COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITY

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL

STUDIES

MSC IN CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT

DETERMINANTS OF SMALLHOLDER FARMERS’ CHOICE OF

ADAPTATION STRATEGIES TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN ODO
SHAKISO WOREDA , SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

BY
LENCHO GEMEDA

ADVISOR: SOLOMON KETEMA (PH.D)

CO-ADVISOR:

JUNE, 2024
BULE HORA, ETHIOPIA
Determinants of Smallholder Farmers’ Choice of Adaptation Strategies
to Climate Change in Odo Shakiso Woreda , Southern Ethiopia

A Research proposal Submitted to Department of Geography and Environmental

Studies, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of
Science in climate change and sustainable development

By

LenchoGemeda

Advisor: Solomon Ketema (Ph.D)

Co-Advisor:

June, 2024

BuleHora, Ethiopia

ii
 APPROVAL SHEET
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAM DIRECTORATE

BULE HORA UNIVERSITY

As members of the evaluators of the thesis proposal open defense, we certify that we have read
and evaluated the thesis proposal entitled “Determinants of Smallholder Farmers’ Choice of
Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Odo Shakiso Woreda , Southern Ethiopia.” We
recommend that it will be submitted as fulfilling the Research proposal requirement.

Name of student Signature Date

LenchoGemeda ---------------------- ----------------------

Major Advisor Signature Date

Solomon Ketema (Ph.D) ------------------ -------------------------

Co- advisor Signature Date

__________________ ----------------------- ----------------------------

Examineer Signature Date

______________ ------------------------- -----------------------------

SGS Coordinator Signature Date

___________________ ----------------------- ---------------------------

I
Abbreviation and Acronyms

FAO Food Association Organization

FGD Focus Group Discussion
GDP Gross Domestic Product
OSRLAMO Odo Shakiso Rural Land Administration and Management
office

II
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS PAGES
APPROVAL SHEET.......................................................................................................................I
ABBREVIATION AND ACRONYMS.........................................................................................II
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................II
LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................IV
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................V
CHAPTER ONE
1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background of the Study...........................................................................................................1
1.2 Statement of the Problem...........................................................................................................3
1.3. Research Questions...................................................................................................................5
1.4. Objective of the Study..............................................................................................................5
1.3.1 General Objective of the Study...............................................................................................5
1.3.2. Specific Objectives of the Study............................................................................................5
1.5. Scope and Limitation of the Study...........................................................................................5
1.6. Significance of the Study..........................................................................................................6
CHAPTER TWO
2. 1. Literature Review....................................................................................................................7
2.1.1. History and Conceptual Definitions of Terms.......................................................................7
2.1.2. Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture...........................................................................8
2.1.3. Climate Change and its Adaptation Strategies......................................................................9
2.1.4. Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Adaptation Strategies.............................................10
2.1.5. The Rural Agricultural Communities and Climate Change................................................12
2.1.6. Agriculture Sector and Climate Change in Ethiopia...........................................................13
2.2 empirical literature review.......................................................................................................15
2.3. Conceptual framework of the study........................................................................................17
CHAPTER THREE
3. Research methodology...............................................................................................................18
3.1 Description of the Study Area.................................................................................................18
3.2 Research Design......................................................................................................................20

III
3.3. Sources and Methods of Data Collection...............................................................................20
3.4. Sampling Technique and Sample Size Determination...........................................................21
3.6. Method of Data Analysis........................................................................................................22
3.6.1 descriptive statistics..............................................................................................................22
3.6.2 econometrics analysis...........................................................................................................22
3.7. Definition of variables and working hypotheses....................................................................23
3.7.1 dependent variable................................................................................................................23
3.7.2 independent variables...........................................................................................................24
4. WORKING PLAN...................................................................................................................29
5. BUDGET SUMMARY............................................................................................................30
REFERENCE...............................................................................................................................31

IV
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1: Type, definition, measurement, and hypothesis of variable......................................................28
2. Work Plan..................................................................................................................................29
3: budget breakdown by personal and transport expense..............................................................30

V
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure1. Conceptual framework of the study................................................................................17

VI
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study

Climate change refers to a change of climate which is attributed to human activities that change
the composition of an atmosphere and natural climate variability observed over a period of time.
Africa experienced low adaptive capacity which leads to easy vulnerable to climate change. This
vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and variability is worsened by widespread poverty,
droughts, floods, unequal access to resources, political conflicts, food insecurity, dependence on
natural resources, dependence on rain fed agriculture and incidences of diseases. The variations
of unexpected temperature and rainfall distribution resulted from this climate change have
greater impact on agricultural development and food-related industries (Nhemachena and
Hassan, 2007).

Even though, Agriculture is a significant sector in Africa, it is affected by climate change and
variation. This climate change and variation will carry out significant losses particularly for
smallholders’ farmers who are their livelihood depend up on agriculture (Asrat & Simane, 2018).
The estimated yield reduction due to climate change and variability in some developing countries
could be 50 % by 2020 (EEA, 2019). This is true in Ethiopia, where more than 85 % of its
population is dependent on rain-fed agriculture. Since 1980, Ethiopia experienced major
droughts, decline in rainfall which in turn led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people
and livestock, which leads to the country’s dependence on food aid. Due to variations in climate,
however, Ethiopia became one of the largest receipts of food assistance which reached about 20-
30 % in the sub-Saharan Africa (Andualem, 2015).

Ethiopia has experienced at least five major national droughts since 1980, along with literally
dozens of local droughts. Cycles of drought create poverty traps for many households, constantly
thwarting efforts to build up assets and increase income. Food shortage and famine associated
with rainfall variability cause a situation of high dependency on international food aid. This
shows that agricultural production in Ethiopia is adversely affected by climate change and
weather variability’s, which is decreasing crop yield, decrease in livestock feed availability,

1
affecting animal health, expansion of tropical dry and expansion of desertification. This effect is
attributed to the fact that those factors that affect by climate change can be seriously depressing
agricultural production in the country (PANE, 2009).

Most of the Ethiopian population lives in rural areas and the livelihood of the greater majority of
this is based on rain fed agriculture that is subject to highly irregular rainfall pattern with
detrimental impact on agricultural production (Amoakoh, 2017). Although Ethiopia has noble
resources such as water, minerals for agricultural development. Yet, it is challenged with
complex poverty resulted from climate change and variability (Banchaymolu, 2019).

To reduce the impact of climate change, efforts have been made by researchers, governments and
non-government. The important approach used to reduce the impact of climate change is
adaptation strategies (Enete and Amusa, 2010). Adaptation strategy comprises activities to
reduce opposing effects from climate change and find chances that might afford socioeconomic
importance. According to Westengen & Brysting (2014), the mitigation and adaptation
strategies have been practiced both at individual and group level.

Farmers’ adaptation to climate change is based on their expectation about the possible benefits
that may be generated in the future. This means there are some costs associated with adaptation
to climate change. The use of a particular adaptation strategy can be linked to the determinants of
the choice of the various adaptation strategies that farmers use in minimizing the effects of
climate change on agricultural production. Factors that affect farmers’ adaptation decision are
very important in scheming policies to encourage effective adaption in the agricultural sector.

The understanding of how adaptation mechanisms of these factors affect farmers’ decision to
choose a specific climate change adaptation strategy is very necessary considering of the choice
of livelihood strategies to be pursued in OdoShakiso district. Knowing the determinants of the
choice of climate change adaptation strategies is very vital to take intervention measures on those
key determinants to improve farmers’ adaptive capacities. In Ethiopia, Some of the adaptation
strategies implemented in different area in order to reduce the impact of climate changes are
crop rotation, mixed farming, early planting, crop diversification and minimum tillage practices,
expansion of irrigation, water harvesting expansion of selected seed variety (Francis and
Watanabe, 2015). Even though adaptation strategies are important to minimize the impact of
2
climate change on agricultural productivity, there are several factors that can determine choose
adaptation strategies like income, age, farming experience, plot size, family size, education and
other related factors has a great impact to adapt or not to adapt this strategies(Gedefaw et.al,
2018).

