dimensions and current discussions concerning the research topic. By using
the environmental entitlement approach, the role of institutions will be examined in order to
understand to what extent they influence the transformation from endowments to entitlements
which again can be used as capitals that sustain people’s livelihoods. Pulling theses insights together,
the theoretical framework allows formulating hypotheses for the research question.
2.2 Theories
2.2.1 Postcolonialism
Although Ethiopia has never been colonized, the critical lenses of postcolonialism help to
reveal the factors that influence community participation and its sustainability in this particular
context. Because of the non-colonial history of Ethiopia, the term postcolonialism may seem
paradox. But the theory looks at the relationship between western and non-western people and their
worlds - these worlds that are full of inequalities and always have been unequal. From this
perspective, colonial times were the breakdown of culture, class, religion, society, gender and often
language of the primitive inhabitants in an attempt to civilize them (Peet 1999: 137). The idea of this
breakdown also creates what Said (1978) refers to as the subalterns, “meaning subordinate in terms
of class, caste, gender, race and culture” (Peet 1999: 134). The subalterns in colonized society were
made to think that their history, knowledge and culture is primitive and assimilating their ways in line
with the colonizers would bring them to modernity. This breakdown would occur repeatedly until
“the subaltern cannot speak” (Spivak 1988; 308). Therefore, silencing the voices of the natives
creates a power relation in favor of the colonizers or more general the westerners. In fact,
postcolonialism suggests that “the colonies and postcolonies have influenced and penetrated the
West” (Sylvester 1999: 712). It places the non-West, its hybrid identities, histories, and priorities at
16
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
the centre and approaches them as subject as opposed to object. In Young’s (2003) words,
postcolonialism turns the world upside down.
The theory focuses on heterogeneity and ambivalence, embraces cultural diversity and centers on
race, culture, language and identity which Sayer unites in the term lifeworld that is coined by
Habermas. As a critic on postcolonialism, Sayer (2001) sees the risk that through the inadequate
appreciation of the role of historical and material processes in the creation of meaning, economic
systems become reduced to the lifeworld. However, the theory holds also some weakness in itself.
The purpose is to look at the world from a different perspective, which creates a space to develop
new questions. It requests to look at the world through the eyes of a refugee or the colonized. But at
the same time, postcolonialism argues that this is not possible because everyone’s perspective is
shaped by the person’s history and experiences. Therefore, can those of us raised in the West
studying development and intervene in the developing world really ever understand the stories of
the colonized? If not, then this theory raises another question, if we can’t understand it, then how
can we find solutions? When solutions are not visible because we can’t understand, we start to shift
into this grey area leading to postdevelopment.
Postdevelopment theorists like Jeffery Sachs claim that the entire concept of development is
a disappointment and has only benefited the already rich and make the poor even poorer (Peet
1999; 150). The theory points out that you can never fully understand another culture. Therefore,
any decision the West makes has the power to once again cause further poverty.
Central in this theory is the emergence of discourses through which social reality comes into being. It
is the articulation of knowledge and power, a “system of relations *that+ establishes a discursive
practice that sets the rules of the game.[...] It sets the rules that has to be followed for this or that
problem, theory, or object to emerge and be named, analyzed, and eventually transformed into a
policy or a plan.” (Escobar 1995: 41).
Applying these ideas to the participatory approach, this research argues that community
participation implies theoretically the same as postcolonialism theorists aim for: empowering the
voices of the natives and listening to their priorities and solutions will teach the one in power how to
achieve sustainable development. If silencing the poor creates a power relation in favour of the
colonizer, listening to them should turn the power relations upside down. However, reality is
different. Therefore, the participatory approach is rather a discourse that produces a social reality.
Thus, this study draws on the presented theoretical perspective to analyze perceptions, social
dynamics and diversities. Thus, it investigates insights about how the empowerment of the
subalterns can be improved.
17
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
2.2.2 Sustainability of common property resources
The concept of sustainability emerged in the 1970´s and is since the overarching goal of
development activities. The concern about environment and development became the focus of a
series of international conferences and commissions. The most famous and influencing one is the
World Commission of Environment and Development (WCED, 1987), who published the Brundtland
Report with the key statement that sustainable development is the tool to combine economic
growth and environmental protection. It defines the concept as the “development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs” (WCED 1987: 43). Sustainable resource use gradually took over the term resource
conservation, indicating that the focus is now more on the people since “there is no point in
conservation for its own sake”, but conservation becomes meaningful if people who rely on natural
resources try to survive (Critchley 1998: 14). The main drivers for this development were population
growth, increase of livestock and the awareness of environmental degradation. These factors
together lead to resource scarcity and therefore bring up the issue of distribution equality. This
concerns especially the common property resources (CPR) such as grazing land/ pastoral land,
forests, surface and ground water and fisheries. CPR´s are defined as resources which are governed
by common property regimes. (IFAD 1995: 3) Contrary to open access resources, the concepts of
tenure and ownership are the central elements. “Sets of rules define the rights and duties of
members and non-members with regard to access to, use and management of these resources.”
(ibid: 3) The difficulty of excluding actors from using them and the fact that the use by one individual
or group means that less is available for use by others is therefore the critical element and makes
sustainable management necessary. The dominant solution suggested in the literatures and empirical
studies is a suitable institutional framework that secures beneficial outcomes for stakeholders on a
local level (Kumar 2002: 763; Sharp 1995,). In other words to ensure a sustainable management of
CPR the government has to share its power with different user groups. Through the influence of
international agencies such as the United Nation, World Bank and World Health Organization,
governments of many countries have acknowledged the need for greater community based
development strategies. Consequently, environmental degradation is commonly associated with a
failure of governance. Summarizing, sustainability of CPR is about: “firstly making production an
integral part of, and rationale for, conserving the land’s resources; secondly ensuring a partnership
between land users, specialists and others, and thirdly creating a process that is durable.” (Critchley
1998: 31)
However, there are critics on the concept of sustainability that one has to be aware of in order to
understand development processes. As Castree and Braun point out, “what counts as `nature´, and
our experience of nature *…+ is always historical, related to a configuration of historically specific
18
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
social and representational practices that form the nuts and bolts of our interaction with, and
investments in, the world. Discourses like `sustainability´ are important to the extent that they
organize our attitudes towards, and actions on, nature.” (1998: 17). Critical scholars claim the
participatory approach as a “new orthodoxy” (Henkel and Stirrat 2001: 168) as Mohan puts it
“participation in development became orthodoxy from the mid-1990s onwards” (Mohan 2007: 781).
This study is aware of the fact that sustainability is a hegemonic idea which is not the product
of a linear, progressive and value-free process but rather a struggle between various unconventional
political coalitions, each made up by actors like scientists, politicians and activists (Hajer 1995: 12).
The necessity of sustainable management of CPR is inevitable and has to be the overall objective of
development processes. Nevertheless it is a socially constructed discourse in which different actors
compete about their needs and interests.
2.2.3 Sustainable Livelihood Approach and Vulnerability
In the understanding of the sustainable livelihood approach (SLA), a household is considered
as poor “when the resources they command are insufficient to enable them to consume sufficient
goods and services to achieve a reasonable minimum level of welfare” (Rakodi 2002: 4). SLA starts
from the assumption that poor people actively seek to overcome vulnerability and develop livelihood
strategies. Thus, it also links to the concept of vulnerability, which Chambers clearly distinguishes
from poverty. “It means not lack or want, but defencelessness, insecurity, and exposure to risk,
shocks and stress. *…+ Vulnerability *…+ refers to exposure to contingencies and stress, and difficulty
in coping with them.“ (Chambers 1989: 1) The concept has the dual aspect of external threats to
livelihood security due to risk factors such a climate, markets or sudden disaster, as well as internal
coping capability determined by assets, food stores, support from kin or community, or government
safety net policies.
Five forms of capitals are central for the SLA, namely human, social, physical, financial and
natural capital (Scoones 1998). A sixth – political capital – has been suggested (Ashley/ Carney 1999:
35). From the perspective of CPR management this could be a key asset, in terms of the political
bargaining between different stakeholders. It can help to increase the “capacity of the poor to
influence the form and weight of trade-offs from the community-level upwards.” (Nicol 2000: 16).
Miruts/ Abay made this experience in a project on farmer innovations in Ethiopia. They point out that
capacity building and empowerment, which is the result of a high degree of participation, lead to a
greater attitude and acknowledgement of decision-makers on zonal and regional levels towards
farmers (Miruts/ Abay 2001: 246).
However, capitals do not exist in isolation. In her study about micro finance, Kabeers (2001)
argues that there are interactions between capitals. She investigated that women share their loans
19
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
more likely with men than the other way around which illustrates an interaction between financial
and social capital. Such findings show how necessary careful analyses are in order to make local
interventions more effective and sustainable.
Generally speaking, the ability to avoid or to reduce risks depends on the initial assets as well
as on the capacity to manage them or to transform them into income, food and basic necessities
(Moser 1998: 5). Managing capitals means developing coping strategy to reduce a household’s
susceptibility to poverty and vulnerability. A brief sketch of some coping strategies include:
increasing the number of workers in a household; improving human capital through infrastructure
upgrading; setting up a home-based business; migration to cities for work or education; creating
stronger social networks through partnerships with community-based organization, NGOs and local
government; and community insurance schemes. However, robustness resulting from a strong asset
bundle can not only be manifested in reduced household vulnerability, but also in increased
influence on policies and institutions, leading to the conclusion that asset building is a ‘core
component of empowerment’ (Carney, 1998: 8). On the other hand, access to both assets and
activities is enabled or hindered by the policy and institutional context of livelihoods, including social
relations, institutions and organizations (Allison/ Ellis 2001: 379). For the purpose of this research the
focus is the interaction between people’s capital and institutions as well as other possible external
factors that influence the vulnerability positively and negatively.
An additional important aspect is pointed out by Nicol (2000). According to his finding on
water supply, “the relative trade-offs involved for households are what determine the poverty
impact, rather than the presence or absence, per se.” (Nicol 2000: 14). As an example he states that
“whilst a lack of a good quality supply may indicate lack of provisioning for human consumption, it
does not necessarily indicate lack of provisioning say, for livestock assets, or for the cultivation of
crops – which may, in fact, be more significant determinants of poverty in given communities. In
short, the presence of a good quality supply may be on the basis of higher unit costs for water
collected.” (ibid). Concluding, the SLA provides an analytical framework which is a people-centred
way of thinking about development priorities and objectives, but has to be carefully applied to
specific contexts by taking social dynamics and diversities into account. It is the central theoretical
approach for this research as it provides insights about existing coping strategies and helps to define
potentials for farmer associations to reduce the vulnerability of people´s livelihoods.
2.2.4 Community Participation
In the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development signed at the United Nations Earth
Summit in 1992, the international community agreed on the fact that “environmental issues are best
handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level” and that “each
20
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
individual shall have [...] the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes” (United Nation
1992, Principle 10). Further it establishs that governments “shall facilitate and encourage public
awareness and participation by making information widely available” and provide “effective access
to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy”. Additionally, principle 22
provides for the “effective participation” of “indigenous people and their communities and other
local communities” in the “achievement of sustainable development”. Participation as the World
Bank (1996) defines it is “a process through which the public influences and shares control over
development initiatives, decisions and resources which affect them.” In the definition that the UN
provides, the notion of equality is contributed: “*Participation is+ the creation of opportunities to
enable all members of a community and the larger society to actively contribute to and influence the
development process and share equitably in the fruits of development.” (UN 1981: 24)
Chambers considers community participation as a new paradigm and defines four
characteristics which he calls the four D’s: decentralization, democracy, diversity and dynamism
(1997: 198 f.). The essential element that he recognizes in all four concepts is trust. “Trust is a
condition for sharing the truth about diversity. So it is that decentralization, trust, diversity and truth
support each other (ibid: 199). He extends this idea by adding a fifth D, naming doubt. “This
encompasses self-critical awareness, doubting one’s perceptions and realities, and being able to
embrace and learn from error.” (ibid: 201). Generally speaking, associated terms with community
participation are capabilities, empowerment, ownership, pluralism and equity. Nevertheless the
concept can be applied differently and there are various understanding of who should how, when
and where participate.
The extremes are, on the one hand,
minimal participation in which specialists
and funders from outside the community’s
control and make decisions and solicit the
community’s land, labour or materials, and,
on the other hand, a project in which
community members are fully involved in
decision-making throughout all phases of
planning, constructing and operating a a
development
activity.
Community
participation is not simply a yes-no variable
that is either present or absent. It rather
occurs in varying degrees (Pretty 1995, Platt
Source: (Arnstein 1969: 217)
1996, Cullen 1996). Arnstein visualized
21
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
these degrees in a useful way, which is shown in figure 1. For the purpose of this research, this ladder
is used as a conceptual model to assess the degree of participation taking place and analyze how
different factors determine this.
A second but similar classification comes from Garande and Dagg (2005) who distinguish
between “empowering” and “mobilization”. Whereas empowering enhances local management
capacities and is people-centred and active, mobilization is rather planners-centred, the community
is passive and comes only into the picture after decisions have been made (Garande/ Dagg 2005:
420). The potential of community participation differs depending on the type. Generally speaking,
the dominant consensus is that by involving people actively in the development process, the
promotion of economic and social progress is accelerated. It also leads to sustainable development
as it is mutually agreed upon action between all stakeholders (Midgley et al. 1986: 13-23). As it is
argued that participation ensures equal distribution of benefits of development (Midgley et al. 1986:
13), participants must be involved in decision-making and management of their own lives (Beazley
2006: 191; Sharp 1995: 311 f.). Applying this to Arnstein´s ladder of participation, numerous studies
proved that the higher the degree of citizen power, the more effective and sustainable is the
intervention (Kleemeier 2000, Kumar 2002, Gebremedhin et al 2003, Fraser et al 2005).
Empowerment occurs through equitable sharing and redistribution of power and resources with
those previously lacking power. But also discussion, consultation and information sharing often
produce greater consensus about goals and clarity about roles and ownership. This study aims at
defining the degree of participation and investigating on how it enhances or limits people’s capacities
to sustain their livelihoods in the context of the LTW.
Having said this, the “participatory turn” (Spies 2006) in the 1990s is a reformation as it
displaces the former top-down approach by introducing the concepts of cooperation and partnership
in the field of development. “In a true partnership, local actors should progressively take the lead,
while external partners back their efforts to assume greater responsibility for their own
development” (OECD 1996). It puts the people in developing countries in the centre of attention as
they are perceived as partners rather than receivers and local knowledge is regarded as a resource.
The concepts of empowerment and ownership have been mentioned already and are central
in the debate. Alsop and Heinsohn provide a useful definition in their World Bank working paper, as
they claim that “empowerment is *...+ a person’s capacity to make effective choices; that is, as the
capacity to transform choices into desired actions and outcomes.” (2005: 4). According to the
authors, the extent to which a person is empowered is determined by personal agency, meaning the
capacity to make purposive choice, and opportunity structures, meaning the institutional context in
which choice is made. Whereas asset endowments are used as indicators of agency, opportunity
structures are measured by the presence and operation of formal and informal institutions, including
22
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
laws, regulatory frameworks, and norms governing behavior. Degrees of empowerment are
measured by the existence of choice, the use of choice, and the achievement of choice (Alsop/
Heinsohn 2005).
The concept of ownership is defined as the community's feeling/belief that the problem/issue
and/or program belong to them and if they have a commitment to the program (Figueroa et al 2002).
Central dimensions and therefore indicators for a sense of ownership are e.g. the importance of the
issue or program to participants, the sense of responsibility to solve a certain problem, the
contribution to the project of beneficiaries and the perception among participants of benefits from
the project (ibid). The definition already indicates the complexity and difficulties that are entailed in
the concept as it is an assessment of subjective feelings, beliefs and thoughts. From the perspective
of postcolonialism, it is consequently unattainable for a western researcher to investigate the sense
of ownership among farmers in Ethiopia. This study tries to overcome this challenge by
acknowledging the difficulties, being transparent and using triangulation.
Furthermore, there are limitations to the concept of participation. Community participation
is a complex and diffuses conception in which the community as well as the external actors are
heterogeneous. Individuals on each side have divergent opinions, competing interests and differing
roles and status (Eng et al 1990: 1350). Power relations within the community and between different
actors are therefore a crucial point which starts to be recognized by scholars and development
agencies. “This dilemma about how external agencies can intervene in such a way as to engender
“power to” among those subordinated by their own “power over” faces researchers as much as
other actors in the development scene.” (Nelson and Wright 1997:11) Community’s knowledge and
experiences with participatory management, the amount of time available, outsider’s skills and
instructions, education, skills and income of community members are influential factors that can
have serious limitations to the success of participation (Eng et al 1990: 1350: Narayan 1995: 9). The
case study of the Koga catchment and chara chara weir in the Abay River Basin (for further
explanation see chapter 1.3) e.g. showed that not enough attention was paid towards factors like
communication, people´s activities, time and projects benefits (Gebre et al 2008b: 43). In their
projects on farmer’s innovation in Ethiopia, Abay et al point out that the consideration of gender
issues in development processes in Ethiopia is an important topic as women’s work is seldom
acknowledge due to social and cultural norms (Abay et al 2001). Indeed, Ethiopians society and
history generally goes against community involvement and decentralization of power (for further
explanation see chapter 4). Therefore, instead of taking the positive effect of community
participation on sustainability for granted, this study critically examines the influencing factors that
determine the process in the societal, cultural and historical context.
23
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chambers argues that practical experiences show that also terms like commitment,
disempowerment, doubt, responsibility and self-critical awareness are essential elements of the
participatory approach even though they are still underestimated (Chambers 1997: 209). “In good
PRA, participatory behavior and attitudes matter more than methods.”(ibid: 212) Because essentially
“the paradigm significance is the reversal of making not lowers, but uppers, the focus: their behavior,
attitudes and beliefs, and what sort of people they are. It is making the powerful the centre of
attention for analysis, action and change.” (ibid: 208). Already in 1983, Chambers claims that the
concept reveals an important synergy of the interacting partners under the condition of appropriate
behavior of the experts. “Rural people´s knowledge and modern scientific knowledge are
complementary in their strengths and weaknesses. Combined they may achieve what neither would
alone. For such combination, outsider professionals have to step down off their pedestals, and sit
down, listen and learn (Chambers 1983:101). In line with that, various authors claim that community
participation has to be linked and incorporated in institutions to ensure sustainability and avoid
window-dressing (Sharp 1995: 320; Stocking 1998; Leach et al 1999; Kolavalli/ Brewer 1999: 254;
Kleemmeier 2000: 942; Reij/ Waters-Bayer 2001: 19; Israr/ Islam 2006; Holmes-Watts/ Watts 2008:
441). Pratten illustrates in his case study about local institutional development and relief in Ethiopia
that
factors
of
institutional
local
legitimacy,
transparency
accountability
both
to
and
are
the
central,
effective
representation of community
views
and
to
long-term
partnerships between local
institutions
and
non-
governmental
organizations
(Pratten 1997). He argues that
so far external interventions
are not compatible with local
conditions and that a stronger
relationship
community
between
and
the
local
institutions can solve this
problem (ibid: 151).
Source: (Uphoff et al 1979, in Eng et al 1990: 1351)
24
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Summarizing, the manner in which participation occurs and the effects that result from it,
depend on the context. Consequently, this study understands participation as a rather complex
socio-political and culturally specific concept. It can only be interpreted from a local specific context
and on a scale, rather than being one-dimensional. Uphoff et al (1979) developed a useful diagram
which argues that there are three dimensions, the how, who and what, as well as the contexts
meaning the project characteristics and task environment that determine the degree of participation.
This research applies this conceptual model (figure 2, p. 19) to the context of the LTW and
investigates hereby the influencing factors for the success of farmers associations (for further
explanation see chapter 3). As indicated in this section, literatures and empirical studies claim the
role of institutions and the promoted attitude as the key factors determining the success of the
development process. This study therefore pays especially attention to this and aims at analyzing the
conditions in the LTW.
2.2.5 Institutions
Previously, CPR´s were defined as resources which are governed by common property
regimes (IFAD 1995: 3, for further explanation see chapter 2.2.2). In other words, common property
regimes determine regulations that concern access to, use and management of these resources. By
participating in this governance process, communities are able to assert their rights for access, use
and management. Institutions play therefore a central role in the sustainable management of CPR’s.
They are defined as “regularized patterns of behavior between individuals and groups in society”
(Mearns 1995: 103) rather than as organizations which is the more common understanding. They can
be both formal and informal (Leach et al 1999: 237). By using this definition this study considers the
role of institutions to be a mediator between people and natural resources, which implies that
common property regimes have to take dynamics and internally differentiation of communities into
account (ibid: 226). In order to understand people’s participation in these regimes, it is necessary to
understand their natural resource use since the final aim of their participation is sustaining this
usage. For this purpose, Leach et al (1999) developed a generalized theory of access to natural
resources called ‘environmental entitlements’. “This framework seeks to elucidate how ecological
and social dynamics influence the natural-resources management activities of diverse groups of
people, and how these activities in turn help to produce and to shape particular kinds of
environment. [...][This] disaggregated entitlement approach considers the role of diverse institutions
in mediating the relationship between social actors, and different components of local ecologies.”
(ibid: 226). For the purpose of this research the second aspect, namely the influence of social
activities on the environment, is not considered.
25
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The authors draw on the entitlement analysis of Amartya Sen (1981) in which he argues that
the absolute lack of resources may be only one of a number of reasons for people not gaining access
to the resources they need for sustaining their livelihoods. Whereas Sen uses resources in general
and is concerned about how people (not) survive given a legal setting or mechanisms, Leach et al
apply this idea to environmental questions (Leach et al 1999: 232 f.). Sen’s key terms entitlements
and endowments are therefore adjusted and determined as the following: “*...+ Endowments refer to
the rights and resources that social actors have. [...] Environmental entitlements refer to alternative
sets of utilities derived from environmental goods and services over which social actors have
legitimate effective command and which are instrumental in achieving well-being” (ibid: 233).
Entitlements therefore derive from endowments and endowments can enhance entitlements.