Efforts should be made focusing on finding mechanisms which can reduce the climate change
problems and improve smallholder farmers’ adaptation to climate change. Generally, the
adaptation strategy of smallholder on agriculture to climate change is vital to enhance the
resilience of agricultural sectors. Therefore, this study will intend to identify smallholder
farmers’ adaptation strategies to climate change and variability’s in
OdoShakisoDistrict .OdoShakisoDistrict , where the study area is situated is one of the most
severely affected by climate change and low agricultural productivity resulting from climate
change and variability. The rise temperature along with a decline in rainfall, have becoming a
severe problem that affected the agricultural sector in the study area. Crop pests, livestock
diseases, and drought become the most frequently happening climate associated shocks in this
area. Therefore, a detailed analysis of socioeconomic and the determinant factors affecting
smallholder farmers’ adaptation strategies to climate change will be carried out to identify its
causes and ensure continued and sustainable productivity to some extent, thereby supporting the
farm households economically. Therefore, the main aim of this study is to identify the
determinant factors affecting smallholder farmers’ adaptation strategies to climate change in
OdoShakisoDistrict .

1.2 Statement of the problem

Ethiopia is a country struggling with growing population while the sustenance rain fed
agriculture is under an inconsistent rainfall. Majority of this country population rely directly or
indirectly on rain fed Agriculture. Such dependence obviously leads to increased vulnerability of
the economy to problems related to climate variability (Yohannes, 2019a).

Adaptation measures are being implemented, on a limited basis, in both developed and
developing countries. These measures are undertaken by a range of public and private actors
through policies, investments in infrastructure and technologies, and behavioral change. A

3
limited but growing set of adaptation measures also explicitly considers scenarios of future
climate change (Manjeru, 2019).

There are several estimates about the impacts of climate change in the country. Farmers’
adaptation to climate change has been viewed by the government of Ethiopia as the major
significant in reduction of climate change impact (Geremew, 2012). It also helps to estimate to
what extent a given farm households participate in practice of climate change adaptation
decisions.

In the past development effort, Ethiopia focused only on drought and agricultural productivity is
found unsuccessful and inadequate to secure the ever increasing population with basic need such
as food, shelter and clothes. Maximum effort has been carried in Climate change adaptation
strategies that are cost effective, manageable and employ significant number of small-holder
farm household. To curb this problem, there should be integrated and differentiated policy
interventions which should promote farmers to adaptation of climate change (Degye, 2013).

In order to tackle or to minimize the effects of climate variability on their lives and livelihoods,
farmers in the area have been pursuing various adaptation options. However, the choice of
particular mitigation and adaptation measures may be positively or negatively affected by
specific socio-economic and environmental factors (Misganaw et.al, 2014). Factors that affect
farmers’ adaptation decision are very significant in designing policies to promote effective
adaption in the agricultural sector. Some farmers are able to use better adaptation than other
famers.

Understanding the factors associated with choice of adaptation will help policy makers for future
intervention to address the challenges of sustainable development to climate variability.In
Ethiopia, a significant number of studies like (Enete & Amusa, 2019;Gedefaw et al., 2018 and
Deressa, 2008)have been done on climatic change adaptation and mitigation strategies in
different parts of the country. Some of these studies were focused on determinants of adaptation,
and role of adaptation in agronomic practice. However, researches on the existing adaptation
measures practiced by the farmers’ and the determinant factors that affect farmers’ found on
similar agro-ecological condition choose different mitigation and adaptation is still unidentified.

4
Moreover, to the best of the researcher knowledge, there is no any research has been done which
can expose farmers’ choice on adaptation decision and types of climate change adaptation
strategies and there is no evidence that can explain farmers in the same agro-ecology choose
different adaptation strategies in the study area. Therefore, this study will attempt to identify
farmers’ choice on adaptation strategies to climate change, examine the local farmers’ types of
adaptation strategies they used and socioeconomic factors that determine their adaptation
strategies in the study area.

1.3. Objective of the study

1.3.1 General objective of the study

The general objective of the study is to identify the determinant factors affecting smallholders’
farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change in the study area
1.3.2. Specific Objectives of the study

 To identify adaptation strategies to climate change and variability used by farmers in the
studyarea;
 To assess the impacts of climate change and variability on smallholder farmers’ in the study
area;
 To identify the major factors affecting farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate
change in the studyarea;
1.4. Research Questions

 What are the adaptation strategies that smallholder farmers used in response to climate
change in study area?
 What impacts does the climate change and variability have on smallholders’ farmers’ in the
study area?
 What are the major factors affecting farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate
change in the studyarea?

1.5. Scope and Limitation of the study

This study will be conducted in Odo Shakiso Woreda of Guji zone, focusing on the determinant
factors affecting farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change, by taking sample

5
from selected households of the community those are using adaptation strategies to climate
change. The study will be used a cross-sectional data to reflect farmers’ circumstances in a given
year, specific climate of the year may affect the result as agriculture is weather dependent.

1.6. Significance of the Study

The study will give detail information on the adaptation strategies to climate change in the study
area. It will an input to the researchers who want further investigation on adaptation strategies to
climate change, a good stepping-ground for other studies related with this study, help researchers
and governmental and non-governmental organizations for policy formulation and show the
policy makers and other participants on which variables to focus to reduce climate change. Since
more is not written in this area, it will also be an input to the existing literature.

1.7. Ethical Consideration

The participants must also be ensured that the information they provide will be treated
confidentially (as their name will not be available on a given method of data collection i.e,
questionnaire). This implies that the informants are made anonymous, the researcher must make
sure that the use of the information the researcher obtain from the informants does not harm them
because, the respondent genuine responses to the sets of questions included in the given
questionnaire will serve as a major input for the master thesis research being conducted in
pursuit of purely academic purpose. Therefore, the response given by the respondents will be
used only as an input for the research work. Thus the participants are not exposed to a heightened
risk of physical or psychological harm as a consequence of participation in the study.

6
 CHAPTER TWO

2. 1. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.1. History and Conceptual Definitions of Terms

Climate Change is defined as the average weather variability over a period of time from months
to thousands or millions of years. It also refers any change in climate over time through natural
variability or as a result of human activities (IPCC 2007). Climate change is largely caused by
human factor which comprise expansion of land use by human being activities and natural forces
like volcanic eruption (Tesfahun, 2018). It has become a great concern to farmers especially
those found in tropical regions like Africa.

Adaptation is an adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected

climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploit beneficial opportunities.
Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory and reactive adaptation,
private and public adaptation, and autonomous and planned adaptation (IPCC, 2001). It is also
the practical steps to protect countries and communities from the likely disruption and damage
that will result from effects of climate change. For example, flood walls should be built and in
numerous cases it is probably advisable to move human settlements out of flood plains and other
low-lying areas. Adaptation is a process by which strategies to moderate, cope with and take
advantages of the consequences of climatic events are enhanced, developed, and implemented
(UNDP, 2005).

Adaptation and mitigation are two split policy responses to climate change. Both are; however,
basically linked. Mitigation is needed to reduce the impacts and allow for adaptation to takes
place, for ecosystems these boundaries are generally narrower than for human systems. Because
mitigation measures will not be able to immediately avoid global warming (Parry et al, 2007),
adaptive measurements will be needed to prevent the negative consequences of climate change at
the short term. On the longer term mitigation measures will be able to avoid further warming or
even reduce the effect. Adaptation through changes in processes, practices or structures is a
crucial element in reducing potential adverse impacts or enhancing beneficial impacts of climate
change (IPCC, 2001).

7
Adaptation to climate change refers to the adjustment in natural or human systems in response to
actual or expected climatic stimuli or its effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial
opportunities. Adaptation can be implemented by smallholder farmers themselves (autonomous
adaptation) or by government policies aimed at promoting appropriate and effective adaptation
measures (planned adaptation) (Asrat & Simane, 2018).

2.1.2. Impacts of climate change on agriculture

Agriculture in Africa is negatively affected by climate change and care need to be taken to avert
this situation. Farmers in Sub-Saharan African countries are adversely affected by the current
changes in climatic conditions (Deressa, 2008). Ethiopia is gradually experiencing the impact of
climate change on its agriculture. Mensah-Bonsu (2003) established that planting period for
crops in different corner of the world has changed from early April in 1960s to late April or
early May in recent years due to the unpredictable nature of rains and the changing
environmental conditions especially rainfall amounts and distribution. Smallholder farmers in
world are likely to experience the negative effects of climate change in recent years. Adaptation
to climate change can be done by reducing the vulnerability of natural and human systems
(IPCC, 2014).

Climate change has strong impact on the agricultural sectors and forestry by modifying or
degrading productive capacities and by directly and indirectly increasing the risks associated
with production. Due to the fact, most of developing countries are particularly vulnerable to the
adverse effects of climate change. In coming decades, millions of people whose food and
livelihood security depends on farming, fishing, forests and livestock-keeping are likely to face
climatic conditions that are unprecedented in the history of agriculture. To sustain current levels
of food production and to meet future challenges adaptation is often underestimated by the
international community (FAO, 2011).

Climate change mitigation is another policy respond to climate change which reduces the
negative impact of climate change through involvement of human action particularly by reducing
the concentration of greenhouse gasses either by decreasing the source and increasing their
plants. This is due to smallholder farmers lack the capacity to adequately adapt to the changing
climatic conditions which are bedeviling the regions. Regardless of this, some of the farmers in

8
adapt to climate change by planting early maturing crop varieties, use of fertilizers, farming on
fallowed land and mulching with the main purpose of reducing the impacts of climate change on
agricultural production (Mabe, 2011). Without adaptation, agricultural production will be
severely affected by climate change (Smit and Skinner,2002).

2.1.3. Climate Change and its Adaptation Strategies

There are many different strategies that the farmers can implement to reduce the risk of climate
change impacts. Farmers use different adaptation strategies that fit with the types of the problems
caused by climate change they faced. This is due to the fact that impact of the climate change is
unevenly distributed over different geographic areas and hence the adaptation mechanisms also
vary with types and level of the impact of climate change.

Therefore, adaptation strategies that the farmers used to reduce the impact of climate change in
different way: for instance changing crop variety, changing planting dates, mix crop and
livestock production, decrease livestock, moving animals/temporary migration, change livestock
feeds, soil and water management, planting trees, change from livestock to crop production,
change animal breeds, seek off-farm employment, planting short season crop, and
irrigation/water harvesting are among some of the several strategies available to enhance social
resilience in the face of climate change (Bradshaw et al., 2004; Nhemachena and Hassan, 2007).

Adaptation strategies are differing among individual farmers depending on their capacity and
willingness to adopt. There are factors that are restricting adaptive capacity and willingness to
adopt as a potential source of limits and barriers to adaptation. The main constraints and barriers
to adaptation are biophysical, economic, social, and/or technological in nature.

The understanding of adaptation to the impact of climate change can be decrease the adverse
effect of climate change at the presence and for future climate. Adapting to present climate is not
the same as adapting to future climate change. The responsible bodies can be learned from the
past for the future about adaptation options and the process of their adoption. Studies of
adaptation to current climate also make it clear that human activities are not now always as well
adapted to climate as they might be. In the development context, therefore, a practical adaptive
response to the threat of climate change may be to improve adaptation to existing climate and its

9
variability, including extreme events. Improving adaptation to current climate variability is not
an alternative to preparing for adaptation to longer term changes in climate. It is an adjunct, a
useful first and preparatory step that strengthens capacity now to deal with future circumstances
(Muleta, 2011).

According to World Bank (2007), in Ethiopian context agriculture is the dominant sector of the
economy. It contributes near half of the GDP and for the vast of majority of the employment, for
generating income, foreign currency and also supplying basic needs of food security. Even
though, Ethiopia is highly vulnerable to climate variability and change. Due to the fact that
highly depend on rain fed and traditional practices in major part of the area.

Soil and water conservation practices can contribute to the climate change adaptation through
maintaining or increasing agricultural productivity. Planting trees and soil and water
conservation practice is both important instruments in order to reduce adverse impact of climate
change. Practically, the consequences of climate change and its adaptation practices are site
specific due to variations in agro-climatic, socio-economic and physical characteristics (Kom,
2020).

2.1.4. Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Adaptation Strategies

Adaptation is initiatives and measures to reduce the vulnerability of nature and human systems
against or expected climate change effect. There is various type of adaptation, for example
anticipatory and reactive, private and public, and autonomous and planned. Adaptive capacity is
intimately connected to social and economic development but it is uneven distributed to the
societies. There are a lot of limitations that barriers the effectiveness of adaptation measures. The
adaptive capacity is depend on the community productive bases, capital asset, social network,
human capital and institutions, government, national income, health and technology. But
societies with high adaptive capacity may be vulnerable to climate change. Agricultural sector is
adversely affected by climate change and variability. This can minimize the negative impact by
using adaptation strategies like adjustment of planting and crop variety, crop relocation,
improved land management (e.g. erosion control and soil protection through tree planting)
(IPCC, 2007).

10
Adaptation strategies are also necessary to tackle adverse impacts from higher temperature and
changing precipitation patterns (Kurukulasuriya& Mendelsohn, 2007). Therefore, a key
component of climate adaptation includes building resilience, where resilience is the capacity of
a system to tolerate disturbance without collapsing into a qualitatively different state that is
controlled by a different set of processes (FAO, 2009).

However, in order to implement appropriate interventions, there is a need to understand location-

specific opportunities, challenges, and the key drivers behind adaptation. Adaptation can also be
effected at different scales: individual/farm-level, national level, or international level. Although
there is some autonomous adaptation at farm-level, it is usually inadequate and requires the
intervention of different institutions. Moreover, adaptation at national or international level
entails an understanding of the process of location-specific autonomous adaptation at farm-level
(Mabe et al., 2014).

Years of farming experience, soil conservation, of land decrease farmers’ likelihood of having
property right is likely to help farmers gain controlling for all other factors. This aspect of
financial institutions often require land or a fixed asset a general decline in arable land available
for potentially decrease farmers’ access to credit conservation. Gain access to credit meets asset
as collateral for production or credit from banks or other financial institutions. Furthermore, the
type of soil conservation mainly practiced by farmers in the district is basically allowing arable
land to fallow for a few years (Afroz&Akhtar, 2017).

Farmers’ perceptions of increased temperature coincided with climatic data, but their perception
of declined rainfall did not support with rainfall climatic data in other country. The majority of
farmers’ perceived variations in temperature and rainfall score with meteorological data in
different part of Ethiopia. Hence, climate change system modeling and impacts may coincide
with the perception of farmers in some cases but not in others. But the link between the two is
helpful for climate change adaptation by influencing farmers’ risk perception behaviors (Francis
and Watanabe, 2015).

In response to the practical and perceived climate change, agrarians in a given agro-ecological
and socio-economic activities might implement various site specific adaptation mechanisms. In
different parts of Ethiopia, farmers practice approaches that help to adapt climate change.
11
Various climate change adaptation strategies can have direct and indirect as well as temporal and
persisting benefits. These benefits of trees on various land uses have been reported for different
parts of the world11-13. The soil and water conservation practices can contribute to the climate
change adaptation through maintaining or increasing agricultural productivity (Kebede and
Gizachew, 2017).