Following Sen, a person’s “entitlement set” is the full range of goods and services that he or she can
acquire by converting his or her “endowments” through “exchange entitlement mappings”
(Devereux 2001: 246). Applying this to the context of CPR management, land tenure issues
(endowments) e.g. can determine the amount of food, firewood and water (entitlements) that a
household uses. Sen determines four sources of food: “production-based entitlement” (growing
food), “trade-based entitlement” (buying food), “own-labour entitlement” (working for food) and
“inheritance and transfer entitlement” (being given food by others) (Sen 1981: 2). Consequently,
there are different “exchange entitlement failure” that can be the reason for hunger or even famine.
To increase people´s entitlement set, the first necessary step is to define the type of exchange
entitlement failure in order to intervene accordingly.
Linking that with the previous sections, participation ideally increases endowments and
consequently leads to enhanced entitlements. Institutions operate on a range of scales, mediating
the underlying dynamic mapping processes (Leach et al 1999: 234). Transforming structures and
institutions “are the main driving forces that determine whether ecosystems can become useful to
communities as commodity over which they have rights, and assets of benefits over which they have
effective command and control” (Fabricius 2004: 25). This research analyzes the entitlement
mapping in the LTW and reveals possible exchange entitlement failures. Further, it defines the role of
institutions and their influence on the transformation process from endowments to entitlements on
different levels in the ARNS context. The study examines how farmer associations as a mechanism of
participation can be a strategy for communities to accelerate this process for their benefits.
26
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 3
Research Methodology
3.1 Conceptual Model
The theoretical framework gave an overview of literature findings and debates. Based on
that, eight hypotheses have been derived:
(1) Households develop coping strategies on the base of their available capitals to sustain
their livelihoods.
(2) External threats and a lack of internal capacities make livelihoods vulnerable.
(3) Community participation can be used as a coping strategy to reduce livelihood
vulnerability.
(4) Community participation is complex and a socio-politically and culturally specific concept
which should be interpreted on a scale, rather than one-dimensional, from a local context.
(5) The type of community participation and its related outcome is determined by contextual
factors.
(6) The higher the degree of participation in the governing process of common natural
resources, the better people can manage their capitals to sustain their livelihoods.
(7) Institutions distribute power among stakeholders and play a central role in management
of common natural resources.
(8) To sustain their livelihoods, people transform their endowments into entitlements with
the help of institutions.
The study does not necessarily test the hypotheses, but they play a key role in developing the
conceptual model as they are articulated here. The conceptual model gives direction to the research
and leads to the research question.
Internal capabilities of
households
External threats to the
households’ livelihoods
Vulnerable
Livelihoods
Coping
strategies
Institutional
Framework
Farmer
Associations
Internal factors in the
community
(Socio-political, cultural,
historical context, capabilities
of the community)
External factors
Entitlement
Mapping
(Actors involved, behavior/
attitude/ skills of external
actors, activities in which the
community is involved)
Sustainable
Livelihoods
Figure 3: Conceptual model
27
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
3.2 Research question and sub-questions
The central question to be answered in this study is:
Are farmer associations a coping strategy for households to sustain the livelihoods and what
factors influence their success?
This research question is divided into five sub-questions. They address the implicated factors that are
necessary to analyze in order to answer the main question.
1. What is the constitutional and legislative framework for common natural resource
management in LTW?
2. What does community participation mean in context of the LTW?
3. What are the main risks for the communities?
4. How do farmer associations minimize the risks of the communities?
5. Under what conditions are farmer associations a successful coping strategy?
3.3 Operationalization
The operationalistion scheme shows how the theoretical concepts (for further explanation
see chapter two) are operationalized and assessed for this study. By defining the dimensions,
variables and indicators, the focus of this research is set and the concepts can be measured.
Concept
Dimension
Variable
Sustainable livelihood
Type of capital
Natural Capital
Financial Capital
Human Capital
Physical Capital
Social Capital
Indicator/ means of
verification
Does the household own
land/ livestock/ trees?
Does the household have
cash income? Does the
household have savings?
Does the household get
credits?
How many people live in
one household? Do all
household members
contribute labour? What is
the level of education of
household members? How
is the health status of the
household members?
Do people have electricity/
public transport/ possibility
to use media? How is the
infrastructure?
Are household members
active in institutions in the
community? Which
institutions help the
household in times of risks?
28
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Amount of capital
Quantity of each type
How much of each capital
does the household own or
have access to?
Usage of capital
Way of usage
How do households use
their capitals?
Do people turn their
endowments into
entitlements?
Does the household think
they have access to
different types of capitals?
What are the rights of
farmers over their natural
resources? What are their
rights in terms of
participation?
What kind of risks do the
households face? What are
the different perceptions
about the type of risks on
different levels?
What kind of support
networks exist for the
communities from the
perspective of the farmers?
Entitlement mapping
Access to capital
Vulnerability
Rights over capitals
Perception of community
concerning the accessibility
of capitals
Endowments
Risks
Perceptions of risks
Support in times of risks
Sustainability of capitals
Changes of capitals over
time
Dependency of capitals
Sufficiency of capital
Quality of capital
Community Participation
Empowerment
Opportunity structures
Agency
Ownership
Perception of importance
How have the amount and
the quality of capital
changed in the last years?
What does the capital of the
household depend on?
Is the amount of capital
sufficient for the household
from their perspective?
How does the household
assess the quality of
household?
Does the opportunity for
farmers exist to build
associations? Does the
opportunity for farmers
exist to strengthen their
capital with the help of
associations?
Do farmers actually use the
opportunity? Do farmers
have the assets to use the
opportunity?
Do farmers think farmer
associations are important
for sustaining their capitals?
Do farmers think natural
resource management is
important?
29
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Perception of
responsibilities
Perception of benefits
Contribution
Power Relations
Social structures
Political structures
Do farmers feel that it is
their responsibility to
strengthen their capitals?
Do farmers feel that it is
their responsibility to make
farmer associations
effective?
Do farmers see any benefits
of farmer associations? Is
there a benefit of being a
member of an association?
How much do farmers
contribute to the work of
improving livelihoods?
What are the different
perceptions of the type of
contributions farmers can/
should make?
What are the roles of men/
women in the society? How
are decisions made in the
society? Who is in charge of
what activities in the
households?
Who has what responsibility
in the political arena of
natural resource
management in LTW?
Where are which decisions
made?
Figure 4: Operationalisation scheme
3.4 Research location
The fieldwork is located in the Lake Tana Watershed in North-West Ethiopia in Amhara state
(for further explanations see chapter 4.2.1). With the support of the project Sustainable Water
Harvesting and Institutional Strengthening in Amhara Region (SWHISA), an intensive case study was
conducted in two command areas of irrigation schemes, namely Gurumbaba and Menti. The sites are
located in the Ethiopian highlands in the very remote and degraded woreda West Belisa (for further
explanation see chapter 4.2.1). However, as SWHISA supported the study in terms of logistic and
transport, built contacts to the population and therefore acted as a gatekeeper, it was accessible.
The project has been present in the area for two years, providing capacity building for farmers and
woreda experts concerning water harvesting, irrigation management and agricultural practices.
Gurumbaba and Menti are selected based on the following criteria: 19 of the 30 kebeles in
West Belisa are chronically food insecure and therefore supported by the Productive Safety Net
Program. Farmers living in Gurumbaba and Menti are seasonal food insecure and partly receive food
aid in times of drought. Common natural resource management is therefore a highly relevant issue in
the degraded area. Whereas Gurumbaba is one of the five modern irrigation schemes in West Belisa,
30
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Menti is one of the 129 small-scale traditional schemes in West Belisa. Both command areas have a
farmer irrigation cooperative (IC) which is formally responsible for the management. Former studies
of SWHISA show that these farmer associations (FAs) do not effectively manage the irrigation scheme
and its related resources, sustain the livelihoods or provide credit services to the farmers (SWHISA
Document IRG 2007). However, the traditional scheme still seems to work better. The research focus
is therefore highly relevant in Gurumbaba and Menti and especially a comparative analysis between
the modern and the traditional scheme promised remarkable insights. Moreover, data from earlier
studies is available and can be useful for preparation work.
Additionally to the intensive case study, participant observations in three different woredas –
Libo Kemkem, Gonda Zuria and Dera – were made, where watershed management projects are
implemented. Watershed User Associations (WUAs) are here responsible to manage and sustain the
common natural resources and serve as a mechanism for the concept of community participation.
The watersheds in Libo Kemkem and Gonda Zuria are project areas of the GTZ, bordering West
Belisa. As a food-secure area, the farmers have only little experiences with external support. In
contrast to the IC in Gurumbaba and Menti, the WUAs are responsible for the management of all
common natural resources available in the watershed. This also applies to the watershed in Dera
woreda, a project site of a Finish project, called Tana Belese. These three additional sites are selected
to get a broader perspective and to compare the findings of the case study with FAs in a different
environment. As FAs in all mentioned locations are used as a strategy for sustainable common
natural resource management, but work under different conditions an analysis in all research sites
helps answering the research question holistically.
3.5 Unit of analysis
The primary units of analysis are households and institution members that are involved in
common natural resource management in the LTW. However, documents that build the institutional
framework for farmer associations and for natural resource management in general are also
analyzed in order to meet the objective of the research.
3.6 Epistemology, theoretical perspective and research methodology
This research is inspired by a constructivist perspective as it investigates how the meaning of
community participation as a coping strategy to reduce vulnerability is constructed in the specific
local context. Community participation is recognized as a social process and social phenomenon
which is in constant state of revision (Bryman 2008: 19). However, if meaning is constructed by our
knowledge of reality, then those that are able to produce knowledge or shape how knowledge is
presented can construct an image of reality. Therefore, the epistemology is determined as critical
31
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
constructivism as the basic assumption of the critical theory is the inseparability of facts and ideology
(Crotty 1998: 130). Critical theory calls current ideologies – or discourses – into question, challenges
conventional social structures and tries to develop new ways of understanding. Hereby, selfawareness of the subject is central (ibid: 130). The theoretical perspective is consequently critical
postcolonialism as it is an example of how critical theories contest dominant ways of looking at
reality. The theory focuses on heterogeneity and ambivalence, embraces cultural diversity and
centres on race, culture, language and identity. It therefore informs the study in a useful way.
However, aspects of symbolic-interactionism also inspire this study. It investigates how local people
interpret community participation from a local specific context and therefore takes into account that
human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that these things have for them. This
research departs from the idea that meanings are expressions of historically situation interpretations
of social life and therefore derive from the culture (Crotty, 1998: 72). In line with that, the
methodology that informs this research is critical ethnography. The focus of ethnography is the
description and interpretation of social systems. In order to understand how people use community
participation to sustain their livelihoods and to analyze the factors that influence the type and
outcome of this process, the researcher has to take the role of farmers (Bryman 2008: 402) to be
able to interpret different perspectives. However, conventional ethnography does not address power
relations inherent in any representation of social interaction. This study therefore uses critical
ethnography which allows an analysis of the role of institutions within community participation.
3.7 Research design and methods
The research design is a qualitative case study with elements of a cross-sectional design. As a
case study the research is concerned with the complexity and particular nature (Bryman 2008: 52) of
the farmer associations in Gurumbaba and Menti. However, in line with the cross-sectional design, it
is interested in variations (Bryman 2008: 44) in respect of environment, organization, activities,
project owner and people. All findings relate to the relevance of the concept of community
participation in a single period in time and place, which usually indicates a cross-section design.
However, the emphasis of the study is upon an intensive examination of the specific setting in
Gurumbaba and Menti.
Concerning the data gathering, the study uses a number of qualitative methods applying
them to the different units of analysis. In order to investigate the livelihood strategies,
vulnerabilities, perceptions and interpretations of the farmers’ households, structured interviews,
focus groups and participant observation are used. As the irrigation schemes in West Belisa represent
the case study, the structured interviews were only conducted in this research site. Focus groups and
participant observation were also realized in Libo Kemkem, Gonda Zuria and Dera.
32
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The questionnaire for the structured interviews examines the different variables of
sustainable livelihoods and vulnerability (for further explanation see chapter 3.3., find the
questionnaire attached in Annex). The method was chosen for practical reasons as language barriers
inhibit semi-structured interviews. To avoid language distortions as best as possible, mostly closed
questions were asked. Some open questions give further explanation about the reasons and
interpretations of the farmers. The survey aims at aggregating the data in a short period as the data
gathering is done in harvesting time of the informants and because of the poor infrastructure and
language barrier, this phase occupies a number of staff members and a vehicle. The total population
is identified as all beneficiaries in the command area of the two irrigation schemes, who are
members and non-members of the farmer association. The sampling is intended to be a stratified
random sample (Bryman 2008: 173). 15% of the population in Gurumbaba and 15% of the population
in Menti is approached, ensuring the same proportion of FHHH as the total population shows.
Gender is the stratifying criterion within the unit of the systematic sample of 15%. This sample can be
chosen on the base of the list of beneficiaries from 2007, available at the ARDO in West Belisa.
However elements of a convenience sampling (ibid: 183) are unavoidable as a result of restriction for
the researcher. The restrictions derive from the conditions at the research site. The term
“beneficiaries” is not consistently defined among stakeholders which leads to different numbers.
Additionally, neither farmers nor woreda experts or SWHISA experts know about who is a member of
the farmer association and who is not. The only available list is supposed to imply only members of
the farmer association and only those who own land in the command area. Further, poor
infrastructure and therefore difficult accessibility require the DA´s to contact and schedule the
farmers. This leads to changes of the chosen sample as not all the chosen farmers are available or
changes are not documented on the available list. For time reasons, the actual sample is simply the
one that is available and accessible and therefore does not allow generalizations. 76 interviews were
conducted with household heads, 38 in Gurumbaba and 38 in Menti.
To examine the meaning that farmers give to farmer associations and natural resource
management in general, farmer focus groups (FFG) were conducted. The method offers the
opportunity of allowing people to probe each other´s reasons for holding a certain view. It shows
how people collectively make sense of a phenomenon and construct meanings around it (Bryman
2008: 475). This is highly relevant in order to investigate the potential of farmer associations as a
coping strategy because it shows how individuals interact and communicate with each other and
how they form their opinions and agreements. In West Belisa, the informants are chosen by the DA´s
based on the following criteria: Each FFG consists of five to eight participants, one FFG represents
youth, one female beneficiaries (from female headed households (fhhh) and male headed
households (mhhh)), one FFG represents male beneficiaries who are not member of the committee
33
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
of the cooperative and one male farmers who are member of the committee. As group discussions
take place in the fields in the villages, it is not realistic to keep the group homogenous. Farmers are
curious and join the discussion or some lose interest and leave earlier. Additionally, not all farmers
that were scheduled for the FG came to the meeting. During the analysis of the data, the actual
composition of the FFG has to be taken into account. Furthermore, the role of the researcher is a
challenging issue in this intercultural context. Language barriers demand the consolidation of an
interpreter who is not only responsible for interpreting but also has to guide the FFG and act as the
facilitator or mediator. This may lead to a situation where the researcher is not able to intervene at
the crucial and interesting points during the groups discussions anymore because the interpreter
takes over this role. Indeed, the method holds very relevant limitations in this specific context, but is
still the most appropriate manner considering the research objective.
By using participant observation the study investigates how people build their livelihoods,
how they participate in common natural resource management and allows some conclusions about
their entitlement mapping. However, observation does not help to understand the processes since it
does not examine the meaning of people’s behavior. Therefore, observations are combined with
interviews, but only little of it involves participation. The researcher rather takes the role of an
“observer-as-participant” which allows gathering two types of data: “naturally occurring inter[personal] talk and detailed descriptions of how [people] handled “live” incidents” (Bryman 2008:
410). Especially in Libo-Kemkem, Gonda Zuria and Dera, this method is applied.
The second unit of analysis comprises the woreda and kebele experts as well as the workers
in institutions on regional level. The intension hereby is to analyze the understanding of the concept
participation, assess the role of institutions in common natural resource management and examine
the opportunity structures for farmer associations. The most appropriate method is therefore semistructured interviews, as it concentrates on the way, meaning is constructed by the informant, rather
than by the interviewer. This meets the objective of this research because it keeps the interview
process flexible and in the control of the participants (Bryman 2008: 439). However, a guideline with
open questions is needed in order to ensure cross-case comparability. As the experts speak
reasonable English, semi-structured interviews are possible. However, the interpreter can intervene
in difficult situations and some closed questions offer a starting point in the beginning of the
interviews. Additionally, informal discussions with stakeholders from experts from SWHISA, GTZ and
other stakeholders during field visits and office work provide different views to gain triangulation.
By using a fieldwork diary, experiences, thoughts and reflections are made transparent. The
research question maintains a fairly open mind, so that detailed observations and initial reflections of
the findings may provide highly relevant information. As an ethnographical study, this typical method
34
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
delivers necessary data about livelihood strategies, social life and possible impact of institutions on
household´s living.
Concerning the methods for data analysis, mainly qualitative content analysis is used. The
findings of the semi-structured interviews and focus groups are reviewed by a thematic analysis
looking at the perceptions, attitudes and meanings people form towards a certain aspect. To answer
the first sub-question (for further information see 3.2.) and analyze the legal framework, qualitative
content analysis is applied on governmental declarations, policies and strategies. Further, SPSS is
used to analyze the gathered data in the survey. Even though the computer software is rather used
in quantitative research, it provides necessary insights about the context in which farmer
associations are established, what capitals people have and how entitlement mapping is done. All
methods combined, gives the opportunity for cross-checking and triangulation which is essential to
achieve reliability and internal validity.
3.8 Limitations and ethical considerations
Following the critical postcolonialism perspective, this study attempts to challenge the
discourse of sustainable resource management through community participation. It tries to reveal
the meaning of the concept from the farmers’ point of view and to interpret participation from a
specific local context rather than from a western perspective. Therefore, this study is inevitably
biased by the understanding and knowledge of reality and the subjectivity of the researcher.
However it will not reach any objectivity, through transparency and reflexivity the interpretations are
justified as they achieve dependability and authenticity. Generally speaking, this research is not able
to prove certain facts, but has tried with the research means at disposal.
Coming from a constructivist perspective, the presence of the researcher and the point in
time when the study was conducted has an influence on the results. In Menti, for example this
research took place at a time when the BoARD started its surveys for the construction of a modern
irrigation scheme. The enthusiastic farmers were informed about the independency between the two
studies, however the hopes and optimistic attitude towards the up scaling clearly influence this
research.
Being unavoidably subjective, the analysis applied in this study is necessarily limited,
incomplete and partial. Firstly, the reason for that is rather practical as choices have to be made to
focus the research, especially for a Master thesis. Secondly, the way the study is conducted and
presented is inevitably shaped by knowledge, access, skills, possibilities and interests of the
researcher. This selectivity affects a number of important issues that are worth mentioning as they
show how the research worked in practise.
35
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The probably most influencing bias is the language distortion, meaning an alteration of
implications caused by different interpretations. To conduct research as a non-Amharic speaking
westerner in Ethiopia, an interpreter is needed for all interviews, focus groups and surveys. The first
language distortion occurs with the translation of the questions from English to Amharic. The second
is the translation of the answers from Amharic to English. As translation is not only a transformation
of words but also of concepts, different interpretations may affect the outcome significantly. This
problem cannot be totally avoided but cross-checking by different people and methods was used to
reduce the distortion as much as possible. Moreover, during the participant observation and informal
conversations, the researcher misses many information because of the different language. Primarily
because of the former issue, but also because of the tendency of the informants to agree on
everything even though they may not have understood it totally, taking perceptions and non-verbal
communication into account is from high interest for this study. Trust is in this context a key for
reliable data, but is also one of the most crucial concerns in such an intercultural interaction.
Apart from the language barrier, throughout the fieldwork it became clear that different
stakeholders have different understandings about the definition of cooperatives and WUAs.
Although the term farmer association that is used in this study implies the two, conclusion may not
inherent the full constructed meaning and intension of the participants.
Additionally, the results are limited by the sample. Concerning the farmers, information
about the number of beneficiaries living in the command area of the irrigation scheme and the
number of members in the cooperatives differ a lot between 38 and 220 households in Menti and 59
and 240 in Gurumbaba. The only available list to select the sample is from the ARDO from 2007 and
contains the household heads. Other household members are not documented and can therefore
not be addressed by the survey. This limitation is minimized, as the focus groups address also
spouses and youth. Information about changes of household heads because of death, illness or
migration are neither available. As the access is very difficult due to poor infrastructure and
hierarchical social structures, the DA´s contact the farmers and scheduled the interviews. Coming to
the point of conducting the interviews, sometimes different farmers than the one that were selected
appeared. The researcher has therefore only little control in this process. Moreover, the list contains
only those farmers who own land and not the one who rent land in the command area. Experts say
there is no difference in livelihood strategies or vulnerabilities. Concerning the sample of the
institutional members and experts, SWHISA and partly the GTZ acted as a gatekeeper and built
contacts. Issue like accessibility and time, but also the knowledge, interest and network of the
gatekeeper decide on the choice of informants.
Finally, it has to be recognized that the researcher is a white young female student. In a
country like Ethiopia with a traditional and hierarchical social structure and a long dependency of
36
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
international aid, institutional members are usually men that know the international discourse and
sometimes have certain vested interests in a conversation. In the rural areas with the farmers, the
presence of white people causes high expectations that may also have an impact on the given
information.
37
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 4
Research context
4.1 Introduction
In Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), agriculture forms the basis of most of the continent’s economies,
providing about 60% of all employment. Especially in the last ten years, agricultural production has
not kept up with the population growth. Consequently, at the end of the 1990s, 30 countries in SSA
had over 20% of their population undernourished, rising to 35% in the 18 worse affected countries of
which Ethiopia is one of them. In terms of absolute numbers, between 1997–99 200 million people in
the world were malnourished, with 194 million of these people living in SSA. The food gap estimated
at 17 million tons in 2000 was filled by imports (14.2 million tons) and food aid (2.8 million tons) at a
cost of US$18.7 billion. In 2001 close to 30 million people required food emergencies due to
droughts, floods and civil strife (Tefesse 2003). Looking at predictions made in the context of climate
change, SSA may face increasing temperature, rainfall variations, extreme weather conditions and a
shift of seasons (IPCC report 2007) which demand adaptation strategies of all stakeholders.