2.1.5. The Rural Agricultural Communities and Climate Change

The agricultural sector remains at the core of developing countries’ economies. It plays a critical
role in food security for all human being. Regardless of their developmental significance, the
rural communities are also characterized by poverty and marginalization, which aggravate and
are aggravated by the effects of climatic variations, seasonal changes and uncertainty caused by
climate change.

According to FAO (2011), farmers in some regions may benefit temporarily from the effects of
CO2 emissions in the form of higher yields, the general consequences of climate change are
expected to be adverse, particularly for the poor and marginalized who in turn, constitute the
main inhabitants of rural agricultural communities. The main reason is that, the rural agricultural
communities are dependent on the fragile agricultural activities for their means of livelihoods
and they are located in areas of high environmental risk and climatic exposure and easily
affected.

Moreover, the subsistence of these communities is largely resource-based. More intense and
uncertain weather patterns and extreme events such as floods and droughts contribute to
deforestation, desertification, land degradation, depletion of water sources, infrastructural and
social damage, among others. This erodes not only local income but ultimately the ability of
rural agricultural communities to respond to the challenges posed by a changing climate. This
makes rural agricultural communities a priority in the design of innovative climate change
responses.

In addition climate-smart agriculture, contributes to the achievement of sustainable development

goals. It integrates the sustainable development of economic, social and environmental by jointly
addressing food security and climate challenges. It is composed of three main pillars: Sustainably

12
increasing agricultural productivity and incomes, Adapting and building resilience to climate
change and Reducing and/or removing greenhouse gases emissions, where possible (FAO,
2010).

2.1.6. Agriculture Sector and Climate Change in Ethiopia

There are different ways of classifying the climatic systems of Ethiopia, including the traditional
and the agro-climatic zone in classification systems (Yohannes, 2003). The most commonly used
classification systems are the traditional and the agro climatic zones. According to the traditional
classification system, which mainly relies on altitude and temperature for classification, Ethiopia
has five climatic zones. They are: - Wurch (upper highlands), Dega (highlands), Weynadega
(midlands), Kola(lowlands) and Berha (desert) (MoA 2000).

The agro-ecological classification method is based on combining growing periods with

temperature and moisture regimes. According to the agro-ecological zone classification system,
Ethiopia has 18 major agro ecological zones, which are further subdivided into 49 sub agro-
ecological zones. These agro-ecologies are also grouped under six major categories (MoA 2000),
which include the following: Arid zone: This zone is less productive and pastoral, occupying
53.5 million hectares (31.5 percent of the country), Semi-arid: This area is less harsh and
occupies 4 million hectares (3.5 percent of the country), Sub moist: This zone occupies 22.2
million hectares (19.7 percent of the country), highly threatened by erosion, Moist: This agro
ecology covers 28 million hectares (25 percent of the country) of the most important agricultural
land of the country, and cereals are the dominant crops, Sub humid and humid: These zones
cover 17.5 million hectares (15.5 percent of the country) and 4.4 million hectares (4 percent of
the country), respectively; they provide the most stable and ideal conditions for annual and
perennial crops and are home to the remaining forest and wildlife, having the most biological
diversity, Per-humid: This zone covers about 1 million hectares (close to 1 percent of the
country) and is suited for perennial crops and forests. Over these diverse agro ecological settings,
mean annual rainfall and temperature vary widely.

The effects of climate change on agricultural production of Ethiopia is manifested through

shortening of maturity period and then decreasing crop yield, changing livestock feed
availability, affecting animal health, growth and reproduction, depressing the quality and

13
quantity of forage crops, changing distribution of diseases, changing decomposition rate,
contracting pastoral zones, expansion of tropical dry forests and expansion of desertification, etc.
Rainfall is highly erratic, most rain falls with high intensity, and there is a high degree of
variability in both time and space.

According to IPCC (2007), the successes and failures of crops have always been subject to
prevailing environmental factors. Crop production is increasingly vulnerable to risks associated
with new and evolving climatic changes. These are variations in environmental conditions that
pose significant challenges to smallholder farmers. The planet is facing more extreme weather
events, such as heavy precipitation, higher coastal waters, geographic shifts in storm and drought
patterns and warmer temperatures.

Besides, Climate change is regularly listed as a major contributor to the food insecure state of
Ethiopia and drought remains the top priority by the government (Coates et al., 2010). Farmers
also reflect this in their claims that the weather is indeed different to what it was a few decades
ago (Amsalu et al., 2007). However, evidence does not bear out any significant change in
rainfall; although it has some changes in the pattern of rainfall have been observed.

There has been a warming trend in the annual minimum temperature over the past 55 years. It
has been increasing by about 0.370C every ten years. The country has also experienced both dry
and wet years over the same period. The trend analysis of annual rainfall shows that rainfall
remained more or less constant when average over the whole county. Ethiopia is the vulnerable
country to climate variability and change due to lower adaptive capacity, low level of socio
economic development, high population growth, inadequate infrastructure and lack of
institutional capacity and heavy reliance on natural resource based socio economic activities
which are highly climate sensitive. The country will experience an increasing level of
temperature and precipitation in the coming decadence (NMA, 2007).

The heavy rainfall and temperature patterns in the different regions in Ethiopia and the
differences in the level of socio-economic development implies that the regions differ in their
vulnerability and adaptive capacity to changing climate related hazards. According to Deressa T.,
Hassan M., Ringler C., (2008) found that Afar, Somali, Tigray and Oromiya regions more
vulnerable to climate change than other rigion of the country. The study revealed that Afar and
14
Somali is attributed to their low level of rural service provision and infrastructure development
and that of Tigray and Oromiya to the higher frequency of drought and flood, lower access to
technology, fewer institutions and lack of institutions. This increasing frequency of droughts and
floods have negatively affected agricultural production, demonstrating agriculture’s sensitive to
climate change.

2.2 Empirical Literature Review

The numbers of studies pointed out on, “determinants of smallholder farmers’ choice of
adaptation strategies to climate change” are indicated as follows;

Aemro et al., (2012) studied on identify the determinants of farmer’s choice of adaptation
strategies to climate change in the Babilie district of Eastern Ethiopia. Multinomial logistic
regression analysis was used to estimate analyze the factors influencing households’ choice of
adaptation strategies to climate change. The multinomial logit analysis reveal that that sex of the
household head, age of the household head and education of the household head, family size,
livestock ownership, household farm income, non/off farm income, access to credit, distance to
the market center, access to farmer-to-farmer extension, agro ecological zones, access to climate
information, and extension contact have a significant impact on climate change adaptation
strategies.

Deressa et al. (2008) studied the determinants of farmers’ choice of adaptation methods to
climate change in the Nile Basin of Ethiopia. The study was used a multinomial logit model to
determine the smallholder farmers’ adaptation measures to climate change. Their result revealed
that the methods identified included use of different crop varieties, tree planting, soil
conservation, early and late planting and irrigation. The results from the discrete choice model
employed indicate that the level of education, gender, age, wealth of the head of household,
access to extension and credit, information on climate, social capital, agro-ecological setting, and
temperature all influence farmers’ to choice adaptation method.

Ringler et al. (2009) they studied on adaptation to climate change in Ethiopia and South Africa:
options and constraints. Based on the finding, climate change is expected to adversely affect
agricultural production in Africa. They used a probit model to examine the factors influencing

15
farmers’ decision to adapt and perceived climate changes. They found that, wealth, and access to
extension, credit, and climate information in Ethiopia; and wealth, government farm support, and
access to fertile land and credit in South Africa are the factors influencing farmers’ decision to
adapt climate change.

Deressa et al., (2010) was used the Heckman model to the same data where a Multinomial model
referred to above was used to assess farmers’ adaptation to climate change. This model initially
assesses farmers’ perceptions that climate is changing followed by examination of the response
to this perception in the form of adaption. The study reveals that education of the household
head, household size, livestock ownership, use of extension services on crop and livestock
production, availability of credit and temperature all positively and significantly affected
adaptation to climate change. However, farm size and high annual average precipitation were
negatively related to adaptation.

Tessema et al. (2013) study examined smallholder farmers’ about climate change, types of
adaptation strategies, factors influencing adaptation choices and barriers to adaptation Eastern
Hararghe Zone, Ethiopia. The data collects from smallholder farmers’ in the study area and
employed a multinomial logit model. The result revealed that planting tree, early planting,
terracing, irrigation and water harvesting. Planting tree is the major adaptation method. Results
of multinomial logit model showed that non-farm income, farm to farm extension, access to
credit, distance to selling markets, distance to purchasing markets, income affect the choice of
adaptation strategies.

Legesse et al. (2012) studied on smallmolder farmers’ perceptions and adaptation to climate
variability and climate change in Doba district, western Harerghe, Ethiopia. The result of the
MNL model revealed that agro-ecological location, sex, family size, plot size, off-farm income,
livestock holding, frequency of extension contact and training are the determinant of factors
influencing adaptation strategies.

Based on the above empirical literature reviews, one can conclude that, most of the determinants
of smallholder farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change are differing from one
place to the other. In addition, the literature reviewed above prevails that there is limited work in

16
area of adaptation strategies to climate change. Moreover, the multinomial logit model (MNLM)
is adopted to study determinants of smallholder farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to
climate change of different studies, indicating that it has wider application and appropriate to use
for such like study. Hence, this study will adopt the most widely applicable method of estimating
determinants of smallholder farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change in the
study area.

2.3. Conceptual Framework of the Study

The figure below depicts the effects of demographic, economic, institutional and natural factors
on smallholder farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change. Smallholder farmers’
choice of adaptation strategies to climate change is affected by demographic factors, economic
factors, institutional factors and natural factors as mentioned below in the figure.
Figure1. Conceptual Framework of the study
Demographic factors; Economics factors
Age Farm size
Educational level Off-farm income
Sex Productivity
Family size Livestock holding
wealth household

Determinants smallholder farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change

Institutional factors
Natural factors
Uses of credit
Extension contact High temperature
Training Annual average
precipitation
Social capital,
Agro-ecological setting

Source: Adopted from the above empirical reviews (own sketch)

17
 CHAPTER THREE
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Description of the Study Area

Location and Area

Odo-Shakiso Woreda is located at 490km from Finfine (Addis Ababa) the capital city of
Ethiopia and 139km from Negele Guji the zonal city. It is boarded by Saba Boru in South, Aga
Wayu by South -West, Birbisa kojawa in West, Adola Rede in the East and Uraga Woreda in the
North. It has an area of 125,492.881 ha. Topographically, it is located between 5o2'29” -
5o58'24” N latitudes and 38o35'0” - 39o13'38” E longitudes.

Population
The Woreda consists of 27 peasants and 2 urban Dwellers kebeles (Magado and Taro town) with
an estimated total population of 124,011 of which 59,776 are females (48.2%) and 64,235
(49.31%) are males. Rural populations are about 83,480 of which 39104 (46.84) are females and
44376 (53.16%), while urban populations are 40,531 of which 20672 are females. Generally,
About 67.31% and 32.68% of the total population of the Woreda lives in rural and urban areas
respectively (OSRLAMO, 2022).
Figure 2: Map of the Study Area

18
Climate and Soils
The District is characterized by three agro-climatic zones, namely Dega, weina-dega and Kola
(locally known as 'Bada or Dega’). The percentage coverage of each climatic zone is Dega33%,
Woina Dega 47% and kola 20%. The mean annual (rainfall)of the Woreda is about 900mm and
the annual temperature of the District 25 0C. Dega which locally known as ‘Bada’, altitudinal
ranging from 2,500metres and above is cover small area of the Woreda , Woina Dega which
locally known as ‘Bada Dare’ is altitudinal ranging from 1850-2500m is cover large area of the
Woreda. This is because of most of the land of the district is located attitudinally between
1500m-2500m. The major soils of district are chromic, and Euphoric with high spatial coverage
of 70%. Camisole found mostly on slopes. The relative humidity is also quiet suitable for the
farm (OSRLAMO, 2022).

Vegetation
High forests, grassland, exposed sand soil and cultivated land are available in the Woreda .
Forests land, exposed sand soil, grassland and cultivated land cover about 403.24, 110.43, 59.6
and 334.5 of the total area of land cover in the Woreda expressed in square kilometer
respectively. Similarly, cultivated land and grassland cover respectively about 25.45 and 2.57 of
the total area of land cover in the district in percent. The Woreda known by its natural forest that
varies from high forest to grasses of lowland. Natural and manmade forests protected by the
community and government. The natural vegetation of this Woreda in 2021 has 14,102.4
hectares of natural forest and 23,764 hectares of manmade forest under preservation and
management in the area (OSRLAMO, 2022).
Crop Production
In general, the size of cultivated land and production obtained vary from season to season as well
as year to year in the Woreda as well as in the kebeles. The largest proportion of the cultivated
land and crops production of the Woreda is accounted by cereals, followed by pulses and others.
Of the Woreda total cultivated land and production obtained, kebeles share is very large. Wheat,
barley, Teff, maize, sorghum, field peas, haricot bean, and chick peas are the most widely
cultivated crops in the Woreda . All agricultural activities are under small-scale peasant holdings.
There is no large scale and state farm in the Woreda . Agricultural systems are characterized by

19
traditional methods. Hand dug and oxen driven are commonly employed methods of plowing in
the Woreda . The uses of modern agricultural inputs are very low(OSRLAMO, 2022).
Relief, Drainage and Climate Relief
Most of the earth surface of the Woreda is ups and down of the land surface with an elevation
ranging from 1500 – 2000 meters in the northwestern part. Both western and eastern boundaries
are marked by two main rivers such as Dawa and Awata. The distance of each rivers from the
center of district are Dawa in western frontier 125km and Awata in eastern frontiers 5km. It is so
drained by these two major rivers, and other streams such as Kojawa and Mormora(OSRLAMO,
2022).

3.2 Research Design

Cross-sectional survey design using (both qualitative and quantitative) approaches will be
employed.This method will be chosen with strong assumption that it is more convenient to
collect several kinds of data regarding farm characteristics, socio-economic, demographic and
institutional factors affecting adaptation strategies. The smallholder households are the main
responsible body for making day to day decisions on climate change adaptation strategies. Thus,
the smallholder households are the basic sampling unit of this study. Survey will be conducted at
household level in the selected kebeles.

3.3. Sources and Methods of Data Collection

In order to collect the reliable data, both primary and secondary sources of data will be used. The
primary data will be collected from smallholder households and others those who have a
relationship with this focus area, using questionnaire, personal observation, oral interview, and
key informant interview. OdoShakiso Office of Agriculture and Natural Resource Management
annual reports, published and unpublished documents, bulletins and websites will be visited to
generate relevant secondary information focusing on human population, agro-ecology, and land
use pattern, topography, soil type, climate, climate change, and adaptation strategies.

Questionnaire

The questionnaires will be designed for smallholder households and to others those have a
relationship with this focus area. Information which describe whether farmers are aware that

20
climate change and adaptation strategies is taking place, how they identify level of adaptation
strategies among different kebeles. Farmers’ climate change adaptation strategies and
determinants that affect their adaptation strategies will be collected by this by questionnaire.
Before the data collection, the questionnaire will be pre-tested and administered by enumerators,
who will be selected based on their educational background to evaluate the appropriateness of
the design, clarity and interpretation of the questions, relevance of the questions and to estimate
time required for an interview. One day training will be given to the enumerators on methods of
data collection, giving prime emphasis to interviewing techniques and the content of the
questionnaire. Subsequently, appropriate modifications and corrections will be made on the
questionnaire. The questionnaire covered different topics in order to capture relevant information
related to the study objectives.