Additionally, political and socio-economic instability makes SSA most vulnerable to climate change.
Development of the agricultural sector in SSA is therefore seen as central for combating hunger,
reducing poverty and generating economic growth through the reduction of food imports and the
boosting of exports. Ethiopia is not exceptional in the context of SSA as similar developments are
observed.
The following chapter provides background information about the situation in which the
study was conducted and gives an overview of the geographical, political, historical, social and
cultural context. It helps to assess the circumstances in which the concept of community
participation was introduced. As this research aims at understanding the role of farmers associations
in a specific local context, it is imperative to have a holistic view.
4.2 Research context
4.2.1 Research location
The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia is situated in East Africa at the Horn of Africa
between 30N and 150N latitudes and 330E and 480E longitude with a total area of 1,104,000 km2
(Factsheet 2010). 15% of the country is devoted to agriculture (Zegeye 1994:172). Ethiopia is a
landlocked state bordering Eritrea, Sudan, Kenya, Djibouti and Somalia. The country offers great
geographical diversity with altitudinal ranges from the highest peak at Ras Dashen 4,620 masl down
to the Afar depression around 110 mbsl. Much of the country consists of high plateaus and mountain
ranges. Altitude is one of the dominant factors influencing the climate and vegetation of the country.
Ethiopia is made up of nine regional states and two chartered cities, namely Addis Ababa and Dire38
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Dawa. This division was established by the Constitution in December 1994. The biggest regional state
is Amhara National Regional State (ANRS). It is situated at 90 to 130 45’N and 360 to 400 30` E and
occupies about one-sixth of the country (170,750 km2). The region is characterized by diverse
elevations with the lowest point at about 600 masl and the highest at 4,620 masl. The highest peak of
the country, Ras Dashen and the source of the world’s longest river, the Blue Nile, are found in this
region.
The Lake Tana watershed (LTW) is situated in the ANRS within the upper course of the Blue
Nile River Basin. Geographically located between latitude 10°58` – 12°47`N and longitude 36°45`38°14`E, the watershed consists of 347 kebeles, and 21 woredas (districts) in four administrative
zones of the ANRS (see annex). The watershed has a total land surface area of approximately 15,000
km2 of which about 55% is under cultivation. Water bodies, grassland, shrub-land and natural forest
cover approximately 21%, 10%, 9% and 0.4% of the total area of the watershed, respectively (ARNS
et al 2008).
One of the 21 woredas in LTW is West Belisa where the case study was conducted. According
to the local information office in the woreda capital Arbaya, West Belisa has a total area of 127,777
ha. 9.4 % of this total land is forest area and 5.4% is grazing land. 95% of total population of 169,769
people lives in rural areas and from agriculture. 50% of the woreda landscape is plain, 10% are
mountains and 40% is a hilly area. Generally speaking the inhabitants documented an improvement
of living conditions since the socialist military regime was toppled by the Ethiopian People's
Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) in 1991 (for further explanations see section 4.2.2).
According to the local information office, the development can primarily be seen at an increased
number of health centres, schools and better economic conditions for small entrepreneurs. Before
1991, West Belisa was a conflict area where the Derg regime had all the control over social, political
and economic life.
4.2.2 Historical and political context
Unique among African countries, the ancient Ethiopian monarchy maintained its freedom from
colonial rule with the exception of the 1936-41 Italian occupation. The country´s history is coined by
independency and a highly centralized system of authority and administration. Emperor Menelik II
(1883-1913) defeated the country against the Italian invasion in the late 1880s and modernized
Ethiopia. He secured Ethiopia's admission to the League of Nations in 1923 and built a railway from
Djibouti to Dire Dawa. His friendship with Russia brought military and civil support to the country and
one of his greatest achievements was the treaty with Italy which ensured him absolute sovereign
independency in 1896. Menelik´s successor Haile Selassi governed the country from 1916 to 1974 but
was interrupted by the Italian invasion. The formally established Italian Empire built large
39
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
infrastructure throughout Ethiopia. In 1941 it was destroyed by the British and Allied forces and Haile
Selassi returned to his throne. His reign was characterized by modernization attempts like an
education system and a long lasting conflict with Eritrea. The cornerstones of his policy can be
described as the centralization of administration in both political and fiscal dimensions. With his
legislative measures, meaning the provincial administration decree 1942 and the two imperial orders
1943, he established the basis for the provincial administration and the central bureaucracy of
today´s age (Zewde 1994).
In 1974 a military junta, the Derg, deposed Emperor Haile Selassie and therefore the
Imperialism and established a socialist state. Following this socialist revolution, Ethiopia was involved
in two wars, one against Somali and one against Eritrea. The Derg regime was characterized by acts
of repression against opposition forces and their sympathizers inside the country. The political
repression reached its zenith in 1977 with the declaration of the Red Terror which meant that people
either support the revolutionary motherland or got killed (Mberu 2006). Until the early 1990s,
Ethiopia was one of Africa’s largest producers of refugees (Bariagaber 1995).
1973-74 the country suffered a national famine from which an estimated 250,000 people
died (Kidane 1989). Following, three major droughts (1977-78, 1987-1988, and 1993-1994) and an
even larger catastrophic national famine in 1984-1985 in which more than a million people died,
occupied the country (ibid). As part of its response to the famines, the Derg regime introduced a
national resettlement and villagization program intended to bring dispersed rural farmers from dry
areas in the north into concentrated farming cooperatives, mostly in Western Ethiopia (Mberu 2006:
511). Kloos (1990) estimated that the 1984-85 resettlement program resulted in the movement of
about 600,000 drought victims from northern and central Ethiopia to the western part of the
country. This controversial resettlement program intensified the food crisis by not only interfering in
agricultural production but also disrupting social relations (Cohen and Isaksson 1987).
In 1991 the socialist military regime was toppled by a coalition of rebel forces, the Ethiopian
People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), who is still in power today. Since becoming the
authority, the new political party EPRDF has promoted a policy of ethnic federalism as a form of
democratization of Ethiopian society and they established largely ethnic-based territorial units. The
politics of ethnicity have thus become the defining feature of governance, meaning access to power
and resources, development, and management of public affairs. In addition, the country has been
undergoing a major transformation from a centrally planned to a market-oriented economy (Mberu
2006: 512-513). Scholars argue that the post revolution land reforms and the new socioeconomic
structures emerging from the societal reorganization appear to have inhibited rural-urban migration
(Rafiq and Hailemariam 1987).
40
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Introducing community participation in this socio-political and historical context leads to an
additional complex societal transformation. To understand development processes in Ethiopia, this
complex historical and political context has to be taken into account. Only by recognizing and
addressing current reorganization and societal transformations, interventions can have positive
outcomes.
4.2.3 Land Tenure
Historically, three land tenure systems existed under the three distinct political regimes
which were described in the former section: the feudal system of the pre-1975 period, the state
ownership of the socialist system in the 1975-91 period and the semi-liberal and market-oriented
system since 1991 (Ahmet et al 2002, Jemma 2004). The major form of ownership in the feudal
system, especially in the North of Ethiopia, was a type of communal system known as rist.
Rist was hereditary, inalienable and inviolable. Ever family member, both male and female, of an
individual founder was entitled to a share and individuals had the right of access and use of family
land. However, the land remained the property of the descent group which sometimes was also the
church. The individual was not the owner (Jemma 2004). The years of feudal rule under successive
Emperors created a land system that consigned most farmers to continuous serfdom – tilling the land
either as share croppers with or providing indentured labour for their respective landlords. Most of
the landlords lived in cities and urban areas, occasionally visiting their rural property to collect rent
and tribute. This system of tenure can be blamed for perpetuating inequity and inefficiency, including
being the major obstacle for the development of the agricultural sector and the country as a whole
(Okoth-Ogendo 2007).
Following the overthrow of the imperial regime of Emperor Hail Selassie by the Derg 1974,
radical rural land reforms consisting of the transfer of ownership of land to the state were initiated
throughout Ethiopia. Proclamations show that the government nationalized rural land without
compensation, abolished tenancy, forbade the hiring of wage labour on private farms, ordered all
commercial farms to remain under state control and granted each peasant family “possessory rights”
(Okoth-Ogendo 2007:7) to a plot of up to ten hectares. The socialist government ordered the
redistribution of holdings above that ceiling to other small holders. The purpose of these reforms was
to redistribute rural land to cultivators. Proclamation No. 31 called Public Ownership of Rural Land
(1975) abolished in its Article 4 private ownership in land and outlawed any transfer of interest
therein by sale, lease, mortgages, or similar means. The implementation of that proclamation was
executed through a “land-to-the-tiller” (Okoth-Ogendo 2007:7) program led by the peasant
associations that were established for that purpose. The major concern of those reforms was
consequently to address issues of gross inequity and inequality inherent in the feudal system by
41
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
providing universal access to land to the farming population. However, critics of the Derg Regime
argue that not only their reforms fail to address the problems related to efficiency, but it actually
created new ones, meaning insecurity of tenure and diminution of farm size that hindered the
development of the agricultural sector.
With the seizure of power by the EPRDF, a wide range of reforms were initiated with the
purpose of radical change. Land systems were meant to be more liberal and market oriented (Ahmet
et al 2002). Despite these initiatives, the land system does not provide farmers robust tenure
security. The institutional setting was reformed, thus Killils are now responsible for land
administration and their jurisdiction but within the Federal legal framework, meaning that any law
issued by them has to conform to Federal law (Rahmato 2008: 140). Land is here defined as the
property of the people but is administrated on their behalf by the state and peasant farmers have
only use rights over plots that they have in their possession.
As this issue is highly relevant for the opportunity structures for farmers participating in natural
resource management, the current tenure system is analyzed more detailed in chapter 5.2.
4.2.4 Agriculture and environmental conditions
Ethiopia's agricultural and environmental conditions are not exceptional in the context of
SSA. The country´s economy is based on agriculture, accounting for 45% of GDP, and 85% of total
employment. The cultivated area in Ethiopia covers about 10.7 million ha (2002), of which 10 million
ha is arable land and 0.7 million ha permanent crops. In 1999, 83% of rural households cultivated less
than 2 ha per household and 52% less than 1 ha. The total area covered by woody vegetation is
estimated at 14.6 million ha, or 11.7% of the country. 3.8% is classified as unutilizable and 18.7% as
unproductive land (Zegeye 1994: 172-173). The main agricultural products are cereals, especially tef,
pulses, coffee, oilseed, cotton, sugarcane and potatoes, but also cattle, sheep, goats and fish. Coffee
is the largest export commodity for Ethiopia, drawing in 60-70% of foreign exchange earnings
(Factbook 2010).
Land degradation has been a concern in Ethiopia for many years. Soil erosion, nutrition
depletion and deforestation are common problems and have an immense impact on the productivity
and consequently on people´s livelihoods (Zegeye 1994, Rahmato 1994). Nyssen et al. (2004) indicate
that the stagnation of agricultural technology and lack of agricultural intensification in the Ethiopian
highlands is the origin of present land and resource degradation. This degradation in turn becomes
the underlying root of poverty.
Loss of arable land due to soil erosion is a widespread phenomenon in the Ethiopian
highlands, which account for about 45% of Ethiopia’s total land area and about 66% of the total land
area of ANRS. Statistics state that Ethiopia loses two billion tons of fertile soil every year, of which 1.1
42
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
billion (58%) is in the ANRS (ANRS et al. 2008). The potential threat of land degradation to the
country’s fragile economy and food security has been emphasized by several publications (e.g.
Wright and Adamseged 1986; Hurni 1988; MNREP 1994; Abegaz Gizachew 1995; Kappel 1996; BoA
1997; NEC 1997; FEC 1998). The reason is that e.g. in ANRS about 90% of the population lives in the
highlands and 90% of the regularly cropped land is found there. The annual loss of cultivated land in
ANRS, mainly infertile land abandoned, was estimated to be about 6,365 ha in the year 2000 and
could reach 62,716 ha by the year 2025 (ANRS et al. 2008). These losses occur despite the fact that
crop land is actually expanding into grazing areas and other marginal zones which shows that the
rate of loss is greater than the areas gained. Due to erosive rainfall, deforestation and resulting
sparse land cover, some estimates give the annual gross soil loss in vulnerable parts of the LTW as
high as 230 tonnes/ha (ibdi.).
Loss of fertility is manifested through using dung and crop residues as household fuels and
animal feeds, low use of chemical fertilizers, declining uncultivated periods, soil and organic matter
burning and soil erosion (Desta et al. 2000). Even though the farming system in the highlands of
Amhara is mixed crop–livestock, nutrient flows between the two are predominantly one sided with
feeding of crop residues to livestock but little or no dung being returned to the soil. Additionally,
continuous cultivation of a farmland with inadequate application of organic as well as inorganic
fertilizer results in soil fertility depletion. Due to the shortage of farmland driven by population
growth, the termination of traditional fallowing and cereal-legume crop rotation also contributes to
nutrition depletion and crop diversity losses.
A shortage of improved crop production technologies, lack of demonstrations and up scaling
services and inadequate seed supply has enforced farmers to open new cropland by clearing natural
forestlands and intruding on grazing lands (ANRS et al. 2008). This practice has increased soil erosion
through deforestation and overgrazing. The rain-fed, low-input crop production system requires
extensive areas for cultivation and the population increase has thus triggered cultivation of marginal
lands. Furthermore, the traditional open access grazing system has led to severe degradation of
grazing lands in LTW (ibid). Surface soil compaction reduces infiltration of rainfall into the soil, and
increases surface runoff. A degraded soil structure impairs the capacity of the soil to store rainwater
for subsequent use for growth of forage species. In this regard, in areas where pastures are under
communal property regimes, the risk of overgrazing is particularly acute.
In LTW, population growth has resulted in a substantial reduction in land holdings and this
again has led to intrusion into communal grazing and marginal lands for cultivation. Meanwhile,
livestock numbers have increased which led to overstocking those areas. Livestock production, which
accounts for 40% of the average household income, is thus reduced and farmers’ incomes decline
correspondingly (ibid).
43
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The impacts of change in land use is reflected in the peak flows and average annual runoff:
the tragic 2006 floods that affected parts of Ethiopia have been naturally perceived by many as being
an outcome of higher rainfall/runoff. Flooding in the past used to occur at long intervals with limited
casualties. The IPCC report 2007 states, that climate change will shorten the intervals significantly
which has already been observed. Before 1996, the Fogera plains of the LTW were never flooded on
a significant scale. Since then, seven flooding incidences have been experienced. Especially the rainy
season flooding in 2006 was unique in many respects. The wave of floods hit not only traditionally
inundated areas of the country, but also new areas where floods were hardly experienced before
(ANRS et al. 2008).
These figures indicate the seriousness of land degradation and the urgency of undertaking
counteractive measures. The major causes of land degradation include deforestation, overgrazing
and unsustainable agricultural practices. It is the main threat in sustainable use of natural resources
in the LTW, both in affecting the lives of the rural poor and damaging the ecosystem integrity and
therefore the biodiversity resources. As the watershed depends heavily on rainfed agriculture, rural
livelihoods and food security are highly vulnerable to climate variability such as shifts in growing
season conditions. A review of climatic history indicates that drought occurs every 3-5 years in some
parts of the country and every 6-8 years in the whole of Ethiopia. It causes severe losses under
rainfed agriculture.
Even though Ethiopia is endowed with a substantial amount of water resources and the
potential of the drainage system is with twelve river basins quite high, the surface water resource
potential is only poorly developed. Water scarcity is perceived at many places due to unreliable
rainfall, multiplicity of competing uses, degradation of sources and catchments. It threatens food
security, energy production, sanitation and environmental integrity and therefore there are wateruse conflicts between sectors of the economy (Tafesse 2008, FAO 2008). Looking at Ethiopia in the
context of other countries in SSA, the artificial storage capacity (43 m3/c) is relatively low in
comparison with numbers from e.g. South Africa (750 m3/c). That is why the creation of additional
water storage to meet greater water variability over the year and within regions was identified as
one policy target to increase national food security
Most of the rivers in Ethiopia are seasonal and about 70% of the total runoff is obtained
during the period June-August. Dry season flow originates from springs which provide base flows for
small-scale irrigation. Various sources give different estimates of irrigated area, but recent sources
indicate that the area equipped for irrigation was nearly 290,000 ha in 2001, which is 11% of the
economical irrigation potential of 2.7 million ha (ibid). In ARNS almost 70.000 ha are irrigated (FAO
2010). LTW has about 250,200 ha of potentially irrigable land but only 4% is actually realized.
Currently about 10,000 ha are irrigated, representing just over 1% of the cultivated area of the
44
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
watershed (ANRS et al. 2008). Field assessments in small-scale irrigation projects indicate that some
irrigation schemes are not operating to their full potential and some are not functional at all due to
factors related to shortage of water, damaged structures, and poor water management (FAO 2008).
Again, Ethiopia is not exceptional in this respect, looking at the situation in SSA. Out of a total arable
land of about 874 million hectares (ha), the current area under managed water and land
development totals 12.6 million ha, or 3.7 % of the surface area of SSA (Tafesse 2003). In spite of this
potential, and the demand for more dependable sources of water, the development of irrigation has
not picked up. Furthermore, existing irrigation farms operate at sub-optimal levels (ibid). Due to the
low extent of irrigation most of the food, as well as cash crops is produced using a single, unreliable
rainfall season. This situation aggravates land degradation by obliging farmers to expand their
cropland to marginal lands in order to produce adequate amount of grain for their subsistence.
This section shows the necessity and the urgency of sustainable resource management. The
challenge of breaking the poverty-environment trap and initiating sustainable intensification requires
measures that confer short-term benefits to the poor while conserving the resource base. Only by
improving the natural resource base food production can be increased and the need for external
food supplies can be decreased.
4.2.5 Socio-economic conditions
Ethiopia is the second most populous country in Sub-Saharan Africa with a current estimate
of 85 million people and an annual growth rate of about 2.3% (Factbook 2010). Similarly, ANRS with a
total population of 19.63 million and an annual growth rate of 2.73%, is the second populous regional
state in Ethiopia. Whereas the inhabitants in Ethiopia doubled from 11,8 million in 1900 to 23,6
million in 1960 in 60 years, it took only 28 years to double again to 43,3 million in 1988 (Minas 2008).
The population density is now as high as 66 inhabitants/km2, but varies from 7 inhabitants/km2 in
Afar in the northeast to 114 inhabitants/km2 in Southern Region in the southwest of the country
(FAO 2008). LTW was home to 2.5 million people in 2005 (49.2% female; 50.8% male) and accounted
for 12.7% of the total population of the ANRS. The watershed is one of the most populated areas in
the region, with an average family size of 4.9 persons per household and a population density of 158
persons/km2 (ARNS 2008). The major cause for the rapid population growth was the high total
fertility rate, which was about three times the replacement rate and thus the highest in SSA (Minas
2008: 23). With an increase in size and growth of population, the carrying capacity of the
environment decreases. Rudimentary technologies and techniques of land exploitation that were
applied to meet the needs were environmentally destructive.
Out of 89% of the total population of ANRS living in rural areas, 27% are youth. Country wide
those aged 65% and over comprised only 4.6% (Minas 2008: 24). About 47% of the youth population
45
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
in rural areas is landless (ANRS et al. 2008). Off-farm activities as livelihood strategies are very limited
and underdeveloped in the watershed due to – among other reasons - a lack of access to credit and
rural financial services (ibid). As a result, the landless rural youth has very limited alternatives to
abusing the natural resource base in order to survive.
In 2009, 38.7% Ethiopians lived below the national poverty line (FAO 2008). Especially food
insecurity, as a result of persistent drought among other reasons, has been normality for a long
period. Even during good years, the survival of some 4-6 million people depends on international
food assistance (ibid). Currently, the population of chronically food insecure people is estimated at 8
million (Negatu 2008: 12). In 2002, only about 22% of the population had access to improved
drinking water sources, going from 81% in the urban areas down to only 11% in the rural areas.
Sanitation coverage is only 6%, differing from 19% of the urban population to 4% of the rural
population. The infant mortality rate was 114 per 1,000 life births in 2002 and the under-5 mortality
rate was 171 per 1,000 children (FAO 2008). The primary health service coverage both in ANRS and
LTW is about 55%. Considerable numbers of people living in the watershed are affected by HIV/AIDS
and malaria. The trend of HIV/AIDS prevalence in ANRS is reported as 5.8% (2002), 6.1% (2003), 6.5%
(2004) and 6.7% (2005) (ANRS et al. 2008). Indirectly, this situation contributes to land degradation
through deteriorating household income and assets, because an HIV/AIDS and malaria infected
population is less productive and income is used primarily for medical treatment.
In terms of infrastructure, the total road network of ARNS is about 5,950 km, implying a
regional road density of almost 37 km per 1,000 km2 (ibid). Many people have to travel long distances
to reach main roads and find transport. The rural road network in LTW reflects the regional condition
and can be considered as a limiting factor to development in the area. A poor road network
contributes to low productivity since it limits the use of external inputs by farmers. It also constrains
efficient agricultural marketing.
Concerning gender issues, women are heavily involved in agricultural production through
supplying labour for various agricultural activities and making important farm management
decisions. It is thus important that actions that deal with sustainable land management problems of
rural communities are aware of this central role of women. Although the government is determined
to solve gender problems, only 35% of civil servants are women (ibid). Furthermore, they face
various gender-inequality related problems such as long distances to travel to collect firewood and
water due to lack of improved technology, shortage of resources and inadequate infrastructure
(ibid).
The socio-economic figures show the existing challenges and constrains for the
implementation of a participatory approach. As the study aims at assessing the role and the potential
of famers associations as a coping strategy, this context has to be taken into account.