Key Informant Interview

In this study, key informant is an elder or knowledgeable people who has been in the area for
longer period and have/had a deeper knowledge on local issues like on environmental and
livelihood systems as a result, 4 key informants will be picked from each sample kebele and in
general, 12 key informants will be selected from three sample kebeles.

Focus Group Discussion

FGD will be employed with key informants who have similar background and experiences of the
subject. Therefore, FGD will be carried out in each sample kebele with the selected key
informants. It will be carried out to collect detail information on determinants of farmers’
adaptation strategies to climate change. A total of six FGD will be held in three sample kebeles.

3.4. Sampling Technique and Sample Size Determination

The smallholder households are the basic sampling unit of this study. Sampling procedure
combining stratified, purposive and simple random sampling will be used to identity smallholder
households to include in the sample. In general, a three stage sampling technique will be used. In
the first stage, a total of 27 rural kebeles will be stratified into three strata based on agro-ecology.
Stratum 1 (Dega) consists 7 rural kebeles, while stratum 2 (Woina-Dega) consists 14 rural
kebeles and stratum 3 (Kolla) consists of 6 rural kebeles. In the second stage, simple random

21
sampling method will be used to select five sample kebeles. Finally, following systematic
random samp ling technique with probability proportional to sample size in each kebele 149, 104
and 99 rural households were sampled and interviewed from stratum 1, stratum 2 and stratum 3
respectively. Sample size will be determined following a simplified formula provided by
Yamane (1967). Accordingly, the required sample size at 95percent confidence level with degree
of variability of 5percent and level of precision will be used to determine a sample size required
to represent the population.
N 1943
n= 2
n= 2 n = 352
1+ N(e) 1+1943(0.05)
Where, ‘n’ is the designed sample size, ‘N’ is the total number of household heads and ‘e’ is the
level of precision (margin of errors) at 0.05 percent.

3.6. Method of Data Analysis

Based on the objectives of this study both descriptive statistics and econometric models will be
employed to analyze both qualitative and quantitative data.

3.6.1 Descriptive statistics

Descriptive analysis will be used to reduce the data in a summary format by tabulation and
measure of central tendency (standard deviations, mean) in the process of examining and
describing farm household characteristics, resource ownership. Quantitative data will be
analyzed by using descriptive statistics such mean, percentage, standard deviation, and
frequency. Whereas, qualitative data that will be obtained from interviews will be presented by
using charts, frequency and tables. It will be employed to have clear picture and draw some
important conclusions on farmers’ behavior on climate change and adaptation strategies. By
applying it, one can compare and contrast different categories of sample unit with respect to
desired characteristics.

3.6.2 Econometrics Analysis

Common and important economic models and correlation will be applied to determine and
predict the current qualitative findings and their effects on farmers’ adaptation strategies to
climate change.
3.6.3.1 The Binary logit model

22
In this study binary logit model will be employed. Binary logit model take into account the
inter-correlations among all variables listed below. This method is used to determine if the
independent variables will explain the variance in dependent variable. This model will also be
employed to identify the determinant variables that influence farmers’ adaptation strategies to
climate change. It is an appropriate model where the dependent variable is dummy (whether to
use coping or adaptation strategies to minimize the adverse effects of climate change and
variability or not, specified as yes or no = 1, 0 = otherwise). Level of significance will be taken
at p=0.01, p=0.05 and p=0.1 levels for analysis.
The effect of X on the response probabilities, P (y = j/x), can be estimated by using a binary
logit model which is expressed as:

( )
Zi Zi
Yi e e
P = F (Zj) = = −zi ---------------------------------------------------------------------------1
X 1+ e
zi
1+ e

Zi = β0+β1X1i+β2X2i+…+βnXni +μi-----------------------------------------------------------------------2

The specific binary logit model is expressed as follows (Equation (3). The model is commonly
used since they guarantee that the estimated probability increases lie within the range of 0 to 1.
In this model, the dependent variable becomes the natural logarithm of the odds when a positive
choice is made:
Pi
ln( ¿ =β0+β1X1i+β2X2i+……………..+βnXni+μi----------------------------------------------------
1−Pi
3
Where Pi is the probability of adaption; (1 – Pi), in (3) is probability of non-adaption. The
subscript i in equation 3 is the observation in the sample; β1, β2, . . . , βn (Equations 2 and 3) are
the regression coefficients of the explanatory variables; X1, X2, . . . , Xn (Equations 2 and 3) are
the explanatory variables; β0 refers to the constant term and Ui (Equations 2 and 3) is the error
term of the model.

3.7. Definition of Variables and Working Hypotheses

Review of literature, past research finding and writer’s knowledge of the adaptation strategies
situation in the study area will be used to identify the potential determinants of farmers’

23
adaptation strategies to climate change. Therefore the following variables will be selected to
analysis whether they explain farmers’ adaptation strategies to climate change or not.

3.7.1 Dependent variable

The dependent variable for binary logit analysis has a dichotomous nature measuring of farmers’
adaptation strategies to climate change and it takes a value of 1 if the farmers are adaption user
and 0, otherwise. It stated as:

Adaption user (Y1): This represents farmers’ decision to use adaptation strategies to climate
change. It takes the value of ‘1’ .

Adaption non-user (Y0): This represents farmers’ decision to not use adaptation strategies to
climate change. It takes the value of ‘0’.

3.7.2 Independent Variables

Age of household head (AHH):- Age is used to indicate the general experience of the household
head. Age of house hold has significant impact on adaptation to climate change (Afroz & Akhtar,
2017). On the one hand, studies in Ethiopia have shown a positive relationship between number
of years of experience in agriculture and the adoption of improved agricultural technologies. But
according to Marie et al.(2020) study indicates that negative relationship between age and
adoption of improved soil conservation practices. On the other hand, studies by (Mabe et al.,
2014a) indicate that experience in farming increases the probability of acceptance of adaptation
measures to climate change. Therefore, age of household heads as experience increases the
probability of adapting to climate change and it hypothesized to have positive effect on
adaptation strategies.

Family size of household(FZHH):- Family size is positively and significantly related to

household decision to pursue crop-diversification and soil and water conservation. One person
increase in the family can increase the probability of using the two adaptation measures. Those
households’ who have larger family have an opportunity of pursuing various adaptation options
in the face of climate variability (Atinkut & Mebrat, 2020). Thus, its positive shows that the
larger the family size, the higher probability to respond to reduce its effects. Large family’ size,

24
with a large labor force, may decide to divert some of this force to off-farm production, to earn
extra income, to reduce consumption pressure caused by a large household (Kom, 2020).
Therefore, family size will be hypothesized to affect adaptation strategies to climate change
positively.

Credit Utilization (CU):- Utilization of credit is measured as a dummy variable taking a value
of ‘1’ if the household used credit and zero otherwise. Credit utilization is assumed to have a
positive significant to adaptation strategies to climate change, because farmers who get credit
service can purchase inputs and improved varieties and hence increase the production and
productivity (Bate & Kimengsi, 2019).
Farm size (FS):- Farm size has appeared to be positively and significantly correlated with crop-
diversification and soil and water conservation (Atinkut & Mebrat 2020). Households’ with
larger farm sizes are more probably to diversify their crops especially under dry seasons and
reduce the negative impacts of climatic variability. Thus it is expected that the more households’
have larger farms, the more they tend to work more intensively on their land instead of going for
another alternative to adapt to climate change and variability (Ndamani & Watanabe, 2016).

Number of oxen owned by households (N-OXEN): it is a continuous variable that will be

measured by taking into consideration the number of oxen owned by the head of the household
and expected to affects the adaption strategies positively.

Livestock Holding (LITO): it is a continuous variable measured in Tropical Livestock Unit

(TLU). It refers to total number of livestock owned by the households. Livestock are the farmers'
important sources of income, means of transportation, source of food and draught power for crop
cultivation and it is a proxy for the wealth status of the households in the study area.

Education level of the household head (EDUC):It is continues variable and measured using
years of formal schooling of the household head and hypothesized to affect the adaption
strategies positively. It is believed that, if a farmer attained formal education of any level, there is
a tendency to accept technologies that will increase production. On one hand, educated farmers
are expected to have more exposure to the external environment and accumulated knowledge
through formal learning which might enable them to pursue livelihood strategy that leads to
better adaptation knowledge.
25
Distance to Market Center (DMC): It is a continuous variable and measured in walking
minutes from the farm household’s residence to the nearest local market center. Proximity to the
markets enables farmers to sell the necessary inputs, sell outputs at fair prices, and minimize
marketing cost. Therefore, it is hypothesized that distance is negatively related to the
household’s decision to use adaptation.
Access to Training (ASRT): It is a discrete variable, which takes a value of “1” if yes and “0”,
otherwise. Training will increase the awareness level of farmers and exposure to new ideas,
information, activities, opportunities, working environment. Therefore, access to training will
have positive impact on the decision of farmers to use adaptation strategies.
Information (Info): It is a discrete variable which takes a value of “1” if yes and “0”, otherwise.
Access to information refers to ownership of radio, tape, mobile phone, etc that the farmers have
the advantage of getting information about weather information Access to information on
weather is crucial in creating awareness and attitude towards adaptation strategies. Therefore, it
affects choice of adaptation positively.
Perception Households (PH):-According to Atinkut & Mebrat (2020) study result, indicated
that farmers’ perception to climate variability is one of the explanatory variables that affect the
choice of farmers’ adaptation measures. Perception of households’ to the increasing temperature
was found to be positively and significantly correlated with the choice of crop-diversification
and soil and water conservation. Other study conducted by Mabe et al., (2014) suggested that
farmers’ who perceived a change in temperature are more likely to adapt to climate variability by
16 and 14 times greater compared to those who do not perceived a rise in temperature.
According to Mabe et al.(2014) study, farmers’ who did not perceive climate variability did not
adapt at all. This possibility is due to the fact that farmers’ who perceive the variability in
temperature are likely to grow different heat-tolerant crop varieties. Kahsay et al.(2019) found
the same result in that farmers’ who are aware of changes in climatic conditions have higher
chances of taking adaptive measures in response to the observed change

Farming experience (FE):- Mabe et al., (2014) study result shows, the number of years a farmer
has spent cultivating crops on a farm is considered as his/her agricultural experience. Possessing
many years of farming experience implies that one is better informed about climate variability
and change in relation to crop produce, in the study areas; hence, experienced farmers are likely

26
to use adaptation strategies which had reduced the effects of change and improved crop
production. Also Atinkut & Mebrat (2020) reported that, farming experience help with the easy
implementation of different types of adaptation techniques. Yesuf, 2008) study also revealed
that households with experience in agricultural production for long years are farmers those their
age had a minimum age of 31 years. Above findings disagree with studies by Hassan &
Nhemachena (2008), who claim that, the age of farmers does not matter when it involves
adaptation methods for climate variation, but rather the number of years involved in farming
activities that count the most.

Access to extension service (EXTS):-(Atinkut & Mebrat, 2020) study reveals that access to
extension contact is one of those significant variables that affect the farmers’ choice of
adaptation. Results of the regression models shows that extension contact has positive and
significant correlation with the likelihood of choosing the adaptation measure such as crop-
diversification, soil and water conservation practice. Also Mabe et al.(2014) suggested that a
one unit increase in the extension contact is likely to increase the probability of the farmer to
adapt the adaptation measures by higher than those households’ who do not access extension
services. Also Bate & Kimengsi(2019) suggested that farmers’ who have access to extension
services are more likely to be aware of climatic conditions. This result is in line with many
researchers Mesfin & Bekele (2018)who noticed that farmers’ who obtain information through
extension workers are more likely informed about the climatic situation and the responses.

Sex of house hold head(SHH):- According to Yesuf (2008) suggested that there is big variation
among male-headed households and female headed household to get information about climate
change impact and importance of adaptation to reduce the adverse impact of climate change.
Male-headed households are more likely to get information about new technologies and
undertake risky businesses than female-headed households. According Marie et al.(2020) study
showed that the multinomial logic model result revealed that gender of the households had a
positive impact on farmer's decision to choose adaptation options in all cases but it was
statistically significant in the choice of use and growing of improved crop varieties. This implies
that male-headed households had better opportunities to practice adaptation measures than
female-headed households. It showed that male-headed households could be more likely to have
access to technologies and climate change information than female-headed households. As a

27
result, they were in a better position to practice diverse adaptation strategies than female-headed
ones.

Table 1: Type, Definition, Measurement, and Hypothesis of variable

Variable Definition Type Measurement Hypothesis
Dependent Climate change Dummy 1=Adopt ,0=non adopt
Adaptation strategies
Independent
SEXHH Male or female Dummy 1= male,0= otherwise +/-
AGHH Age of house hold Continuous Year +/-
EDUHH Education of household Dummy 1=literate,0=otherwise +/-
FSHH Family size of household Continuous Number +/-
LAND OWN Land ownership Dummy 1=yes.0otherwise
FARMSIZE Farm size of household Continuous Hectare +/-
ACC.CU credit Utilization Dummy 1=credit user,0=otherwise +/-
ACCTR Access to extension service Dummy 1=training,0=otherwise +/-
FARPER Farmers Perception Dummy 1= Perceive ,0=otherwise +/-
INCOHH amount of farm income Continuous Birr +/-
INFORMAV Information access Dummy 1=Yes,0=otherwise +/-
DISTANCE From plot of land Dummy 1=yes ,0= otherwise +/-
LIVESTOCK Livestock ownership Dummy 1= owned,0=otherwise +/-
FARM-EXP Farming experience in Year Continuous Year +/-
ACCTRAIN Training for local farmers Dummy 1= yes,0 =otherwise +/-
LIVSTOCKU Number of livestock Continuous Numbers of livestock +/-

28
 4. WORKING PLAN
Table 1. Work Plan

S.N List of activities Months

April May June July Aug Sep Oct

1 Checklist and questionnaire X

development
2 Identifying respondents X
3 Orientation and train X
enumerators
4 Conduct the actual survey X X
5 Search additional literatures X X
6 Data coding and entry X
7 Data editing X
8 Data analysis and write up X X
9 Organization of the finding X
10 Submission of the finding X

5. BUDGET SUMMARY
Required budget for research undertaking is as stated below.

29
Table 2: Budget breakdown by personal and transport expense

1. Personal expense
No. Description No Working day Per diem Total fee (ETB)

1 Enumerators Training 6 3 50 900

2 Per diem for Enumerators 6 3 50 900
3. Stationary and printing (1pack A4 paper, 300 printing pages (proposal, research report, and
questionnaire duplication)) and payment for questionnaire
10800.00,
SubTotal 12600.00

2. Transport Expenses
Person Departure No of Destination Cost /one Total Cost (ETB)
round trips trip (ETB )
Researcher BHU 6 Sampled kebeles 400 2400.00

Sub total 2400.00

Budget Summary
No Description Sub-Total (ETB)
1 Per diem and stationary fee 12600.00
2 Transport expense 2400.00
Grand Total 15000.00
Budget Source: Self