46
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
4.2.6 Decentralization, Community Participation and Institutions
Decentralization and people´s participation are the major elements of the Ethiopian
Constitution. ”States shall be organized at the state and Woreda level. State Parliament, may, while
organizing its administration, include other administrative hierarchies. Sufficient power shall be given
to organs at a lower level to allow for direct popular participation” (Ethiopian Constitution, Chapter
5, Art. 50 1995) The Ethiopian administrative hierarchy is the following: Federal Government
(Ministries), nine regional governments (Bureaus), zonal government (Departements), woreda
(Offices) and kebele. Politically, the constitution provides wide executive and legislative powers to
each region and even ensures their right to secession. Administratively, part of the country’s civil
service was assigned to the sub-national levels, to which they now report and are held accountable.
Fiscally, the power of revenue generation lies predominantly with the federal government, with
financial transfers from the central administration to the various regions given formally as untied
block grants. Regions can allocate resources from their revenue to provide public services to the
residents in their jurisdiction (Spielmann et al 2008).
ARNS, as one of the regions, is divided into 11 administrative zones (with Bahir Dar the
capital forming a special zone), 110 woredas of which 7 are classified as urban, and 3051 kebeles,
formerly known as Peasant Associations (Desta et al 2000). Originally, Peasant Associations (PAs)
were established in 1975 by the Derg regime to administer the land reform. It was an attempt to
introduce indigenous democracy and genuine representations of peasant interests. PAs were elected
to administer land distribution in a traditional system of collective responsibility and had local courts
to arbitrate in disputes and adjudicate minor offences (Pausewang et al 2002). Thus, farmer had the
control over their local resources. However, in 1977 the Derg reorganized the PAs radically and
centralized the administration of local resources and decision-making in the hands of the military
government. In the Proclamation of 1992, the EPRDF established the electoral structures and
regulations, which instituted electoral commissions on regional, zonal, woreda and kebele level
(Harbeson 1998). The kebele level was inherited from the PAs of the Derg regime and appeared to
ensure EPRDF´s control of the rural population (Pausewang et al 2002). Norwegian election observers
found indications of peasant apathy in the decentralized systems, meaning “a form of popular
resistance towards the non-competitive election and the derailed democratization process” (Tronvoll
and Aadland 1995: 2). In order to achieve the intended democratic structure, the Norwegian election
report 1995 concluded that Ethiopia has to “depoliticize its administrative infrastructure, so that the
peasants may develop trust in the system of government and a sense of “ownership” and
“belongingness” to the state” (Tronvoll and Aadland 1995: 1-3). The basic idea behind that reminds
on Chambers hypothesis that decentralization and trust support each other (for further explanation
see chapter 2.2.4)
47
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Furthermore, it is important to note that while fiscal decentralization and decentralized
delivery of public services have proceeded in Ethiopia, political power still remains highly centralized
in the hands of the EPRDF. Moreover, party structures at the local level have a significant influence
on farmers’ access to resources, such as agricultural inputs and credit (Spielmann et al 2008).
Thus, the main question that remains is whether decentralization has brought government
priorities and investments into closer alignment with community priorities. Dom and Mussa
(2006a,b) reviewed the implementation of decentralization policy in Ethiopia, focusing on Amhara,
and came to the following conclusion: There are significant regional differences in the pace and
effectiveness of decentralization. In ARNS, public officials such as agricultural extension agents (DAs)
remain primarily accountable to planning targets set at the woreda level. Woreda officials, in turn,
remain constrained by the regional state’s planning targets. Upward accountability thus takes priority
over accountability to grassroots needs.
However, today the kebele administration plays a decisive role in terms of local governance.
This role includes identifying problems; designing areas of intervention and for community action;
developing regulations related to resource use; identifying target groups for food aid, food for work,
rehabilitation schemes and credit; regulating tax collection and credit repayments; ensuring security;
and resolving other minor legal issues. The current administrative set-up is the result of a
reorganization that started in 1995 to reduce the number of woredas and kebeles. This
reorganization may have affected the ability of local governments to reach and implement
agreements. Following the international discourse of community participation, decentralization in
Ethiopia is still under its way. Regional and lower level administrative organs are becoming more
autonomous in aspects related to natural resource management, especially irrigation development
and water management. Since the late 1990s institutions provide policies and strategies that stress
the importance of community participation and decentralization of power. “To ensure sustainability
by empowering and supporting natural resources users’ at all levels to be in charge of their own
development efforts, and thus to develop, use and manage their natural, human-made and cultural
resources respectively”(Protection Authority and MEDAC 1996). Following the international
consensus, the strategy that is currently developed is to establish WUAs before projects are
implemented and to strengthen them through both training and involvement in the process so that
they can take over the responsibility of operation and water management when construction is
completed.
Additionally, a variety of informal governance systems co-exist with these formal systems
throughout Ethiopia. Traditional systems operate at the community level to adjudicate over conflict,
to pool resources for production (e.g. work- or labour-sharing groups, oxen or land-sharing groups),
to provide financial service, to provide social welfare services like funerals or to carry out traditional
48
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
and religious functions. The church plays an important role in the economic and social life. For
example, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, Ethiopian Evangelical Church (Mekane Yesus) and Baptist
Mission Ethiopia have ongoing agricultural development projects in about 62 kebeles in ARNS. The
projects include integrated rural development, food security, and soil and water conservation (Desta
et al 2000).
Historically, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has a long tradition and powerful role in the
country. As one of the few pre-colonial Christian churches, it counts to the oldest in sub-Saharan
Africa (SSA) and is deeply rooted in the Ethiopian history, social life and ethics. Indeed, it played a
significant role in the state formation in the Ethiopian highlands and resisted several missionaries and
power-holders who tried to introduce the Catholic, Protestant or Islamic religion to the country
(Abbink 2003). Today, about half of Ethiopians are Christian-orthodox and the majority actually lives
their faith. Especially in rural areas, it has a major influence on social and professional life. One of the
most distinct examples for its significant role is the practise of Christian Orthodox holidays. According
to the church, 17 of the 30 days in a month1 are religious holidays on which people are not supposed
to work. In the Ethiopian highlands where 90% of the population is Christian orthodox and farmer,
this has a noteworthy impact on communal life and the economy.
1
th
The Ethiopian calendar has 13 months, the first 12 months consists of 30 days. The 13 month has 5 or 6
days, depending on leap year.
49
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 5
Analysis of findings
5.1 Introduction
Legal Framework
Coming to the main chapter of this thesis, the analysis of the findings gives
answers to the research questions (for further explanation see chapter 3.2). The
gathered data is examined within the theoretical framework and the
Understanding of
participation
information about the research context, using a five step analysis2 (see figure 5).
At first, the legal framework and therefore the endowments of households are
analyzed. Together with the assessment of the understanding of participation
Main risks of
households
among stakeholders in a second step, it builds the opportunity structure for the
participation of farmers. To assess the potential of farmer associations as a
Respond of FAs to
risks
coping strategy, it is necessary to explore the main risks that households face,
which is done in a third step. Following, the forth step of analysis looks at how
Influencing factors
FAs minimize the risks and therefore reduce vulnerabilities. Coming from a
constructivist perspective, the sense of ownership among farmers is hereby
essential as it shows how informants construct the meaning and explain the
Conclusion
function of FAs. In a last step of analysis, the influencing factors for the success
or failure of these associations are examined.
Figure 5: Five step analysis
5.2 Constitutional and legislative framework for common natural resource management
Legal Framework
Looking at the constitutional and legislative framework for natural resource
management, land tenure is the central issue. Depending on the land tenure
system, farmers have certain endowments (for further explanation see chapter 2.2.5) that
determine the amount of firewood, food, water and grazing land they can access. Land has always
been an issue of great contention in Ethiopia and is coined by tenure insecurity for peasants (for
further explanation see chapter 4.2.3). The underlying basis for land policy is article 40 “The Right to
Property” of the constitution which makes access for rural people a right and promises each
Ethiopian sufficient land for housing. However, the power of the state is clearly manifested.
“The right of every Ethiopian citizen to own private property is guaranteed. Unless the law
provides otherwise in the public interest, this right shall include the right to use and enjoy
property, and, in so far as it does not violate the rights of others, to sell, transfer by succession or
by any other means. [...] The right to own rural and urban land as well as natural resources
belongs only to the state and the people. Land is an inalienable common property of the nations,
nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia. [...] The State may, in the public interest and in particular, to
2
This five step analysis follows the sub-research questions that are defined in chapter 3.2
50
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
ensure that Ethiopian citizens shall have an equal opportunity to gain a living and an equal access
to housing, determine the size of ownership of both rural and urban land. [...]The State may
expropriate property in the public interest in accordance with procedures that are laid down by
law. Such procedure must, as a minimum requirement, ensure that the parties concerned are
given an open forum in which whether the proposed expropriation satisfies the purposes of the
proposed public interest and that such interest cannot be satisfied by other means.” (Ethiopian
Constitution 1995)
At present, Killils are responsible for the administration of land on behalf of the farmers. Article 40
indicates that the state holds the major decision-making power in his hands which shows that land is
in effect state property and farmers have the use right over plots. Constrains for individual farmers
are public interests. Killils laws stipulate that, carrying a number of obligations for peasant land
holders: the land holder is, or willing to be, engaged in farming for his/ her livelihood; the land holder
is resident in the given rural kebele (variations between Killils); the land is farmed on a regular basis
and not left unused for any length of time (variations between Killils); the holder takes “proper care”
of his/ her land. Moreover, in line with the constitution, the Killils determine the size of land that a
household is allowed to possess in order to ensure social equity (Rahmato 2008).
In contrast to the Derg regime, the current land policy allows limited forms of land transfers,
e.g. inheritance or renting. This practice has been observed in the research areas. Further, land
redistributions are restrained under the present government, compared with earlier times. However,
article 40 showed that the framework sets the conditions for peasants and allows expropriation in
the public interest. Indeed with the payment of compensation, grounded on the principle of social
equity (Ethiopian Constitution 1995), but still under the authority of the state. Generally speaking,
the disposition and management of natural resources is dispersed among many actors. As already
noted, rights of ownership are basically vested in the state, Federal and Killil. Lower level public
authorities, like woreda and kebele administrations have regulatory responsibilities and the authority
to alienate and expropriate land for a variety of purposes. Further, these local offices, together with
the Killil, decide over planning and carrying out land distributions (Proclamation 455 in 2005, Article
3/1). The Bureaus on regional level also come into the process of decision-making, when it concerns
agricultural and environmental protection (BoARD, EPLAUA) and water resource development
(BoWRD). The communities themselves have the right to manage the land, which essentially means
decisions about farming strategies, cropping plans, utilization of farm inputs, as well as land
transactions under the conditions set by the law.
In order to promote greater tenure security, land certification and registration have been
introduced in 2003. By the end of 2006 more than half of the rural households in the country had
51
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
their lands registered and received user certificates (Rahmato 2008: 144). Also in West Belisa,
farmers were aware of this certificate, explaining the importance of it in order to claim their
ownership of the plot. “We all have a certificate for our land. It has our names, sometimes a photo
and a fingerprint of the household head on it. With this certificate, the government knows how much
land we have and cannot take it away without compensation.” (Committee member, participant
observation, Gurumbaba). Nevertheless, farmers´ position within the governance system is weak.
Concluding, with regard to land tenure system in Ethiopia, peasant households live in
insecurity deriving from the limited endowments that the Constitution provides. Even though
farmers have formally the right to access and own land to sustain their livelihoods, their position
within the hierarchy is weak. Increasing population pressure and a scarcity of resources may amplify
this situation. The opportunity structure for households to participate in resource management is
clearly defined by the legal framework as it determines the roles of stakeholders and allocates the
responsibilities. The legal framework therefore creates a hierarchy in the governance system of
natural resources that contradicts the concept of community participation.
5.3 Understanding of community participation
Understanding of
participation
If farmers’ endowments and opportunities for participation are limited, the
understanding of the concept among the power-holders influences its
implementation. The power-holders are the different governmental bodies as it was
shown in the former section. Their way of implementing development activities determine the role
of farmers in this process.
To assess the understanding of participation among stakeholders in natural resource
management the conceptual model of Arnstein is used (for further explanation see chapter 2.2.4,
figure 1). According to the author, participation occurs in degrees, varying between the extremes
manipulation and citizen control. Generally speaking, in the studied areas participation is understood
as informing and consultation. Following Arnstein, outsider professionals in the governance of
natural resources allow the farmers to hear and to have a voice. “Communities are the user of
development processes. They report their problems to us and follow our advices in order to solve
them.” (Woreda expert West Belisa). Similar attitudes are observed on kebele level. “My role is to
solve the problems that farmers have. They must therefore share their ideas with me and follow my
advices. Participation of farmers is important, because we all have to work together to do
maintenance and construction work, help the older people in the community and solve our problems.”
(Kebele Manager Menti) Even though farmers are informed and consulted during development
processes, they lack the power to ensure that their views are heeded by the outsider professionals.
Especially the kebele and woreda experts understand participation as taking part in construction and
maintenance work, using agricultural practises and “increasing the economical situation of the
52
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
community by doing any work that the experts advise” (DA Gurumbaba). In contrary to the
international discourse, outsider professionals who work directly with communities do not
understand participation as sharing power in decision-making processes. “No, the farmers are not
involved in decision-making processes because this is not their role. Their role is to follow the advices
of the experts. Like students. The experts are the teachers.“ (DA Menti)
Looking at the regional level, the governmental officials in the bureaus are aware of the
international discourse and claim that it is important to involve farmers in decision-making processes
and distribute the power among all stakeholders. However, most experts see practical constrains.
“Communities should participate in all phases of a development processes, starting from problem
identifying. It would be more sustainable, if they were already involved in planning. But most farmers
are not aware of the environmental situation and do not have the knowledge to fully participate.”
(IADP expert, BoARD) “The involvement of farmers must start with the need assessment. But a lack of
money and time as well as only little education of farmers limit full participation.” (ESEPP expert
EPLAUA)
During interviews, the informants often stressed the fact that they work according to
international accepted principles and in line with the governmental strategies. “Development
processes in our country must be implemented by a bottom-up approach because it is more
sustainable. We work in line with the eight international accepted principles which you can see
everywhere in the building on the doors. [...] Ethiopian institutions must be accountable for the
government and national oriented.” (CPA expert, regional level) It can be concluded that experts in
regional bureaus are educated according to the international discourse and adopt it for their work.
However, they do not interpret it from their own local context but are aware of the gap.
Having assessed the understanding of participation as informing and consultation, it is essential
to point out that informing citizens of their rights, responsibilities and options can be the most
important first step toward legitimate citizen participation. However, in the studied areas the focus is
often a one-way flow of information from officials to farmers with limited opportunities for feedback
and power for negotiation. Consulting communities without combining it with other mechanisms
does not ensure that opinions and ideas are taken into account which is necessary for full
empowerment. Under these conditions, particularly when information is provided at a late stage in
planning, people have little prospect to influence the program designed for their benefit. Households
are hereby primarily perceived as statistical abstractions and participation is measured by how many
come to meetings. “The problem is that farmers sometimes do not want to participate. They do not
come to meetings.” (Kebele Manager Menti) “Farmers often come too late to meetings. Sometimes it
is very difficult to work with them together.” (DA Gurumbaba)
53
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
In order to reach a higher level in the ladder of participation and working in partnerships as the
discourse suggests, communication skills and the willingness of all stakeholders to work on one level
would be necessary. The interviews showed that this is the crucial issue on all levels of resource
governance in LTW. “The biggest challenge that I face working with farmers is that they keep holding
to their own interest.” (Woreda expert West Belisa) “Farmers do not believe the experts. So it is very
difficult for me to do my work.” (DA Menti, kebele level) “Communities become resistant and do not
follow the advices. The experts need a lot of patience and it takes time.” (EPLAUA expert, regional
level)
However, one can think that this causes conflicts between farmers on the one side and outsider
professionals on the other side. In fact, the findings rather indicate that farmers obey their role and
have a similar understanding of their own position. “Our knowledge is not enough and not good. We
need training and support from the experts. So by following their advices, we participate.“ (FFG Men
and Committee Gurumbaba) “Our role is to contribute labour. The experts bring the knowledge and
the materials. We can do construction and maintenance work but everything else we do not know.“
(FFG Men and Committee Menti) The statements show the little confidence of farmers that makes
them accepting the hierarchy in the resource management. The understanding of participation is
consequently consistent among the different levels of governance. According to the international
discourse, these findings can be defined as power relations that constrain full participation. However,
power relations in its core derive from a certain sense of authority. This sense of authority is
manifested in a culture as it is determined by the morality which influences the way of thinking in a
society. Cultural norms and values affect people´s behaviour, identity and self-perception and
understanding of authority. The key question should therefore concern the source of the morality in
order to gain insights about local conditions that are central in the implementation phase of the
participatory approach. Building up on the findings from section 5.2, the legal framework may be one
of the sources as the understanding of participation is in line with the hierarchy determined by the
constitution. Introducing farmer associations as an instrument for participatory resource
management in the described context, they can only maintain and reflect the status quo of decisionmaking procedures, power relations and governance systems. They are introduced in a defined
system and the actors do not aim for reorganizing this system.
Concluding, the understanding of participation among stakeholders reflects a strong sense of
authority manifested in the society and accords with the hierarchy that is established by the legal
framework. According to this, FAs do not give more voice to the farmers but reflect the existing
governance system. The understanding of participation can be defined as informing and consulting
and therefore does not meet the intensions and understandings of the international discourse.
54
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
5.4 Main risks for households and communities
Main risks of
households
After analyzing the opportunity structures for farmer associations (FAs), the main
risks for households are assessed in order to see in a next step how FAs can help to
reduce them. By applying the sustainable livelihood approach, livelihood strategies and
vulnerabilities in Gurumbaba and Menti are explored. The five assets – natural, financial, human,
physical and social capital – were considered in terms of their availability, accessibility, usage and
sustainability, based on the perception of the household heads. By analyzing the capitals, the agency,
meaning the capacity of farmers to make meaningful choices, is measured (for further explanations
see chapter 2.2.4). Generally speaking, the two studied areas have a limited natural capital, little
financial capital which is however very heterogenic, high human capital in terms of quantity but low
considering the education, little physical capital and a relatively high social capital which is however a
lot higher in Menti. Comparing the households in the command areas of the two irrigation schemes,
they resemble in many ways but differ in some details which indicates that assumptions of
stakeholders that the situation in Menti is better than in Gurumbaba, is partly true. This needs
further explanations and proofs, based on the gathered data and is provided in the following.
5.4.1 Natural capital
Natural capital, in the context of this study, includes land, water for irrigation, wood, livestock
and grazing land. In table 1 it is indicated that the food for the majority of households derives from
Always
Often
Sometimes
N
Ever
Grow
food in
%
94.7
2.6
2.6
0
Work
for food
in %
2.6
1.3
3.9
92.1
Food as
gift in %
0
0
6.6
93.4
Buy
food in
%
2.6
3.9
22.4
71.1
own fields. Livelihood strategies are consequently
based on natural capital and especially the access of
productive
land
is
essential
for
sustainable
livelihoods. Looking at the availability of land for
farmers, the vulnerability of households becomes
Table 1: Exchange entitlement mapping of food
obvious. The size of total land per household is usually
between 1.1 and 1.5 ha, indicating a population of many
small-holders in which the stress for land increases with
the number of household members. Graph 1 shows that
in Gurumbaba the situation is more severe than in Menti,
because here 86.8% of the 38 informants have less than
1.5ha whereas in Menti it is 68.4%. This is also in the
perceptions of the farmers. One of the women in the
focus group discussion argued that “the major problem is
the shortage of land” (FFG Women Menti).
55
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The increasing stress for soil also explains the following findings which are visualized in graph
2 and 3. The productivity of the soil, according to the farmer’s perceptions, is generally poor but
slightly better in Menti. Compared to ten years ago, this difference becomes clearer, as the tendancy
in Gurumbaba is negative and in Menti rather positive. It can be speculated that the lower soil
productivity in Gurumbaba is caused by the higher population pressure on the land.
Looking at the availability of water for irrigation, 18.4% of the household heads say it is always
enough, 50% say it is usually enough and 27.6% think that the amount of water that the household
can access to irrigate their land is sometimes enough for the household (see Annex 3.1). However,
this does not allow the conclusion that there is enough water for irrigation and therefore drought is
not a risk. Graph 4 and 5 show that only a small percentage of the total land is actually under
irrigation and that the land per household that depends on rain tends to be bigger.
The household´s susceptibility to climate variations, particularly rainfall variations is consequently
high and represents the main risk. This is also in the perceptions of the farmers. In focus groups all
target groups – men, women, youth and cooperative committee members – mention drought and
climate conditions as one of their major problems. In line
with that, 65.8% believe that their income depends on
the weather conditions (see Annex 3.2).
Apart from land and water, also wood is an essential
natural asset for the households as they use it as
56
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
building material for e.g. shelter as well as for fuel. Especially in Gurumbaba, people perceive a lack
of wood for sustaining their livelihoods. Graph 6 visualizes this shortage and especially the severe
situation in the command area of the modern irrigation scheme. Considering that only 6.6% of the
informants generates income with the sale of wood and only 2.6% buys their fuel wood, the asset is
not a trade product (see Annex 3.3). However, during participant observation women were always
seen selling wood on the market. According to the informants, the main source of fuel is animal dung
and communal trees (see table 2). It implicit two risks for the sustainability of
natural resources of households.
Firstly, if the majority of people use
communal trees, management becomes a
necessity
in
order
to
avoid
overexploitation. The dependency on this
wood
represents
a
high
risk
and
vulnerability for communities if the
Source of fuel
Number of households in %
Wood from own trees
Wood from communal trees
Bought wood
Animal dung
I don´t know
No fuel in the household
56.6
69.7
2.6
88.2
1.3
1.3
Table 2: Source of fuel
sufficiency is not ensured in a long-term. The high usage of animal dung may already be an indicator
for the severe situation. Secondly, the fact that 88.2% uses animal dung for fuel (see Annex 3.4) may
also cause the low productivity of land, which was discussed earlier, and therefore holds vulnerability
in itself. If animal dung is used as fuel, it is not used as organic fertilizer that would increase the
productivity of the soil. Again, the described situation may also indicate that the consequences of
this practice can already be observed today.
Additionally to crops, livelihood strategies rely on animal husbandry as selling livestock is the
major source of income. 92.1% of the informants own livestock, 3 cattle, 1 goat, 2 sheep, 1 donkey
and 3 chicken on average (see annex 3.5). The livestock´s food supply and medicine care constitute
two of the biggest expenditures for the farmers. However, crop residuals are the major source of
food for the animals, representing 75% in rain and 89.8% in dry season (see Annex 3.6). 60.6% of
households do not own grazing land that may feed their livestock and only 44.7% of them have
access to communal grazing land (see Annex 3.7). However, after crop residuals, communal grazing
land is the second common source of animal food. That indicates again a necessity of management
structures in order to ensure sustainable usage. Regarding the high dependency of livelihoods on
livestock and grazing land and discovering anyhow the shortage of the former, a high vulnerability of
households is apparent. They seem to be exposed to the worsen situation and do not have the
capabilities to reduce this risk as there are no alternatives so far.
Considering the natural capital of the households in Gurumbaba and Menti in general, it can
be summarized that there is a high dependency but a low sustainability of the assets which results
57
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
from the exposure to weather conditions and environmental changes. Without internal capabilities
or alternatives, this makes livelihoods very vulnerable.
5.4.2 Financial capital
Regarding the financial capital, the two study areas differ a lot. In the context of this study,
financial capital includes income, access to credit and savings. Table 3 shows the large variations
between Gurumbaba and Menti. Whereas the average income per year in Gurumbaba is about 2703
Birr (ca. 142 Euro), it is almost three times higher in Menti. Also the highest income that informants
Location
Minimum
Maximum
Average
in the traditional scheme mention is
Gurumbaba
Menti
0 Birr
150 Birr
12 000 Birr
25 000 Birr
2703,24 Birr
7360,76 Birr
more than two times higher than in the
Table 3: Income variations in Menti and Gurumbaba
modern scheme. However, the table
also shows that the asset varies a lot among households looking at the minimum and maximum
earnings, indicating that the population is very heterogeneous. Variations are also high within one
household, looking at the changes throughout the year. 76.3% of the informants say that the income
varies from month to month (see Annex 3.8). December till January and June (European calendar) are
the main months of income.
Considering the asset in a long-term by comparing it with the income ten years ago, farmers
tend to have less profit today. However, graph 7 shows, how also this finding differs a lot between
Menti and Gurumbaba. Whereas in the modern
scheme some household heads assess their income
today as more than ten years ago, in the traditional
scheme many households have a relatively stable
earning. According to the informants, the asset mainly
depends on the weather conditions, however also the
market conditions and their own work influence the
amount of money. Taking into account what was
mentioned before, that the main source of income is the sale of grain and livestock and therefore
depends on natural capital, livelihoods are reasonably vulnerable in this respect. Interesting in this
context is the perception among farmers expressed in the survey that external support plays no role
for the amount of money they earn. This is contradictory to the findings conducted in the focus
groups. In the discussions, the informants usually saw the responsibility of improving the situation in
terms of agricultural practices and environmental conditions on the site of the government, namely
the experts of ARDO and Kebele Administration. From the farmer´s perspective, they do not have
“enough knowledge and enough money” (FFG Men and Committee Menti, Gurumbaba) to change
the situation. It is somehow contradictory to the data of the survey because apparently the
beneficiaries of the irrigation schemes assess the opportunities of external support networks to
58
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
improve the situation as promising but do not think that it influences their income at all. Concerning
the influence of the collective work of the community on the households’ financial capital,
informants assess it as almost none in the survey (see Annex 3.9). This is very interesting because in
the focus groups, especially the men were aware of the fact, that collective maintenance work such
as canal cleaning is the major task of the communities when it comes to irrigation management.
Taking the former finding into account that farmers see the responsibilities to improve the situation
on the government side, it can be concluded that they do not see any relation between the actual
situation and the management or organizational structures. The attitude also shows the low
confidence and the lack of ownership that farmers feel when it comes to adaptation and alteration of
livelihood strategies. The problem is consequently a lack of awareness. Famers do not see the
complexity and therefore their agency which would enable them to actively participate in a process
that reduces vulnerabilities.
Summarizing, the financial capital is limited but varies a lot on communal as well as on
household level. Farmers are hereby exposed to external risks as it highly depends on natural capital.
5.4.3 Human capital
Considering the human capital of households in Gurumbaba and Menti, the average number of
household members is 6.3 people (see Annex 3.10). As table 4 shows, the largest age group is the 1019 year olds and only a minority of people is above 51. The majority of people are below 20.
Table 4: Distribution of household members according to their age
0-4 years
Sum
65
5-9 years
10-19 years
94
20-29 years
127
30-39 years
63
40-49 years
53
above 50 years
43
31
This distribution is representative for the region as section 4.2.5 mentioned a high percentage of
youth in ARNS. It indicates a low life expectancy and entails a lack of skilled and experienced people.
By this, it represents vulnerability for households in terms
of human capital. Usually everyone contributes labour to
sustain the livelihood which is visualized in graph 8. The
only reason for not contributing labour is the age.
Considering the findings from table 4, it is obvious that
being too young is a more common explanation than being
too old.
Even
though
58.67% of the informants say that they have health
problems in the household (see graph 9), sickness is
usually not a reason for not contributing labour. The
59
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
major health problems that household face are malaria, eye diseases and stomach problems.
Apart from the number of household members, their age and health, also their education is
an important asset, when talking about human capital. Hereby, a relevant difference between
Gurumbaba and Menti can be observed. Generally speaking, the level of education is very low. Table
5 shows that if people have an education, it is mostly on primary level. The number of people that
visited a high school or a college is rather small. However, in Menti it is a multiple of the number in
Gurumbaba.
Level of education
Primary
High School
College
University level
Informal education
Gurumbaba
55
7
1
0
5
Menti
73
14
4
0
4
Total
128
21
5
0
9
Table 5: Distribution of people according to their level of education in Menti
and Gurumbaba
Informal education, meaning church
schools,
plays
a
fairly
little
role
considering the importance of religion
and the Orthodox Church in the region
(for further explanation see 4.2.6).
The low level of education can be
explained by the lack of schools in the
command areas of the irrigation schemes. Even though primary schools are available and free for all
children, books and uniforms have to be paid by the families. During participant observation,
stakeholders mentioned that this is often a reason for not sending children to school. Additionally,
stakeholders claim that many children who start primary school do not finish the second grade.
Conversations with teachers and a school visit in Menti pointed out the low quality of the material, a
lack of equipment in the classrooms and the poor education that the teachers themselves received.
Teachers in Ethiopia complete the college in a one or two years program and are sent to any place in
the state where they graduated. Often a lack of teacher in rural areas obliges them to work under
difficult conditions that they have not chosen themselves.
Additionally, the accessibility of any further education than primary level is low. One high school
in the woreda capital Arbaya and colleges in cities like Gonda and Woreta force young people to
leave their homes in order to gain a higher level of education. This entails vulnerabilities for the
households in the rural areas as they rely on the manpower of every member. Further, the limited
financial capital constrains youth in living in towns.
It can be summarized that households have a high human capital in terms of quantity and
especially the number of youth is large. Still, a low level of education and little access to education
decrease the agency of people in the communities to manage and control the process of reducing
vulnerabilities.
5.4.4 Physical capital
Physical capital, in the context of this study, includes electricity, telephone, media, infrastructure,
shelter and drinking water. Generally speaking, physical capital is fairly low, but considering certain
60
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
assets, it is slightly higher in Menti. All households own a shelter. But none of them in the modern or
traditional irrigation scheme have access to electricity, television or telephone. The access to roads
and public transport is low even though distances are far. The only opportunity for public transport is
from the woreda capital Arbaya to the bigger towns like Addis Zemen, Gonda or Woreta and most
people do not see a need for using this. 51.31% of the informants estimate that the distance to the
next market is about 0-2 km. 27.63% say that the next market is more than 8 km from their home.
However, this differ a lot looking at Menti and Gurumbaba in comparison. Table 6 shows that the
distance between the home of the farmers and the next market tends to be smaller in Menti.
0-2 km
Location
2,1-5 km
5,1-8 km
more than 8 km
Total
Gurumbaba
13 (34.21%)
4
6
15 (39.47 %)
38
Menti
26 (68.42%)
5
0
6 (15.79%)
38
39 (51.31%)
9
6
21 (27.63%)
76
Total
Table 6: Distance to the next market in Menti and Gurumbaba
If distances are long and infrastructure poor, daily life activities can be a challenge for the
beneficiaries. Selling products which is the main source of income is constrained by available
transport means, manpower and weather. Especially women who are mainly responsible for market
activities are exposed to this and the table shows that the situation is more difficult in Gurumbaba.
The distance to the neighbor is usually 0 – 0.5 km. The access to media is with 58.1% for radio and
32.88% for newspaper moderately high, considering the poor infrastructure and low level of
education. Still 58.06% of the people who have access to a radio also use it. For the newspaper this is
true for only 24.59%. The percentages for Menti are in both cases clearly higher (see Annex 3.11).
The reason for not using radio or newspaper is the lack of money or no ability to read.
Considering drinking water, graph 10 shows that the majority
of households have 2-3 Jars per day at their disposal, which is
about 40 – 60 litres. However, the main source of drinking
water in Gurumbaba is the river. This may entail some risks
for the future as rivers became drier and rainfall decreased in
the last decades already. In Menti, the main source of water
is a bore well,
which indicates
a reliance on groundwater.
Looking at the distance to the next source of drinking
water, graph 11 indicates again a better situation in
Menti. Whereas here the majority of households access
a source that is about 0 – 0.5km from their home,
people in Gurumbaba do often walk more than 1 km.
61
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
To sum up, it can be said that the low physical capital does not lead to additional
vulnerabilities for the households, but makes livelihood strategies more difficult and complex. Due to
poor infrastructure, the lack of communication tools and electricity, the opportunities to reduce
existing risks and develop coping strategies, are limited.
5.4.5 Social capital
The last capital that is analyzed in the livelihood approach is the social capital. Talking about
farmer associations, this is a highly relevant issue. However, it is difficult to measure especially in a
structured interview. This study determined two indicators for social capital. One is the amount of
people who are a member3 of any institution and the second is the perception of farmers concerning
the support that they get from these institutions. The findings are represented in two tables. Table 7
illustrates the number of institutional members in Menti and Gurumbaba.
Institution membership of
Looking at the total numbers it can be
Gurumbaba
Menti
Irrigation Cooperative
30
32
concluded that communities
WUA
28
22
traditional irrigation scheme have a higher
School
13
25
social capital than in the modern.
Agricultural and Rural
12
31
4
13
grain mill, edir, ekube, the church and also
Health Centre
15
29
mass organizations like the women
Kebele Administration
15
21
assocociation the sense of belonging to
Amhara Credit and Saving
13
5
this network is higher than in Gurumbaba.
6
2
Grain Mill
20
30
administration and ARDO they are also
Edir
16
22
higher. In line with that, stakeholders
Ekube
4
4
often mention in informal discussions that
Mass organizations (Youth/
5
13
the cooperation between governmental
18
28
Other Association
0
0
No member of any institution
0
1
Development Office
Service Cooperative
Institute
Potable Water Committee
Women Associations)
Church
TOTAL
199
277
Table 7: Membership in institutions according to the perception of farmers in
Menti and Gurumbaba
in the
Especially in traditional networks like
Regarding the number for the kebele
organizations and the communities works
better in Menti as farmers are more open
to suggestions from experts, ask for help
and are more active. The fact that
informants in both command areas see
themselves as members of irrigation
cooperatives and water user associations indicates the confusion about the terminology that has
3
The term membership can be confusing at this point. In most of the institutions, community members can not
actually be a member as if they work for them or pay membership. However, the key issue is to see if they feel
like a member and have a sense of belonging.
62
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
been mentioned in chapter 1.5. According to the experts from SWHISA and also to some from ARDO,
no institution like the WUA formally exists. However, farmers mention them in group discussions and
in the structured interviews they claim to be a member of it.
Table 8 visualizes the existing support networks within the communities that informants
perceive in times of certain risks. Again, it is clearly noticeable that according to this indicator the
social capital in the traditional irrigation scheme is higher than in the modern one.
Type of risk
Drought
Type of support
Irrigation Cooperative
Gurumbaba
Menti
Health problems
Death of a
household member
Food insecurity
Gurumbaba
Gurumbaba
Gurumbaba
Menti
Menti
Menti
12
15
0
1
1
0
0
8
15
11
0
4
1
1
0
4
0
2
0
7
0
1
0
1
19
28
0
0
0
0
2
12
Service cooperative
1
7
0
6
0
2
1
11
Health Centre
0
0
30
34
0
0
0
0
Kebele Administration
7
9
2
8
5
2
3
10
Amhara Credit and Saving
Institute (ACSI)
12
10
0
1
0
0
3
12
Potable water committee
2
5
0
4
0
0
0
3
Grain Mill
4
0
0
2
2
18
0
0
Edir
3
0
0
1
14
25
0
0
Ekube
0
4
0
4
1
8
0
6
Mass organizations
2
5
0
5
1
8
0
10
Church
5
2
0
6
8
13
0
0
Friends and Relatives
6
4
1
11
15
19
5
13
Food Aid programme
7
13
0
0
0
0
17
17
95
155
33
94
48
97
31
107
Water User Association
School
Agricultural Development
Office
TOTAL
Table 8: Perception of support in times of crisis in Menti and Gurumbaba
63
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
The total number of households that say they get support of any institution is generally exceedingly
higher in Menti than in Gurumbaba. This can be noticed again at the traditional institutions, but it is
even more obvious when it comes to governmental organizations like ARDO, kebele administration
and ACSI. Concerning the IC and WUA the same problem as mentioned before appears. However,
farmers in Menti see more benefits or support as in Gurumbaba.
Looking at the reasons for being a member of institutions in general, people see here an
opportunity to benefit either in terms of material, knowledge or labour sharing. It can be concluded
that communities generally know the idea of having institutions to cope with situations, to increase
the profit or to get support in times of crises. However, the existing institutions have no expertise in
management and organization and the idea of managing water, wood, grazing land and land among
the community has not been included in the past. Even though the IC formally has the aim of a
sustainable resource management and the committee is responsible for its implementation, the
farmers do not have the agency because of a lack of education and capitals.
5.4.6 Conclusion
The analysis of the capitals according to the SLA showed the vulnerabilities of households. The
high dependency on natural capital which however has a low quality and limited quantity indicates
the defencelessness, insecurity and exposure to risk, shocks and stress of farmers in Gurumbaba and
Menti. The limited financial capital, the lack of skilled educated human capital and the low physical
capital in terms of infrastructure weaken internal coping capabilities and therefore lead to further
vulnerabilities. The partly high social capital shows that households generally use institutions and
communal work as a coping strategy. However, the idea of managing natural resources in terms of
determining access and usage for more sustainability is a new concept where farmers do not have
any knowledge and expertise. Therefore farmer associations (FAs) like cooperatives and WUA do not
derive from the communities but are rather given to farmers from outsider professionals. In order to
be a coping strategy, FAs have to minimize the risks that farmers face and consequently reduce
existing vulnerabilities. The following section is thus concerned with the overall question, how FAs
answer the challenges that households face and reduce their vulnerabilities.
5.5 Farmer associations as coping strategies
Respond of FAs to
risks
After analyzing the main risks of households, the forth step of analysis shows how
FAs respond to the challenges that farmers face and answers the question if and
how FAs minimize their vulnerabilities. By analyzing the sense of ownership among farmers and the
differences between members and non-members of FAs from informants´ perspective, it is
investigated how they are a coping strategy that helps sustaining livelihoods.
64
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
5.5.1 Sense of ownership among farmers
Looking at farmer associations as a mechanism of community participation from a constructivist
perspective, the sense of ownership is a key issue as it informs about how informants construct their
meaning and function. Generally speaking, the sense of ownership among farmers concerning the
management of their resources is rather low. Four indicators were used for this assessment:
perception about the importance of management structures and farmer associations, the benefits of
membership in farmer associations, the responsibilities for problem solving processes and changes,
and the contribution of farmers in the past and in the future.
Concerning the importance of management structures for natural resources, the farmers
concordantly agreed on the necessity to manage especially the water for irrigation to have more
production and “a better life” (FFG Men and Committee Menti). All informants claimed that the
current management system “is not good” and needs improvement. As suggestions they named e.g.
two-times-production per year, the application of fertilizer, usage of improved seeds, conservation
strategies or a gate that locks the irrigation canal in rainy season, which are rather agricultural
practises. Management tools or specific mechanisms were not mentioned. The existing irrigation
cooperative (IC), which was interchangeably called water user association (WUA), did not come up as
a strategy. After further questions, informants referred to activities of the WUA as methods for an
effective resource management, which are rather technical support. “The aim of the WUA is to
improve our lives and achieve economic growth. It helps us to use the water effectively, by cleaning
the canals.” (FFG Men and Committee Menti). “Because our canal is locked with soil, the aim of the
WUA is to clean the irrigation canal, so we can use the water and get two times production in a year.
[...]The advantage of being a member of the WUA, is to get support and training from the agricultural
office. [...] The WUA has a saving account. With this we can buy fertilizer and improved seeds. This is
the advantage of the WUA and leads to an effective water management.” (FFG Men and Committee
Gurumbaba) From the statements, it can be concluded that the presence of farmer associations is
not significantly important for a sustainable resource management system. This is closely connected
to the perception that they do not have any benefits from the association. “We do not have any
benefits from the WUA, so it is not important for us.” (FFG Women and Youth Gurumbaba) The
reason for the ineffectiveness is the lack of water. “If there is not enough water, we do not have any
benefits from the WUA. [...] But the advantage of the WUA is that we have hope for the future. If
there is enough water in the future, we can get more production.” (FFG Men and Committee
Gurumbaba). Female farmers in Menti claim, that “this year there was a shortage of rain and
therefore we did not have any benefits or profits from the WUA. But before, when there was enough
rain, we did.” (FFG Women Menti). Further they argue “today we are not satisfied with the WUA
because we need more training and more water to distribute among the farmers and we hope to get
65
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
this in the future.” (FFG Women Menti). Male farmers in Menti share this opinion, saying “the WUA is
not effective because there is a shortage of water.” (FFG Men and Committee Menti) and in line with
that the youth think that “if we have more production, we have benefits, but mostly this is not the
case.” (FFG Youth Menti). This attitude among all informants shows that from the perspective of
farmers the WUA/ IC is not a strategy to minimize the risks of the drought, it is rather one of the
outcomes if the situation improves. In fact, the central issues that informants associate with the
WUA are money and punishment. Thus, regarding the content of the by-law, farmers are above all
aware of the instruments for punishment, the amount of money they have to pay to be a member
and the hierarchical structure of the association. It indicates that this institution is rather a
cooperative, focusing on business not on management activities (for further explanation see chapter
1.5). However, the cooperatives do not seem to meet the needs of the farmers. One informant gets
very emotional, sharing his anger: “In the past, the committee told us, we get benefit if we pay money
to be a member of the WUA. But now, we do not get any benefits. We do not get any money. I want
my money back.” (FFG Youth and Women Gurumbaba). Nonetheless, according to all farmers they
see a purpose of having a WUA. “For the future it is good to have a WUA, because our purpose is to
clean the canals and to sow more crops. The WUA helps us.” (FFG Youth and Women Gurumbaba).
“The committee motivates us and helps us to do conservation work.” (FFG Youth Menti). It indicates
that the idea from the farmers’ point of view is sharing labour and experiences among the members
rather than coordinating and organizing the access and usage of resources.
Indeed the analysis shows that people in Gurumbaba and Menti are aware of the problematic
situation. Informants were asked for their perception about who has the responsibility to improve
this. Again, the answers were very similar as most of the informants argued that it is not the farmers
themselves who have to take action. Usually, the governmental institutions like the kebele
administration or ARDO were mentioned. “We do not have enough money to improve anything here.
But the government has. So they are responsible for that.” (FFG Men and Committee Gurumbaba)
“To solve our problems the government came last year just to look, but nothing happened. We have
no choice other than doing our duty. But if this duty [cleaning] is impossible it is above our capacities.
We do not have enough labour and money to do anything.” (FFG Committee Gurumbaba). Apart from
the money, farmers also think they are not capable because they are not educated enough. “The
governmental office is responsible to improve the situation because they have the knowledge. If we
get more training, we can do it in the future.” (FFG Men and Committee Menti). That shows the little
confident of farmers in themselves. “Our traditional knowledge is not enough. We need professional
advice from the experts because they have the modern agricultural practices that we need for
economic growth” (FFG Men and Committee Menti). It can be concluded that the low sense of
ownership that is expressed here, results from a very low self-esteem which may be the outcome of
66
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
a long period of top-down development activities. This goes in line with the findings in section 5.2
concerning the legal framework.
But additionally to the government, especially the youth and the committee members also see
the committee of the association responsible for changing the severe situation. “The leader of the
committee is responsible because he tells the community how to do better work. Also he is the one
who has to punish the ones who do not work hard.” (FFG Youth and Women Gurumbaba). “To
change our situation, the governmental institutions must give us material. We, as the Committee
must solve the problems, distribute the water, support people in cleaning canals and send reports to
the ARDO. But we also need the support of more people in the community. We do not have enough
working people.” (FFG Committee Gurumbaba) In line with that, the committee leader in Menti
points out that even though they are responsible, they need the support of the whole community to
achieve improvement. Taking the findings of the survey into account, people generally think that
under the condition of their hard work, they may change their lives to the positive within the next
five years. However, especially in Gurumbaba beneficiaries of the irrigation scheme have not noticed
any positive changes in the last ten years. In Menti, people saw, above all, the development in the
change of clothing as well as in the increase of educated children.
Interesting in this context is also the role of God and religion. In the survey, many informants say
that if God allows, they may get more production, more rain or better conditions in the future. In line
with that, farmers in the focus group discussions consider the decreased rainfall and the worsening
weather conditions as an action of God. The circumstances and their living conditions are God given
and as a result, they see the responsibility and the capability to change the situation also in God.
Religion and beliefs stop people from taking over responsibilities and having a sense of ownership for
the management of their resources.
The last indicator for the sense of ownership measured in this study is the contribution that
farmers made in the past to the management of resources and the farmer association, but also their
perception of what they can contribute in the future for a better management system. Hereby, the
findings from section 5.3 come into play, as the attitude of the experts influence the form of
community´s contributions. The last preceding paragraphs already indicate that farmers usually do
not take the initiative for actions and are hereby in accordance with the understanding of
participation of government officials on woreda and kebele level. The informants see their
contribution in construction work of the irrigation schemes and canal cleaning. Whereas in
Gurumbaba, the construction of the modern scheme happened ten years ago, it was in the planning
phase while this research took place. The farmers’ perception of their role is the same. Looking at
Gurumbaba, the opinions of members and committee members show the problem. “The only way
how we can contribute is cleaning the canals. We do not have more money and knowledge to do
67
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
anything else. The committee must solve problems with the support of ARDO.” (FFG Men and
Committee Gurumababa) Committee members argue: “During the construction, 10.000 people
worked with CO-SEARAR4. Today, we do not have so many people supporting us anymore. So we need
more members who contribute their labor.” (FFG Committee Gurumbaba) These two statements
show that within the community, no one perceives his own contribution and role decisive enough to
change the situation. The FA is not considered as an institution where all members work together to
achieve a sustainable management, but rather as a hierarchical system where responsibilities are
passed on.
In Menti, farmers have high expectations for the planned modern irrigation scheme. “With the
modern scheme, we will have two times production a year and achieve economic growth.” (FFG Men
and Committee Menti) They consider their contribution in building and cleaning activities. “The
government must plan the scheme and give the material. Together with SWHISA they give us the
knowledge on how to do the constructions. The community together will build the modern scheme
and therefore we are the owner of it. Later SWHISA will give us the knowledge on how to distribute
the water and maintain the canals.” (FFG Men and Committee Menti) The FA as an institution did not
play any role in this process.
Concluding, the findings show the little awareness of opportunities for own initiatives and
actions. A low self-confident stops people from participating in any other activities than construction
and cleaning work. It indicates a low sense of ownership as the informants apparently do not see any
benefits of the WUA/ IC and the major responsibility to improve the situation on the government
side. Linking this back to the findings from the first and second step of analysis (section 5.2 and 5.3),
farmers´ attitude conform with the existing governance and value system in the society. It shows that
from the perspective of the informants, FAs do not minimize the risks or vulnerabilities of
households.
5.5.2. Relation between members and non-members of farmer associations
This section follows up on the aspects of the former section, as the perception of benefits from
the associations among farmers is one of the key issues. It is based solely on the perceptions of the
informants and does not take objective measurements into account. Looking at differences between
members and non-members, apparently the WUA/ IC does not make any difference for the
livelihood strategy. “The members paid 25 Birr which non-members did not pay. But other than that,
we are all the same.” (FFG Male and Committee Menti) In Gurumbaba the situation is the same.
“Also non-members irrigate their land by using the irrigation scheme. They also clean the canals and
do communal work. We do not know the difference.“ (FFG Male and Committee Gurumbaba)
4
CO-SEARAR (Commission for Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental
Rehabilitation in Amhara Region) used to be a governmental institution that is now integrated in the BoWRD
68
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Another farmer adds that “the only difference between non-members and members is the saving
account of the association. As members can buy fertilizers, improved seeds and excise books, because
we have this saving account. But this is only in theory.” (FFG Male and Committee Gurumbaba). This
confirms the perception of having no benefits from the cooperative (for further explanation see
section 5.5.1).
Generally, the informants report a good relationship between members and non-members.
However, the committee of the cooperative in Menti pointed out that “we are all the same, as
everyone can legally access the water, cleans the canals and has to follow the bylaw. There is no
benefit if you are a member. But the non-members are backward people. We [the members] are
educated and understand the experts. That is the difference.” (FFG Committee Menti). This statement
clearly shows that the association is an institution that was introduced to the community by external
experts following a top-down approach. As one expert from the Tana Belese WME project puts it:
“We set up the watershed team [watershed user association] according to the watershed logic. But
practically, this does not always work, because of social and cultural conditions in the community. The
watershed logic e.g. entails equal gender division in the team. But women in our culture do not
participate in discussions. Also there is a lack of education and most farmers do not understand
watershed development.” (Expert interview Tana Belese WME).
5.5.3 Conclusion
Knowing that West Belisa is partly food insecure – 19.7% of the informants are beneficiaries of
the food aid program and all of them belong to the command area of Gurumbaba irrigation scheme
(see Annex 3.12) – and keeping in mind the findings of the analysis of endowments in section 5.2, the
entitlement mapping can partly be identified as a failure in production-based entitlement (for further
explanation see chapter 2.2.5). Natural capital is the main asset that households build their
livelihoods on and their sustainable management must be the focus of FAs in order to be a coping
strategy. However, according to the informants, this is not the case. Farmers believe that the
government authorities are responsible for initiating this development and perceive the FAs rather as
a labour sharing institution. Members and non-members have basically the same rights, benefits,
obligations and face the same challenges.
In line with the understanding of participation among kebele and woreda experts, FAs are an
instrument that organizes the beneficiaries in a way that outsider professionals can give instructions
and information to the farmers. The committee is the contact person for governmental and nongovernmental workers and provides a hierarchy that is necessary for implementing a management
system in this social and cultural context (for further explanation see chapter 4 and section 5.2).
Farmers do not consider the association as their instrument or tool as they do not see its usefulness.
They are not actively engaged but follow the rules of the institutions which conform with the sense
69
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
of authority in the society. An example for this is the bylaw that exists, but the farmers only know the
regulations concerning the punishment. The FA is rather a regulatory body than a coping strategy for
households that strengthen them and help them to sustain their livelihoods. They are part of the deal
in order to get external support.
Participant observations in Libo Kemkem, Gonda zuria and Dera woreda showed that the
situation in West Belisa is not exceptional. During field visits with the experts, farmers behaved like
learners, listening to the advices of the DA´s or institutional members. In focus groups with the
committee of the WUA, informants primarily see the new knowledge, the training and the additional
conservation practises that outsider professionals taught them as the major benefit and change.
Statements concerning the association are always closely connected to the development
organization that introduced the concept to the community and questions regarding e.g. the benefits
of the associations are rather interpreted as benefits of the project or the development organization.
However, the sense of ownership among farmers in these woredas appeared higher, as
responsibilities for taking actions against land and resource degradation were rather seen among the
people themselves. “We are responsible for initiating the change in our community, because we are
the owner of it. […] Because the GTZ gave us the knowledge, we can now pick up the activities
ourselves. In the future, our children will benefit from that. At the moment our benefit is the payment
that we get from the GTZ for doing conservation work.” (FFG Gonda zuria). “At the moment we have
only little benefits, but the project only just started a few months ago. For the future, we hope to get
a better life. But we as a whole community are responsible for that. So we have to work hard.” (FFG
Dera).
Concluding, FAs theoretically have to potential to minimize the risks and vulnerability of
households. Considering the legal framework (for further explanation see section 5.2) and the formal
aim of the different types (for further explanation see section 1.5) of associations, they can increase
productivity of land by introducing sustainable practises. Further, they have the potential to
distribute the resources equally to avoid overexploitation, increase social capital by providing a
platform for knowledge sharing and allow communities to develop their own activities and problem
solving strategies. However, farmers have a low sense of ownership and do not see this potential.
They obey the rules that are set by the governance system, focusing on governmental bodies as
authorities. Therefore, weak coordination from woreda experts, no actual regulations about
management activities in the bylaw and different understanding of the objective of cooperatives and
WUA hinder the conversion of the theoretical potential into practice.
70
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
5.6 Influencing factors of the success of farmer associations
Influencing factors
Bringing the findings from the preceding sections together, in the following the
factors that influence the success or failure of farmer associations are discussed. An
actual proof would go beyond the scope of this study. However, the comparative analysis gives some
insights and allows first speculations about the conditions that obtain an effective association which
farmers can use as a coping strategy.
Existing institutions in the communities indicate that farmers have traditional forms of organizing
themselves and accomplishing tasks through communal cooperation. However, these activities do
not include the management of natural resources. The idea to develop mechanisms that determine
the rights of farmers in terms of access and usage, that help to control their own property and that
give them the opportunity to develop adaptive livelihood strategies is a new concept in this sociocultural environment. Historically and formally, farmers are at the bottom of the hierarchy in the
governance system and are restricted in their agency. Therefore, a lack of skills, knowledge and
consequently agency influences the effectiveness of the institutions.
According to the literature, one of the limiting factors of participation in general is internal and
external power relations. Even though this study did not focus on gender issues and power relations
between experts and community members, it confirms the argument. Traditional structures entail a
higher importance for men than for women. In focus groups, women were rather quite, almost shy
and did not show any initiative or have an opinion. In general assembly meetings of the cooperatives,
women do not attend because “that is not their role” (FFG Women and Youth Gurumbaba) and also
the committee mainly consists of men. Further, women are only the head of the household, if the
man already passed away. It shows that on communal level, men are in a higher position in terms of
decision making and organizing livelihoods. However, the survey does not confirm this for internal
household structures. According to the informants, there is no clear labour division depending on the
gender. Women and men both work on the fields, are responsible for household work and are
involved in decision making processes. Participant observations indicated however that cleaning,
cooking, washing and children care is rather done by women, additionally to their agricultural
activities, whereas men are almost exclusively involved in agricultural work. These described gender
inequalities are part of the framework that builds the opportunity structures for empowerment.
Talking about external power relations between experts and community members, the
relationship can clearly be defined as teachers and students or speakers and listeners. As already
mentioned in section 5.3, the role of farmers in the understanding of woreda/ kebele experts is
defined as listening, learning and following the advices of the experts. The hierarchy and its
acceptance seem to be inherited from earlier times and may derive among others from the church
and existing governance systems also in the past. Obedience and compliance seem to be values that
71
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
are coined by the religion and part of the culture. It is the sense of authority that is part of the
culture, manifested in the morality. Implementing the participatory approach in this context, the
understanding of authority and participation are part of the local knowledge that is, according to the
discourse, acknowledged as a resource and must therefore be into account.
Generally speaking, internal and external power relations, understood as sense of authority, are
informal structures that hinder the implementation of the participatory approach as it is suggested
by the international discourse. In other words, if the concept is used according to the Western
understanding – meaning gender equality, dialogue between stakeholders across hierarchical levels,
empowerment of the poor – the traditional, cultural and social norms in the studied communities
constrain participation, because the Ethiopian sense for authority contradicts with the discourse of
cooperation and partnership (for further explanation see chapter 2.2.4).
Concerning farmer associations as a mechanism of participation their sense of authority stops
farmers from developing their own livelihood strategies. However, power relations itself do not make
farmer associations an ineffective institution. This study argues that power relations have no major
influence on the success or failure of farmer associations. Contradictory to the international
discourse but following the local understanding, cooperatives and WUA can be a successful coping
strategy if the outsider professionals would implement development processes accordingly and lead
the beneficiaries towards a sustainable resource management. This is the way, the local governance
system is created and therefore it has to be the starting point for participatory interventions.
Central to this argument is the understanding of participation among experts and government
officials as their behaviour, attitude and communication with the farmers decide on the activities
that community members participate in. In line with Chamber (for further explanation see chapter
2.2.4), this study argues that the outsider professionals determine the practical execution of the
theoretical discourse of participation in the local context. They can either strengthen or soften
existing informal structures and power relations in a community. In other words, depending of their
understanding of participation the outsider professions can change the sense of authority within a
society in a long-term. The central issues hereby are clearly skills, knowledge and experience of these
experts.
Further, on the side of the farmers, their agency and sense of ownership influences the outcome
of their associations. Generally speaking, both usually conform with the sense of authority. However,
whereas agency results from capitals and skills, the comparison between different woredas shows
that the sense of ownership can be influenced by earlier experiences of the community with external
support and by the kind of activities that farmers are involved in. In Gonda zuria and dera woreda,
where the sense of ownership was measured higher than in West Belisa (for further explanation see
chapter 5.5.1), the watershed development projects were both the first intervention of external
72
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
organizations and both communities were involved in the development of bylaws and regulations.
Additionally, in stakeholder discussions, DA´s and woreda experts pointed out that in food secure
areas, where people do not receive food aid, farmers are more engaged and active in development
projects. Comparing Menti and Gurumbaba, this difference in the attitude and willingness was
noticeable, as informants in Menti were very enthusiastic about the construction of the modern
irrigation scheme. In Gurumbaba the frustration and resignation of farmers about ineffective
irrigation practices result from management and maintenance failures in the last ten years and
mistakes during the construction of the modern scheme in 1999.
Concluding, graph 12 visualizes the influencing factors for successful farmer associations as a
mechanism for community participation in common natural resource management. It represents a
conceptual framework that results from the findings of this research and may serve as a departure
for further research.
Understanding
of
participation
among experts
Agency
of
farmers
Sense of
ownership
among
farmers
Sense of authority among
stakeholders
Earlier experiences of
communities with external
support
Graph 12: Conceptual framework for influencing factors of community
participation in Lake Tana Watershed, Ethiopia
73
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Chapter 6
Conclusion
6.1 Conclusion
The central research question to be answered in this empirical study was weather
farmer associations (FAs) are a coping strategy for households to sustain the
livelihoods and what factors influence their success. The five step analysis addressed the essential
issues and pointed out the complexity and necessity to consider the mechanism for participation
from a holistic and historical perspective.
From the first step of analysis to answer the overall research question can be concluded that
the constitutional and legislative framework for common natural resource management formally
allows farmers to own land and natural resources to sustain their livelihoods. However, this is rather
a right for access based on conditions set by the state. Farmers´ endowments are limited as the
government administrates natural resources, especially land, on their behalf and has the power to
decide over their property. For FAs to be a coping strategy, they would have to aim at enhancing
endowments for individuals which was not the case in the examined areas. The question remaining
at this point is why FAs do not take over this activity. The respond firstly derives from the historical
background. Centralized governments and weak farmer institutions under difficult environmental
conditions and a strong religious influence kept the farmers at the bottom of the Ethiopian hierarchy
for many centuries. Secondly and basically as a result of the former, the second step of analysis
concerning the understanding of community participation among stakeholders reveals the sense of
authority that determine the roles that stakeholders take over in the governance system.
As this study defines participation as a multi-dimension discourse which has to be
interpreted from a local context, this examination is the central step in order to meet the purpose of
this research. The overall interest was to understand the processes that happen in situations in which
the discourse of participation comes into practise. Indeed, the process through which the theoretical
concept is implemented can be determined as informing and consulting farmers about development
activities, using the conceptual model of Arnstein (1969). The stakeholders in the governance system
of natural resources have realized and understood the international discourse. However, implicated
terms like empowerment, acknowledgment of local knowledge, ownership and power sharing in
decision-making processes are not interpreted from, but adopted to the local context. That leads to a
gap between the theoretical concept and the actual practise that is taken place in the communities.
Government officials and development experts on regional level are aware of this gap.
However, especially government officials on kebele and woreda level who are directly working with
the communities understand the role of the farmers as users, listeners and students. Themselves
they see as the experts who teach and give advices as they are educated and therefore have the
knowledge that is needed. Interesting in this respect is the attitude of the farmers who have a low
74
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
self-confident and a strong sense of authority. From a historical perspective this is not surprising.
Farmers take over their responsibilities in resource management accordingly, defining the roles of
stakeholders in the same way. Consequently, their sense of ownership is low as they see the
authorities responsible for a sustainable governance system.
In a third step, the analysis of the main risks for the communities showed that households´
livelihoods are vulnerable and not yet sustainable managed. Households are exposed to external
shocks and stress and have a limited internal coping capability. As farmers heavily rely on natural
capital, FAs would have to strengthen it in order to be a coping strategy. However, the forth step of
analysis indicted that this is not the case in the examined areas. Members and non-members of FAs
basically have the same rights, benefits, responsibilities and challenges. Further, from the
perspective of the farmers, FAs are not the institution in charge for initiating development or
improving the situation. The responsibility is on the side of the government, who has the authority.
This trend can be seen as a result from the historical development, the legal framework and the
sense of authority that is inherited in the society.
Pulling all findings together and coming to the last step of analysis, the behaviour and
attitude of the one in power, the agency of the farmers and their sense of ownership influences the
success of FAs as a coping strategy to sustain farmers´ livelihoods. At present, FAs are not a coping
strategy to sustain the livelihoods but rather the connecting point between the farmers and outsider
professionals. They were introduced to the communities by external agencies and serve as a contact
person for the experts, a messenger for both sides and a regulative authority for farmers. From the
perspective of the informants, FAs are not an instrument to make them heard in the governance
system of natural resources or to have more control over owned endowments. Presently, existing
cooperatives or WUA are not used for improved entitlement mapping activities of households or as a
tool for a sustainable management system. However, looking at the social dynamics and existing
structures in the research areas, FAs can help farmers to sustain their livelihoods, if the kebele and
woreda experts are interested in community’s development, take over the responsibility for required
activities and have the necessary skills which include technical as well as communication skills. In a
long-term perspective, their behaviour, attitude and way of cooperating with the communities can
strengthen the farmers in their agency, increase their sense of ownership and consequently
empower them in the governance system of natural resources.
Finally, in order to develop mechanisms for the participatory approach, the discourse has to
be interpreted from the local context, taking the sense of authority into account that derives from
the historical development. Rather than acknowledging the local knowledge but facing practical
challenges during implementation, the outsider professionals have to define the local knowledge and
conditions and take them as starting point for their activities.
75
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
6.2 Reflections and recommendations
In line with Chambers, the conclusion suggests putting the power-holder in the centre of attention. In
order to achieve participation as it is understood in the international discourse, the outsider
professionals are the key for sustainable development. Kebele, woreda and regional officials have to
reflect their understanding of participation detached from the ideal discourse. The fifth D , meaning
doubt, that Chambers defines as a characteristic of the paradigm plays the central role as self-critical
awareness and doubting one’s perceptions and realities is essential for a higher degree of
participation on Arnstein´s ladder. The findings of this study indicate that participation cannot be
perceived as the only solution for development problems but neither solely as an instrument of the
confederacy of neoliberal actors. Development workers, especially the one working close with the
communities, have to overcome the orthodoxy or dogma and interpret participation from a local,
specific and empirical context. Only by defining the acknowledged “local conditions” at the beginning
of any development activity and taking that as a starting point, the process meets the ideology and
intension of the concept. Regarding this research, local conditions entail social dynamics and
structures like the sense of authority and historical grown centralized governance systems. The
discourse aims at changing this into a situation where dialog, partnership and cooperation can take
place and where every individual has the same opportunities. Frances Cleaver (2001) finds the same
gap between theoretical concept and practicability and asks “how then, do we deal with situations
where “local culture” is oppressive to certain people, where appeals to “tradition” run contrary to
modernizing impulses of development projects?” (Cleaver 2001: 47).
Thus, the discourse holds some contradictions. It demands development workers to esteem
the local conditions, the local people and the local knowledge and consider it as a resource. At the
same time, the aim of any development activity is the improvement and change of this situation. It is
an ambivalent relation between heteronomy and self-determination. The key question centres
therefore around the understanding of “the others” according to postcolonialism.
This study claims that challenges and problems in the field of development can be defined as
situational problems of intercultural understanding between outsider professionals and the locals.
External experts face the challenge of balancing two cultures and even overcome the differences in
order to work in partnerships. Looking at participation, further research is needed, combining two
research fields: development studies and intercultural communication studies. Both disciplines deal
with problems that result from differences between interacting people. Their common aim is to
develop strategies to overcome these differences in order to achieve a certain goal. Especially the
question concerning influencing factors for the success of participatory mechanisms requires further
studies and must be considered by using tools from both fields.
76
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Further research is needed in forms of ethnographical studies that reveal local understanding
of participation, social dynamics and diversities. From the perspective of anthropology of
development5, applied science can provide information about processes that happen in situations in
which the discourse of participation comes into practise.
Looking at politicians and practitioners in the governance system of natural resources in Lake
Tana Watershed, this research suggests putting themselves, their attitude and their way of
interacting with farmers in the focus of any activity. Capacity building in terms of communication
skills plays hereby a central role. The critical questioning of the understanding of participation,
interpreting the concept detached from the international discourse and trying to understand “the
others” have to be the starting point for a project. Political guidelines and strategies have to
overcome the orthodoxy and develop mechanisms and instruments that are applicable and
appropriate for the project site. What is appropriate and applicable can only be defined by taking
historical, political and social developments into account. For the studied areas, FAs may be a
possibility to come into contact with communities and build a forum where interaction can take
place. Under current conditions, politicians and practitioners have to be engaged and actively taking
over responsibility to sustain the livelihoods of the farmers and to make FAs effective. But to be an
effective coping strategy where farmers are actively developing strategies to manage and sustain
resources and livelihoods, kebele, woreda and regional officials have to redefine the roles of
stakeholders and both farmers and outsider professionals have to learn to work in partnerships.
5
This branch of anthropology arose in the 1980s when social change and development were considered from
an interdisciplinary perspective. It has an ethnographical view on interactions between institutions, norms,
actors and systems, who take place in development cooperation (Spies 2006)
77
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Bibliography
Abay, F./ Lemma, M./ O’Flynn, P./ Waters-Bayer, A. (2001): A challenge and an opportunity:
innovation by women farmers in Tigray, pp. 155-171 in: Reij, C./ Waters-Bayer, A. (2001): Farmer
Innovation in Africa, A source of inspiration for agricultural development, Earthscan publication,
London
Abbink, J. (2003): A bibliography on Christianity in Ethiopia, ASC Working paper 52/2003, Leiden
Ahmet, M.M.; Ehui, S.K.; Gebremedhin, B.; Benin, S.; Teklu, A. (2002): Evolution and technical
efficiency of land tenure systems in Ethiopia, International Livestock Research Institut, Working
Paper No. 39
Allison, E.H./ Ellis, F. (2001): The livelihoods approach and management of small-scale fisheries, in:
Marine Policy 25, pp. 377–388
Alsop, Ruth; Heinsohn, Nina (2005): Measuring Empowerment in Practice: Structuring Analysis and
Framing Indicators, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3510
Amstein S. R. (1969): A ladder of citizen participation, Journal of the American Planning Association,
pp. 217-224
Ashley C.; Carney D. (1999): Sustainable livelihoods: lessons from early experience. London:
Department for International Development
Amhara National Regional State (ARNS); Global Environment Facility (GEF); International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD) (2008): Community-Based Integrated Natural Resources
Management in the Lake Tana Watershed, Ethiopia, project document
Bariagaber, A. (1995): Linking Political Violence and Refugee Situations in the Horn of Africa: An
Empirical Approach. International Migration, 33(2): 209-234.
Beazley, H. and J. Ennew (2006) “Participatory Methods and Approaches: Tackling the Two
Tyrannies” in: Desai, V. and R.B. Potter (2006) Doing Development Research, London: Sage
BoA (Bureau of Agriculture). 1997. Regional Conservation Strategy, Volumes I–III. BoA, Bahir Dar,
Ethiopia. 254 pp.
Bryman, Alan (2008): Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press, Third Edition
Carney, D. (ed.) (1998) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods – What Contribution can we Make? London:
DFID
Castree/Braun (1998), quoted of: Irwin, Allan (2002): Sustainability as Social Challenge, in Sociology
and Environment, pp. 31-49
Chambers R. (1989): Editorial introduction: vulnerability, coping and policy. IDS Bulletin;20(2),pp. 1–7
Chambers, R. (1997): Whose Reality Counts, Putting the first last, Intermediate Technology
Publications London
78
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Cleaver, Frances (2001): Institutions, Agency and the Limitation of Participatory Approaches to
Development, in: Cook, Bill and Kothari, Uma: Participation. The new Tyranney? London, New York,
Zed Books, pp. 36-55
Cohen , J.M./ Isaksson, N.H. (1987): Villagization in the Arsi region of Ethiopia. Uppsala: Swedish
University of Agricultural Sciences.
Critchley W (1998): From Soil Conservation to sustainable land management: a new approach in
Africa, in: Critchley, W./ Versfeld, D./ Mollel, N. (1998): Sustainable land management: some
signposts for South Africa, The University of the North Press, pp. 9-31
Crotty, Michael (1998) The Foundation of Social Research: Meaning and Perspectives in the Research
Process , London: Sage
Cullen, Barry (1996): Community Development Fund Review Report. Combat Poverty Agency, Dublin
Davies S. (1996): Adaptable livelihoods coping with food insecurity in the Malian Sahel. London:
Macmillan Press
Desta, Lakew; Kassie, Menale; Benin, S. and Pender, J. (2000): Land degradation and strategies for
sustainable development in the Ethiopian highlands: Amhara Region, Socio-economics and Policy
Research Working Paper 32, International Livestock Research Institute and Amhara National Regional
State Bureau of Agriculture
Devereux, Stephen (2000)
Devereux, Stephen (2001): Sen’s Entitlement Approach: Critiques and Counter-critiques, Oxford
Development Studies, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2001, pp. 245-263
Dom, C. and M. Mussa (2006a) Review of Implementation of the Decentralisation Policy: A Sample
Survey in Four Sentinel Woredas of Tigray Region. Oxford: Mokoro, Ltd.
Dom, C. and M. Mussa (2006b) Review of Implementation of the Decentralisation Policy: A Sample
Survey in Six Woredas of Amhara Region. Oxford: Mokoro, Ltd
Ejigu, Tenaw (2009): Irrigation Water Management by Beneficiaries, Summary of Participatory
irrigation management practices, in: University of Bahir Dar; BoARD (2009): Proceedings of the
Workshop on Experiences in Household Water Harvesting and Water Management in Amhara, not
published, available through SWHISA
Eng, E./ Briscoe, J./ Cunningham, A. (1990): Participation from water projects on EPI, in: Soc. Sci.
Med. Vol. 30 No. 12, pp. 1349-1358
Escobar, A. (1995) Encountering Development, The Making and Unmaking of the Third World,
Princeton N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, Chapter 3: The Problematization of Poverty: The Tale of Three
Worlds,
pp.
21-55.
Factbook
(2010):
The
World
Factbook,
available
at:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/et.html
Ethiopian Constitution (1995): Federal Democratic Republic
http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Hornet/Ethiopian_Constitution.html
of Ethiopia,
available
at:
79
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Fabricius, C. (2004): The fundamentals of Community-based natural resource management, in:
Fabricius, C./ Koch, E./ Magome, H./ Turner, S. (2004): Rights, Resources and Rural Development,
Eathscan, London
FEC (French Engineering Consultants). 1998. Abay River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
Project (ARBIDMPP): Soil conservation. Consultant’s report to the Commission for Sustainable
Agriculture and Environmental Rehabilitation for Amhara Region (CoSAERAR), Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
108 pp.
Figueroa, Maria Elena; Kincaid, D. Lawrence; Rani, Manju; Lewis, Gary (2002): Communication for
Social Change: An Integrated Model for Measuring the Process and Its Outcomes, The
Communication for Social Change Working Paper Series: No.1
Food and Agriculture Organization; Jim Kundell (Topic Editor). 2008. "Water profile of Ethiopia." In:
Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. Cutler J. Cleveland (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Information
Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment). [First published in the Encyclopedia of
Earth March 15, 2007; Last revised August 24, 2008; Retrieved February 18, 2010].
<http://www.eoearth.org/article/Water_profile_of_Ethiopia>
Food and Agriculture Organization (2010): Global Map of Irrigation Areas, available at:
http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/irrigationmap/et/index.stm
Fraser, Evan D.G.; Dougill, Andrew J.;. Mabee, Warren E; Reed, Mark; McAlpine, Patrick (2005):
Bottom up and top down: Analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification
as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management, Journal of
Environmental Management 78 (2006) 114–127
Garande, T./ Dagg, S. (2005): Public Participation and Effective water governance at the local level: a
case study from a small under-developed area in Chile, in: Environment, Development and
Sustainability (2005) 7: 417–431
Gebre, A./ Getachew, D/ McCartney, M. (2008): Stakeholder Analysis of the Koga Irrigation and
Watershed Management Project, A Study Report Submitted to The International Water Management
Institute (IWMI)
Gebremedhin, Berhanu, Pender, John, Tesfay, Girmay (2003): Community natural resource
management: the case of woodlots in Northern Ethiopia, Environment and Development Economics
8: 129–148, Cambridge University Press
Gizachew, Abegaz (1995): Soil erosion assessment: Approaches, magnitude of the problem and issues
on policy and strategy development (Region 3). Paper presented at the Workshop on Regional
Natural Resources Management Potentials and Constraints, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, 11–13 January 1995.
Bureau of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. 9 pp.
Government of Ethiopia (1999): Poverty Situation in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Welfare Monitoring Unit,
Ministry of Economic Development and Cooperation (MEDAC)
Hajer (1995) quoted of: Irwin, Allan (2002): Sustainability as Social Challenge, in Sociology and
Environment, pp. 31-49
80
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Harbeson, John W. (1998): Elections and Democratization in Post-Mengistu Ethiopia, in: Kumar,
Krishna (1998): Postconflict elections, democratization, and international assistance, London
pp.111-133
Holmes-Watts, T./ Watts, S. (2008): Legal frameworks for and the practice of participatory natural
resource management in South Africa, in: Forest Policy and Economics 10, p. 435-443
Hurni H. 1988. Degradation and conservation of the resources in the Ethiopian highlands.
Mountain Research and Development 8(2/3):123–130.
Indexmundi (2009), available at: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=et&v=67
International Fund for Agricultural Development (1995): Common Property Resources and the rural
poor in Sub-Saharan Africa
Israr, S.M./ Islam, A. (2006): Good Governance and sustainability: A case study from Pakistan, in:
International Journal of Health Planning and Management 21, pp. 313-325
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007): IPCC TGACI Expert Meeting, Integrating Analysis
of Regional Climat Change and Response Options, Meeting report, Available at:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/supporting-material/tgica_reg-meet-fiji-2007.pdf
Jemma, Hussein (2004): The politics of land tenure in Ethiopian history: Experiences from the South,
Paper prepared for 6. world congress of rural sociology, Norway
Kabeer, N. (2001). Conflicts over Credit: Re-evaluating the Empowerment potential of Loans to
Women in Rural Bangladesh. World Development, vol. 29 (1), pp. 63-84.
Kassa, Habtemariam (2008): Agricultural Extension in Ethiopia: Historical Evolution, Relevant Policies
and Challenges, in: Assefa, Taye (ed.) (2008): Digest of Ethiopia´s National Policies, Strategies and
Programs, Forum for Social Studies, Addis Ababa, pp. 153-176
Kappel R. 1996. Economic analysis of soil conservation in Ethiopia: Issues and research perspectives.
University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland, in association with the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia. 29 pp.
Kidane, A. (1989): Demographic Consequences of the 1984-1985 Ethiopian Famine. Demography,
26(3): 515-522.
Kirkby, J./ O´Keefe, P./ Timberlake, L. (1995): Sustainable Development, Earthscan Publications,
London
Kleemeier, E (2000): The Impact of Participation on Sustainability: An Analysis of the Malawi Rural
Piped Scheme Program, in: World Development Vol. 28, No. 5, pp. 929-944
Kloos, H. (1990): Health aspects of resettlement in Ethiopia. Social Science & Medicine, 30(6): 643656
Kolavalli, S./ Brewer, J.D. (1999): Facilitating user participation in irrigation management, in:
Irrigation and Drainage Systems 13, pp. 249-273
Kumar, S. (2002): Does ‘‘Participation’’ in Common Pool Resource Management Help the Poor? A
Social Cost–Benefit Analysis of Joint Forest Management in Jharkhand, India; in: World Development
Vol. 30, No. 5, pp. 763–782
81
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Leach, M./ Mearns, R./ Scoones, I. (1999): Environmental Entitlements: Dynamics and Institutions in
Community-based natural resource management, in: World Development Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 225-247
Mearns, R. (1995): Institutions and natural resource management: Access to and control over
woodfuel in East Africa, in: Binns, T. (1995): People and Environment in Africa. John Wiley and Sons,
Chichester, pp. 103-114
Midgley, J., A. Hall, M. Hadriman and D. Narine (1986) Community Participation, Social Development
and the State, London and New York: Methuen
Minas, Getachew (2008): A Review of the National Population Policy of Ethopia, in: Assefa, Taye (ed.)
(2008): Digest of Ethiopia´s National Policies, Strategies and Programs, Forum for Social Studies,
Addis Ababa, pp. 23-46
Miruts, G./ Abay, F. (2001): Farmer-led experimentation in the drylands of Central Tigray, pp. 234247, in: Reij, C./ Waters-Bayer, A. (2001): Farmer Innovation in Africa, A source of inspiration for
agricultural development, Earthscan publication, London
MNREP (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection). 1994. Ethiopian Forestry
Action Program (EFAP). MNREP, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 168 pp.
Moser, C. (1998). ‘The Asset Vulnerability Framework: Reassessing Urban Poverty Reduction
Strategies’, World Development, vol. 26, no.1, pp. 1-19.
Narayan, D. (1995): The Contribution of People’s Participation: Evidence from 121 Rural Water
Supply Projects, Environmentally Sustainable Development Occasional Paper Series No. 1,
IBRD/World Bank: Washington.
NEC (Netherlands Engineering Consultants). 1997. Tekeze River Basin Integrated Development
Master Plan Project (TRBIDMPP): Land degradation and soil conservation. Second Phase Report,
Volume-ENV1. Consultant’s report to the Commission for Sustainable Agriculture and
Environmental Rehabilitation for Amhara Region (CoSAERAR), Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. 101pp.
Negatu, Workneh (2008): Food Security Stratefy and Productive Safety Net Program in Ethiopia, in:
Assefa, Taye (ed.) (2008): Digest of Ethiopia´s National Policies, Strategies and Programs, Forum for
Social Studies, Addis Ababa pp.1-22
Nicol, Alan (2000): Adopting a sustainable livelihood approach to water projects: implications for
policies and practice, Working Paper 133, Overseas Development Institute, London
Nyssen, J., Poesen, J., Moeyersons, J., Deckers, J., Haile, M., Lang, A. (2004): Human impact on the
environment in the Ethiopian and Eritrean highlands – a state of the art. Earth-Sci. Rev. 64 (3–4),
273–320.
Okoth-Ogendo, H.W.O. (2007): Documenting the Amhara Land Administraion Reform experience and
drawing lessons from the Tigray certification, Final Reports submitted under contract no. C31140
Decision No. 29/07 to the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency
Pausewang, Siegfried, Tronvoll, Kjetil, Aalen, Lovise (2002): Ethiopia since the Derg: A decade of
democratic pretension and performance, Zed Books Ltd, London
Peet, R. (1999): Theories of Development, Sociological, New York: Guilford
82
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Platt, Irene (1996): Review of Participatory monitoring and Evaluation. Report prepared for Concern
Worldwide, August.
Pretty, Jules (1995): Participatory Learning for Sustainable Agriculture in World Development, Vol.23,
No.8.
Pratten, D.T. (1997): Local Institutional Development and Relief in Ethiopia: A Kire-based Seed
Distribution Programme in North Wollo, in: Disasters 21(2), pp. 138-154
Proclamation 455 (2005): Expropriation of landholdings for public purposes and payment of
compensation, Federal Negarit Gazeta, Addis Abeba
Proclamation No. 31 (1975): Public Ownership of Rural Land, Addis Abeba
Protection Authority and MEDAC (1996): The federal policy of natural resources and environment
Rafiq M./ Hailemariam A. (1987): Some structural aspects of urbanization in Ethiopia. Genus. 43(34):183-204
Rahmato, Dessalegn (1999): Water Resource development in Ethiopia: Issues of Sustainability and
Participation, FORUM FOR SOCIAL STUDIES, Discussion Paper, Addis Abeba, available at:
http://www.ethiopians.com/Main_FSS_Paper1.htm#rfethio
Rahmato, Dessalegn (2008): Ethiopia: Agriculture Policy Review, in: Assefa, Taye (ed.) (2008): Digest
of Ethiopia´s National Policies, Strategies and Programs, Forum for Social Studies, Addis Ababa, pp.
129-152
Rakodi, C. (2002) A Livelihoods Approach - Conceptual Issues and Definitions, in: C. Rakodi and T.
Lloyd-Jones, Urban Livelihoods, a People-centred Approach to Reducing Poverty, Earthscan, London,
pp 3-22
Reij, C./ Waters-Bayer, A. (2001): Farmer Innov Said, E.E (1978): Orientalism, London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul
Sayer, A. (2001): For a critical Cultural Political Economy, Antipode. 33 (4), pp. 687-708
Scoones I. (1998): Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis. IDS Working Paper, No. 72,
Institute of Development Studies, Sussex, UK
Sharp, R. (1995): Organizing for Change: People Power and the Role of Institutions, in: Kirkby, J./
O´Keefe, P./ Timberlake, L. (1995): Sustainable Development, Earthscan Publications, London, pp.
309-327
Sen, A. (1981) Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation (Oxford, Clarendon
Press)
Spielmann, David J.; Cohen, Marc J.; Mogues Tewodaj (2008): Mobilizing Rural Institutions for
Sustainable Livelihoods and Equitable Development, A Case Study of Local Governance and
Smallholder Cooperatives in Ethiopia, International Food Policy Research Institute, Addis Ababa
83
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Spies, Eva (2006): Das Dogma der Partizipation, Interkulturelle Kontakte im Kontext der
Entwicklungszusammenarbeit in Niger, Köln, Mainzer Beiträge zur Afrikaforschung Band 20, Rüdiger
Köppe Verlag
Stocking, M. (1998): Conditions for Enhanced Cooperation between People and Institutions, in:
Blume, H.-P./ Eger, H. /Fleischhauer, E./ Hebel, A./ Reij, C./ Steiner, K.G. (1998): Towards Sustainable
Sylvester, C. (1999): Development studies and postcolonial studies: disparate tales of the ‚Third
World’, Third World Quarterly, 20(4), pp. 703-21
Tafesse, Mekuria (2003): Small-scale irrigation for food security in sub-Saharan Africa, Report and
recommendations of a CTA study visit, CTA Working Document Number 8031
Tafesse, Tesfaye (2008): A Review of Ethiopia´s Water Sector Policy, Strategy and Program, in: Assefa,
Taye (ed.) (2008): Digest of Ethiopia´s National Policies, Strategies and Programs, Forum for Social
Studies, Addis Ababa, pp. 313-336
Tronvoll, K. and Aadland, O. (1995): The Process of Democratization in Ethiopia; an Expression of
Popular Participation or Political Resistance? Oslo: Norwegian Institute of Human Rights, Human
Rights Report No. 5, pp. 33-47
Uphoff, Norman (_):Local Institutions and Participation for Sustainable, Gatekeeper Series Nr. 31,
Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods Programme, Development International Institute for
Environment and Development
United Nation (1981) in: Midgley, J., A. Hall, M. Hadriman and D. Narine (1986) Community
Participation, Social Development and the State, London and New York: Methuen
Vermillion, Douglas (1996): The Privatisation and Self Management of Irrigation. Final Report of
International Irrigation Management Institute, Sri Lanka
Wright C. and Yeshinegus Adamseged (1986): An assessment of the causes, severity, extent and
probable consequences of degradation on the Ethiopian highlands. FAO (Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations)/EHRS (Ethiopian Highlands Reclamation Study) Working Paper 3.
FAO/EHRS, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 59 pp.
World Commission of Environment and Development (1987): Brundtland Report, available at:
http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
World
Bank
(__):
Ethiopia:
Climate
Risk
Factsheet,
available
at:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRICA/Resources/Ethiopia_Country_Note.pdf
Young, R.J.C. (2003): Postcolonialism – A very short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Zegeye, Abebe (1994): Environmental Degradation, Population, Movement and War, in: Zegeye,
Abebe; Pausewang, Siegrid (1994): Ethiopia in change: peasantry, nationalism and democracy, British
Academic Press, London, pp.172-191
Zewde, Bahru (1994): Hayla-Selassa: From Progressive to Reactionary, in: Zegeye, Abebe and
Pausewang, Siegfried (1994): Ethiopia in change: Peasantry, Nationalism and Democracy, British
Academic Press, New Year
84
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Annex
(1) Questionnaires for focus group disussions
(Vulnerability)
1. What are the main risks that your households face?
Changes of livestock prices
Animal/ livestock disease
Lack of feed for livestock
Changes of crop prices
Unavailability of water
Soil degradation
Health problems of household members
Death of household member
Climate change (what kind of effects?)
Size of land holding (increase of population  land fragmentation)
2.
What do you think what are the causes for these risks? (why does the situation become worse?)
3.
Have you experienced those risks in the past? Have these risks become reality in the last years?
4.
Do you expect to experience those risks in the near future?
5.
What do you do to minimize these risks?
6.
Who can help you to minimize these risks?
7.
Have you discussed any strategies to deal with the risks with your household members or community
members?
8.
Do you think you have to adapt to the current situation or can you minimize the risks through certain
action? Can you do anything to prevent these risks?
(Ownership)
1. How important is the irrigation scheme in order to reduce these risks?
2.
How important is the WUA to manage this irrigation scheme/ the water?
3.
What are your legal rights in terms of resources (land tenure, ownership of resources, use of
resources)?
4.
What are your duties in terms of resources?
5.
Do you have any benefits from the irrigation scheme?
6.
Do you have any benefits from the WUA?
7.
Do you have any benefits from the IC?
8.
Do all community members benefit in the same way? If not, where are differences?
9.
Who is the owner of the irrigation scheme?
10. Do you think the water can be managed better than it is done at the moment?
11. Whose responsibility is it to improve the management/ who has to do it?
12. On a scale from 0 to 5 (one is nothing, 5 is everything) how much have you as a community
contributed in the planning process of the irrigation scheme?
85
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
13. On a scale from 0 to 5 (one is nothing, 5 is everything) how much have you as a community
contributed in the construction process of the irrigation scheme?
14. On a scale from 0 to 5 (one is nothing, 5 is everything) how much are you as a community contributing
now to maintain the irrigation scheme?
15. If only little, what has prevented you from making more contributions?
16. If only little, who has done more and why?
17. Who is responsible in making the WUA/ IC more efficient?
18. What are the advantages/ potentials of a WUA/ IC?
19. What are the disadvantages/ negative aspects of a WUA/ IC?
20. Whose fault is it that the potential of the irrigation scheme decreases?
21. Whose benefit is it when the water is managed well?
22. Do you personal have any hopes/ plans/ dreams for the future? Can the WUA help you to achieve
them?
(WUA)
1. What is the aim of the WUA?
2.
When was the WUA initiated? By whom? Why?
3.
How was the starting point? Did you have any problems? Did every community member agreed
immediately? How did you select the Committee members?
4.
Can you explain me the structure and organisation of the WUA? Who has which responsibilities?
5.
How did you manage your water before the WUA was created?
6.
Do you think the work of the WUA is successful or not? Why?
7.
Is the WUA a legal institution?
8.
What are the rights and what are the duties of a WUA member?
9.
Do you have a bylaw? Is it executed? Is it known by every member?
10. How often does the general assembly meet? What do you discuss there? Does every member attend
or do you have to convince the people to come? Does everyone participate in discussions?
11. How often does the committee meet? What do they discuss there?
12. Who decides the distribution of water and when?
13. Can it happen that new members join the WUA? How does that work?
14. Are there different rights/ duties for different users (women, older people, new members etc.)?
15. How would you describe the relationship between the WUA and the Kebele Administration/ ARDO?
16. Are you allowed you make suggestions towards the Kebele Administration? Are they heart?
17. What are the responsibilities of external institutions in the water management process?
18. What are the responsibilities of the WUA in the water management process?
19. How is the relation between WUA members and other farmers in the area?
20. Have you got plans/ strategies for the future with the WUA?
21. Have you made plans for the time when SWHISA´s intervention is finished here?
22. How much did the trainings help you to improve the water management/ WUA?
23. Have you noticed any changes in your community since the start of WUA?
86
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
(2) Questionnaire for survey with farmers in Gurumbaba and Menti
Nr. of questionnaire:___
Name of interviewer:________________________
General information
1. I am
2. My age is:
3. My religion is:
4. My occupation is:
5. I live in the village:
□ male
□ female
□ 15 – 20 years
□ 21 – 35 years
□ 36 – 50
□ older than 51 years
□ Orthodox □Muslim
□ Protestant □ Catholic
□ other, please specify_______________________________
years
□ farmer
□ housewife □ student
□ other, please specify_____________________________________
________________________ (name of the sub-village in the Kebele)
□ the household head
□ the spouse of the household head
□ the child of the household head
□ the parent of the household head
□ other household member, please specify_____________________
6. I am
7. I am a member of the (multiple answers possible):
□ Water User Association
□ Irrigation Cooperative
□ Water User Committee Association
□ No member
8. What is the source of the food for your household?
Always
Often
Sometimes
Never
We grow it on our
own fields
We work and food
is our payment
We are given food
by others
We buy our food
from our money
Livelihood activities
9. What is the size of your households total land:
□ 0 – 0,5 ha □ 0,6 – 1 ha □ 1,1 – 1,5 ha
□ 1,5 – 2 ha □ 2,1 – 2,5 ha □more than 2,6
ha
87
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
□ Yes
10. Do you own this land:
□
No, please specify_____________
______________________________
I only own parts of it, the other part, please specify:
___________________________________________
11. What is the size of your households irrigated land:
□ 0 – 0,5 ha □ 0,6 – 1 ha □ 1,1 – 1,5 ha
□ 1,5 – 2 ha □ 2,1 – 2,5 ha □more than 2,6
ha
12. What is the size of your households rain fed land:
□ 0 – 0,5 ha □ 0,6 – 1 ha □ 1,1 – 1,5 ha
□ 1,5 – 2 ha □ 2,1 – 2,5 ha □more than 2,6 ha
13. How often does your household irrigate your different types of crop?
Type of crop
Irrigation interval
Tef
Sorghum
Shallot
Garlic
Chickpea
Maize
14. Is the amount of water that your household can access to irrigate the land enough for your
household?
□ Always enough for my household
□ Usually enough for my household
□ Sometimes enough for my household
□ Never enough for my household
15. Does your household own livestock:
□ Yes
□ No
15.1. If yes: How much livestock does your household own:
______ Cattle
______ Goats
______ Chicken
______ Donkeys
______ Sheep
88
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
15.2. If yes: What does your household feed your livestock with in the rainy season (multiple
answers possible)?
□ Our own grazing land
□ Communal grazing land
□ crops
□ animal feed that I buy
15.3. If yes: What does your household feed your livestock with in the dry season (multiple
answers possible)?
□ Our own grazing land
□ Communal grazing land
□ crops
□ animal feed that I buy
16. Does your household own grazing land?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
16.1.
If no or don’t know: Does your household have access to communal grazing land?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
17. How much water does your household have on average for one day (for drinking, cooking,
washing)?
(Instructions for interviewer: Measure the litres that fit in one Jar)
□ 0 – 1 Jar per day for the household
□ 1 Jar per day for the household
□ 2 jars per day for the household
□ 3 jars per day for the household
□ 4 jars per day for the household
□ More than 4 jars per day for the household
18. From where does your household get this water?
□ From the river
□ From a bore well
□ From a hand pump
□ Other source, please specify ______________________________
89
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
19. How far is this water source from your households’ home?
□ 0 – 0,5 km
□ 0,6 – 1 km
□ 1,1 – 1,5 km
□ More than 1,5 km
20. What is the main source of your household’s fuel (multiple answers are possible)?
□ My household owns trees
□ From communal trees
□ My household buys fuel wood
□ My household doesn’t have any fuel wood
□ Animal dung
□ I don’t know
20.1.
If wood is used: What is the main source of your fuel wood
□ My household owns trees
□ From communal trees
□ My household buys fuel wood
□ My household doesn’t have any fuel wood
□ I don’t know
21. What is the main source of your household’s wood for shelter (multiple answers are possible)?
□ My household owns trees
□ From communal trees
□ My household buys wood
□ My household doesn’t have any wood for shelter
□ I don’t know
22. The amount of wood (for fuel wood and shelter) that your household can access is …
□ Always enough for the household
□ Usually enough for the household
□ Sometimes enough for the household
□ Never enough for my household
23. How is the productivity per ha of the soil of your land today?
□ Good
□ Sufficient for my household
□ Poor
□ Very poor
□ The majority is good, the minority is poor
90
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
□ The minority is good, the majority is poor
□ I don’t know
24. Compared to ten years ago how is the productivity per ha of the soil of you land today?
□ Better
□ The same
□ Worse
□ A lot worse
□ I don’t know
25. How would you assess the cleanness of your household’s drinking water today?
□ Good
□ Sufficient for my household
□ Poor
□ Very poor
□ I don’t know
26. Compared to ten years ago, how would you assess the cleanness of your household’s
drinking water today?
□ Better
□ The same
□ Worse
□ A lot worse
□ I don’t know
27. What is your household’s main income source? (rank them by their importance from 1-9, if
one option does not apply, do not write anything in the box):
__ Sale of grain/ horticultural crops
__ Petty trade
__ selling of local beverages
__ Earnings from daily labour
__sale of livestock
__fuel wood sales
__selling of handcrafts
__renting out land
__renting out oxen
__ money gift from family/ friends in a foreign country
__ other, please specify______________________________
28. How much total minimum cash income does your household earn on average per year:
______ Birr.
29. In which months of the year does your household earn the most cash income?
___________________________________________________________________________
91
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
30. Compared to one year ago, how much cash income does your household have now?
□ More
□ The same
□ Less
□ I don’t know
31. Does your household have the same income every month?
□ Yes, more or less the same
□ No, it varies
□ I don’t know
32. What does your households income depend on (rank the answers from 1- 5 by their
importance, if something does not apply, leave it out)?
__ On the weather
__ On my work
__ On the external support that I get
__ On the work of the whole community
__ On the market conditions where I sell my products
__ I don’t know
33. How much from your households cash income does your household spend on average per
year on…?
_________Birr for food for household consumption
_________Birr for food/ water for
Livestock
_________Birr for education
_________ Birr agricultural inputs
_________Birr for transport
_________Birr for tax and other
contributions
_________Birr for medicine for human
_________Birr for social obligations/
cultural and religious festival
_________Birr for veterinary/ animal medicine
34. Does your household have access to any credit arrangement?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
34.1.
If yes: What credit arrangement does your household have access to?
□ Safety Net
□ Amhara Credit and Saving Institute
□ Private Businesses
□ Relatives/ friends
92
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
34.2.
If yes: Did your household ever try to get a credit from one of the credit arrangements?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
34.2.1. If yes: Did your household ever get a credit from the credit institute?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
35. Does your household have any savings?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
36. Does your household receive food aid in times of food shortage?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
37. How often has your household received food aid in
a. the last year __________
b. the year before last year ___________
38. What is your opinion about the food aid programme?
39. How far away is the next household from your household?
□ 0 – 0,5 km
□ 0,6 – 1 km
□ 1,1 – 2 km
□ more than 2 km
40. How far away is the next market from your household?
□ 0 – 2 km
□ 2,1 – 5 km
□ 5,1 – 8 km
□ more than 8 km
93
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
41. Does your household have access to public transport (buses, minibuses)?
□ Yes
□ No
□ I don’t know
41.1.
If yes: Does your household sometimes use public transport (buses, minibuses)?
□ Yes (please specify for what) _____________________________
_______________________________________________________
□ No, because __________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
□ I don’t know
42. In what kind of shelter does your household live?
□ We own a shelter
□ We rent a shelter
□ We don’t have a shelter
□ We live in a shelter that was given to us as a gift
□ Other type of shelter, please specify _______________________
_______________________________________________________
43. Does your household have access to electricity in your home?
□ Yes
□ Sometimes
□ No
□ I don’t know
44. Does your household have access to a telephone/ mobile connection?
□ Yes
□ Sometimes
□ No
□ I don’t know
45. Does your household have access to media (make a cross in the applicable box)?
Type of media
Yes, I have access
No, I don’t have access
Radio
Newspaper
Television
45.1. if yes: Does your household have use any type of media (make a cross in the
applicable box)?
94
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Type of media
Radio
Newspaper
Television
Yes, I use it
No, I don’t use it, please give a reason
46. How many people live in your household (Put the applicable number in the box)?
Age
0-4 years 5-9 years 10-19 years
20-29 years
30-39 years
40-49 years
Male
Female
Total
50 + years
47. Is there anyone in your household who can not contribute labour to the household activities?
□ Yes
□ No
□ Sometimes
□ I don’t know
47.1. If yes or sometimes: Why can this/ these person(s) not contribute labour to the
household activities (multiple answers possible)?
□ Because he/she is sick
□ Because he/she does not want to
□ Because he/she is too old
□ Because he/she is too young
□ Because of traditional/ cultural/ religious reasons
□ I don’t know
□ Because of other reasons, please specify___________________
_______________________________________________________
48. What is your level of education:
□ Uneducated
□ Primary level
□ High school level
□ College level
□ University level
□ I don’t know
49. How many people in your household are formally educated?
_________people
□ I don’t know
50. How many people in your household are formally educated on:
__ Primary level
__ High school level
__ College level
__ University level
□ I don’t know
95
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
51. How many people in your household are informally educated? _________people
□ I don’t know
51.1. What kind of informal education do you have? ___________________________________
52. Who is doing which type of labour in your household (indicate the applicable answer with a cross,
multiple answers are possible)?
Type of labour
Women
Men
Girls
Boys
No one
Land preparation
Planting/ sowing
Applying
fertilizer/pesticide
Weeding
Threshing/ processing
Irrigation applications
Selling Products
Buying Food
Canal cleaning
Looking after cattle
Feeding the cattle
Milking
Cleaning the house
Cooking
Washing the clothes
Looking after the small
children
Making decisions about
the crops
Making decisions about
the livestock
Making decisions about
the marketing of products
Responsible
for
the
household budget
53. Does any of your household members have health problems?
□ Yes
□ No
□ Sometimes
□ I don’t know
53.1.
If yes or sometimes: What kind of health problems do your household members have?
96
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
54. In what institution in your community are you or one of your household members active (multiple
answers possible)?
□ Irrigation Cooperative
□ Water User Association
□ School
□ Agricultural Development Office
□ Service cooperative
□ Health Centre
□ Kebele Administration
□ Amhara Credit and Saving Institute (ACSI)
□ Potable water committee
□ Grain Mill
□ Edir
□ Ekube
□ Mass organizations (Women Association, Youth Association etc.)
□ Church
□ other Associations, please specify_________________________________
□ None
54.1.
If any Institution was mentioned:
Why are you or your household member involved in the institution(s)?
55. In times of crisis, who helps your household to overcome the situation (multiple answers possible
indicate the applicable type of support in the case of a certain type of risk with a cross)?
Type of risk
Type of support
Drought
Health problems
Death of a
household
member
Food insecurity
Irrigation Cooperative
Water User Association
School
Agricultural
Development Office
97
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Service cooperative
Health Centre
Kebele Administration
Amhara Credit and
Saving Institute (ACSI)
Potable water committee
Grain Mill
Edir
Ekube
Mass organizations
Church
Friends and Relatives
Food Aid programme
No one
56. Have you noticed any changes in the way your household makes their living in the last 10 years?
If yes, what kind of?
57. Have you noticed any changes in the way your household makes their living in the last 2 years?
If yes, what kind of?
58. Do you expect any changes in the way your household makes their living in the next 5 years?
If yes, what kind of?
98
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
(3) Tables of results of survey with farmers
Annex 3.1: Sufficiency of water for irrigation
Sufficiency of access to irrigation
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Always enough for my household
14
18,4
18,4
18,4
Usually enough for my household
38
50,0
50,0
68,4
Sometimes enough for my
21
27,6
27,6
96,1
3
3,9
3,9
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
household
Never enough for my household
Gesamt
Annex 3.2: Dependency of income
Dependency of household income: on the weather
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
yes
50
65,8
65,8
65,8
no
26
34,2
34,2
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the work
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
yes
28
36,8
36,8
36,8
no
48
63,2
63,2
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the external support that I get
Häufigkeit
Gültig
no
Prozent
76
Gültige Prozente
100,0
Kumulierte Prozente
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the work of the community
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
yes
11
14,5
14,5
14,5
no
65
85,5
85,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
99
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
dependency of the household income: on the market conditions
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
46
60,5
60,5
60,5
No
30
39,5
39,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Annex 3.3 Fuel wood as a trade product
Source of fuel: household buys fuel wood
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
2
2,6
2,6
2,6
No
74
97,4
97,4
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Source of income: Sale of fuel wood
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
1
1,3
1,3
1,3
Yes
5
6,6
6,6
7,9
No
70
92,1
92,1
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Annex 3.4: Animal dung as a source of fuel
Source of fuel: animal dung
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
67
88,2
88,2
88,2
No
9
11,8
11,8
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
Gesamt
Annex 3.5: Ownership of livestock
Ownership of livestock
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
70
92,1
92,1
92,1
No
6
7,9
7,9
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
Gesamt
100
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Average Nr. Of livestock
Standardabweichun
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mittelwert
g
Amount of owned catlle
73
0
10
3,16
2,297
Amount of owned goats
73
0
10
1,37
2,519
Amount of owned Sheep
73
0
15
2,27
3,314
Amount of owned donkeys
73
0
4
1,07
1,058
Amount of owned chicken
73
0
20
3,47
3,819
Annex 3.6: Food for livestock
Food for livestock in rainy season : Own grazing land
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Percent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
23
30,3
30,3
38,2
No
47
61,8
61,8
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Food for livestock in rainy season : communal grazing land
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
44
57,9
57,9
65,8
No
26
34,2
34,2
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Food for livestock in rainy season : Crop residuals
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
57
75,0
75,0
82,9
No
13
17,1
17,1
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Food for livestock in rainy season : animal feed that I buy
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
21
27,6
27,6
35,5
No
49
64,5
64,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
101
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Food for livestock in dry season : Own grazing land
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
15
19,7
19,7
27,6
No
55
72,4
72,4
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Food for livestock in dry season : Communal grazing land
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
24
31,6
31,6
39,5
No
46
60,5
60,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Food for livestock in dry season : crops
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
66
86,8
86,8
94,7
No
4
5,3
5,3
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
Gesamt
Food for livestock in dry season : animal feed that I buy
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
6
7,9
7,9
7,9
Yes
28
36,8
36,8
44,7
No
42
55,3
55,3
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Annex 3.7: Grazing land
Ownership of grazing land
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
4
5,3
5,3
5,3
yes
26
34,2
34,2
39,5
no
46
60,5
60,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
102
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Access to communal grazing land
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
26
34,2
34,2
34,2
yes
34
44,7
44,7
78,9
no
15
19,7
19,7
98,7
1
1,3
1,3
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
I don´t know
Gesamt
Annex 3.8: Income variations
Income varieties
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
yes, more or less the same
11
14,5
14,5
14,5
no, it varies
58
76,3
76,3
90,8
I don´t know
7
9,2
9,2
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
Gesamt
Annex 3.9: Dependency of income
Dependency of household income: on the weather
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
yes
50
65,8
65,8
65,8
no
26
34,2
34,2
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the work
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
yes
28
36,8
36,8
36,8
no
48
63,2
63,2
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the external support that I get
Häufigkeit
Gültig
no
Prozent
76
Gültige Prozente
100,0
Kumulierte Prozente
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the work of the community
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
11
14,5
14,5
14,5
No
65
85,5
85,5
100,0
103
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
dependency of the household income: on the work of the community
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
11
14,5
14,5
14,5
No
65
85,5
85,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
dependency of the household income: on the market conditions
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
Yes
46
60,5
60,5
60,5
No
30
39,5
39,5
100,0
Gesamt
76
100,0
100,0
Annex 3.10: Number of people per household
Report about household members
Amount of household member per household
Bootstrapa
Location
95% Konfidenzintervall
Statistic
Gurumbaba
Mittelwert
Menti
Mittelwert
Insgesamt
Mittelwert
Oberer Wert
,36
5,66
7,05
38
0
0
38
38
2,188
-,048
,179
1,805
2,496
6,16
,01
,34
5,50
6,84
38
0
0
38
38
2,086
-,039
,191
1,677
2,423
6,28
,01
,25
5,78
6,75
76
0
0
76
76
2,127
-,024
,128
1,848
2,359
N
Standardabweichung
Unterer Wert
,01
N
Standardabweichung
Standardfehler
6,39
N
Standardabweichung
Verzerrung
Annex 3.11: Access and usage of media
Access to radio
Access to radio
yes
Location
Gesamt
no
Gesamt
Gurumbaba
20
16
36
Menti
23
15
38
43 (58,10%)
31 (41,89%)
74
104
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
Usage of radio
Usage of radio
yes
Location
no
Gesamt
Gurumbaba
14
12
26
Menti
22
14
36
36 (58,06%)
26 (41,94%)
62
Gesamt
Access to newspaper
Access to newspaper
yes
Location
no
Gesamt
Gurumbaba
14
21
35
Menti
10
28
38
24 (=32,88%)
49 (=67,12%)
73
Gesamt
Usage of newspaper
Usage of newspaper
yes
Location
no
Gurumbaba
Menti
Gesamt
Gesamt
4
21
25
11
25
36
(75,40
61
15 (24,59%)
46
%)
Annex 3.12: Amount of people receiving food aid
reception of food aid
Häufigkeit
Gültig
Prozent
Gültige Prozente
Kumulierte Prozente
2
2,6
2,6
2,6
yes
15
19,7
19,7
22,4
no
58
76,3
76,3
98,7
1
1,3
1,3
100,0
76
100,0
100,0
I don´t know
Gesamt
105
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
(4) List of semi-structured interviews with experts and institutional members
(Regional level:)
IADP expert, BoARD
9th October 2009, 14.30h – 15.30h
IDDP expert, BoWRD
13th October 2009, 14.30h – 15.30h
WRM expert, BoWRD
13th October 2009, 15.30h – 16.00h
ESEPP expert, EPLAUA
14th October 2009, 14.30h – 15.30h
ESEPP expert, EPLAUA
16th October 2009, 11.00h – 12.30h
CPA expert, regional level
27th of October 2009, 11.00h – 12.00h
(Woreda level:)
IDDP expert, ARDO West Belisa
23rd October 2009, 15.45h – 17.00h
CPA expert, ARDO West Belisa
2nd of November, 16.30h – 17.30h
CPA expert, ARDO West Belisa
2nd of November 2009, 15.30h – 16.15h
(Kebele level:)
DA Abeye Kebele
22nd October 2009, 8.30h – 9.30h
DA Gurumbaba Kebele
22nd October 2009, 9.45 – 10.45h
Kebele Manager, Menti
5th of November 2009, 18.30h – 19.30h
DA Menti Kebele (all three DAs)
5th of November 2009, 8.45h – 9.45h
DA Gonda zuria
10th of November 2009, 15.00h – 16.00h
DA Supervisor and DA Amba Chera Kebele
11th of November 2009, 9.30h – 10.30h
(5) List of farmer focus groups
FFG Male and Committee, Menti
4th of November 2009
FFG Youth, Menti
4th of November 2009
FFG Women, Menti
4th of November 2009
FFG Committee
5th of November 2009
FFG Male and Committee, Gurumbaba
17th of November 2009
FFG Youth and Women, Gurumbaba
18th of November 2009
FFG Committee, Gurumbaba
18th of November 2009
(6) List of participant observations
West Belisa, Gurumbaba
23rd – 25th of September 2009
Libo Kemkem
1st October 2009
Gonda Zuria (FFG Committee)
11th of November 2009
Dera Woreda (FFG Committee,
Expert interview, Tana Belese WME)
29th October and 12th of November 2009
106
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
(7) Questionnaire for semi-structured interviews with institutional members
Nr. of questionnaire:
General information
1.
2.
3.
4.
□
□
I am
male
female
I work in (name of institution)
My position is:
I have been working for this institution for ( period of time)
Development processes in Amhara
1. Who are the main actors/ institutions involved in a development process in Amhara region
(please begin with the most important)? Why do you make this order?
2. Development processes should …
□meet the interests of the Ethiopian government
□ meet the interests of the donor(s)
□meet the needs of the community
□follow the advises of the experts
□ be not too time and money consuming
3. Which activities in a development project should be fulfilled by the community and which by
external experts (make an E for expert and C for community)?
__ Problem Identifying
__ Project planning
__ Financing
__ Construction/ Implementation
__ Monitoring (sometimes with C)
__ Evaluation
__ Documentation
4. What are the main differences between a top-down and a bottom-up approach in development
processes?
5. From your point of view, when is a development project successful?
6. What is your role as an expert of an institution in a development process?
7. What is the role of the community in a development process?
8. What does “community participation” mean for you as an individual person?
9. From your point of view, what are the five advantages of participation?
10. From your point of view, what are the five disadvantages of participation?
107
Anna Leidreiter, International Development Studies (MSc.), Universiteit van Amsterdam
11. From your point of view what are the main challenges when you work with a community in a
development process?
12. When you work as an expert in a development process what is your main work (make only
one cross in the box that fits the best)?
□ to give advises to the community.
□ to discuss different possibilities with the community and formulate the development
process with the community.
□ to send experts to the community to implement the development process.
13. Which statement describes the relationship between you as the expert and the community
best?
□ The community helps me to realize the project.
□ I help the community to realize the project.
□ We work together to realize the project.
14. Decentralization is essential to involve the community effectively.
□
I agree because, problem can be passed on if it is out of the capacity from
someone
□ I disagree because,
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
15. Institutions should be … (choose the 3 most important characteristics by making a cross in the
box).
□ flexible
□ bureaucratic
□ steady
□ accountable for the government
□ accountable for the civil society
□ locally oriented
□ national oriented
□ globally oriented
16. From your point of view, what are the main risks that farmers face for their livelihoods?
17. How do you think your work contributes to minimize these risks/ enhance farmer’s opportunity
to cope with these risks?
18. Do you have any further comments, suggestions or questions that came up during this
questionnaire?
Thank you very much for your cooperation. Your comments are a great support for my work.
With kind regards, Anna Leidreiter
108