30
REFERENCE
Adugna. (2015). Assessment Of Challenges And Opportunities Of Wetlands Management In Bule
Hora District , Borena Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Star(Science, Technology And Arts
Research Journal ), 99-111.
Andualem. (2015). Impacts Of Climate Change On Agriculture In Ethiopia: What, When, Where
And How?
Afroz, R., & Akhtar, R. (2017). Research Article Determinants Of Malaysian Farmers ’ Choice
Of Adaptation Strategies For Adapting To Climate Change In Kedah Malaysia Rafia Afroz
And Rulia Akhtar. Asian Journal Of Agricultural Research, 11, 120–127.
Asrat, P., & Simane, B. (2018). Farmers ’ Perception Of Climate Change And Adaptation
Strategies In The Dabus.
Atinkut, B., & Mebrat, A. (2020). Determinants Of Farmers Choice Of Adaptation To Climate
Variability In Dera District , South Gondar Zone , Ethiopia. Environmental Systems
Research, 2016.
Deressa. (2008). Analysis Of Perception And Adaptation To Climate Change In The Nile Basin
Of Ethiopia. Centre For Environmental Economics And Policy For Africa (Ceepa). University
Of Pretoria. University Of Pretoria. .
Eea. (2019). Climate Change Adaptation In The Agriculture Sector In Europe. European
Environment Agency.
Enete, A. A., & Amusa, T. A. (2019). Challenges Of Agricultural Adaptation To Climate
Change In Nigeria : A Synthesis From The Literature Challenges Of Agricultural
Adaptation To Climate Change In Nigeria : A Synthesis From The Literature 1. 4(April), 0–
11.
Fuss S Et Al . (2018). Negative Emissions—Part 2: Costs, Potentials And Side Effects. Environ
Res Lett 13:063002.
Gedefaw, M., Girma, A., Denghua, Y., Hao, W., & Agitew, G. (2018). Earth Science & Climatic
Change Farmer ’ S Perceptions And Adaptation Strategies To Climate Change , Its
Determinants And Impacts In Ethiopia : Evidence From Qwara District. 9(7).
Gallant K Et Al . (2020). Measurement And Economic Valuation Of Carbon Sequestration In
Nova Scotian Wetlands. Ecol Econ 171:106619.

31
Gasseret. Al . (2015). Negative Emissions Physically Needed To Keep Global Warming Below 2
°C. Nat Commun 6:7958.
Gren And Aklilu . (2016). Policy Design For Forest Carbon Sequestration: A Review Of The
Literature. For Policy Econ 70:128–136.
Gornall, J., Betts, R., Burke, E., Clark, R., Camp, J., Willett, K., & Wiltshire, A. (2010).
Implications Of Climate Change For Agricultural Productivity In The Early Twenty-First
Century. 2973–2989. Https://Doi.Org/10.1098/Rstb.2010.0158
Hassan And Nhemachena. (2007). Micro-Level Analysis Of Farmers’ Adaptation To Climate
Change In Southern Africa. Ifpri Discussion Paper No. 00714. I Washington, D.C.
Nternational Food Policy Research Institute,16.
Hache Et.Al. (2015). Decarbonization Wedges.
Harper Ab Et Al . (2018). Land-Use Emissions Play A Critical Role In Landbased Mitigation
For Paris Climate Targets. Nat Commun 9:2938.
Hepburn Et. Al . (2019). The Technological And Economic Prospects For Co2 Utilization And
Removal. Nature 575:87–97.
Ipcc. (2014). Impacts, Adaptation, And Vulnerability. Intergovernmental Panel On Climate
Change.
Ipcc. (2015). (Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change). (2015).Climate Change: Synthesis
Report. Contribution Of Working Groups I, Ii And Iii To The Fifth Assessment Report Of
The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change. Geneva,.
Ipcc. (2018). Global Warming Of 1.5 °C. In: Masson-Delmotte V,Zhai P, Pörtner H-O, Roberts
D, Skea J, Shukla Pr, Pirani A, Moufouma-Okia W, Péan C, Pidcock R, Connors S,
Matthews Jbr, Chen Y, Zhou X, Gomis Mi, Lonnoy E, Maycock Thews Jbr, Chen Y, Zhou
X, Go.
Kahsay, H. T., Guta, D. D., Birhanu, B. S., & Gidey, T. G. (2019). Farmers ’ Perceptions Of
Climate Change Trends And Adaptation Strategies In Semiarid Highlands Of Eastern
Tigray , Northern Ethiopia. 2019.
Kom, Z. (2020). Determinants Of Small-Scale Farmers ’ Choice And Adaptive Strategies In
Response To Climatic Shocks In Vhembe District , South Africa. Geojournal, 7.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S10708-020-10272-7

32
Lakshmi K Et.Al . (2015). A. Applications Of Biotechnological Tools To Overcome Climate
Change And Its Effects On Agriculture. Research News For U (Rnfu) Issn; 20: 2250 –
3668.
Lin. (2019). Carbon Dioxide Removal After Paris. Ecol Law Q 45:533.
Mabe, F. N., Sienso, G., & Donkoh, S. (2014). Determinants Of Choice Of Climate Change
Adaptation Strategies In Northern Ghana. 6(4).
Marie, M., Yirga, F., Haile, M., & Tquabo, F. (2020). Heliyon Farmers ’ Choices And Factors
Affecting Adoption Of Climate Change Adaptation Strategies : Evidence From
Northwestern Ethiopia. Heliyon, 6(December 2019), E03867
Misganaw Et.Al. (2014). Investigating The Determinants Of Adaptation Measures To Climate
Change: A Case Of Batii District, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Int J Agric Res 9(4):169–
186.
Montpellier Panel Report . (2015). The Farms Of Change: African Smallholders Responding To
An Uncertain Climate Future. Retrieved From: Https://Reliefweb.Int/Sites/Reliefweb.
Ndamani, F., & Watanabe, T. (2016). Determinants Of Farmers’ Adaptation To Climate Change:
A Micro Level Analysis In Ghana. Scientia Agricola, 73(3), 201–208.
Ndukwe, O. O., Aba, S., Amu, C. J., & Baiyeri, P. (2017). The Role Of Trees And Plantation
Agriculture In Mitigating Global Climate Change Okorie Ndukwe * Corresponding
Author : Nduemeka26@Yahoo.Com Department Of Crop Science , University Of Nigeria ,
Nsukka , Nigeria Department Of Crop Science And Horticulture , Nnamdi Azikiwe
University , Awka ,. November.
Opaluwa, H. I., Opeyemi, G., & Eleojo, M. J. (2020). Journal Of Agribusiness And Rural
Development Determinants Of Choice Of Climate Change Adaptation Strategies Among
Rural Farming Households In Lokoja Local Government Area.
Pires Jcm. (2019). Negative Emissions Technologies: A Complementary Solution For Climate
Change Mitigation. Sci Total Environ.
Ren21. (2019). Renewables 2019—Global Status Report. Https://Www. Global Energy Report.
Royalsociety . (2018). Greenhouse Gas Removal .
Tesfahun, W. (2018). Climate Change Mitigation And Adaptation Through Biotechnology
Approaches : A Review. 2(1), 62–74

33
Villa And Bernal. (2018). Carbon Sequestration In Wetlands, From Science To Practice: An
Overview Of The Biogeochemical Process, Measurement Methods, And Policy
Framework. Ecol Eng 114:115–128.
Vinca A Et Al . (2018). The Role Of Carbon Capture And Storage Electricity In Attaining 1.5
And 2 °C. Int J Greenh Gas Control 78:148–159.
Westengen, O. T., & Brysting, A. K. (2014). Crop Adaptation To Climate Change In The Semi-
Arid Zone In Tanzania : The Role Of Genetic Resources And Seed Systems. 1–12.
Wolka, K., & Zeleke, G. (2016). Understanding Farmers’ Perception On Climate Change And
Adaptation Strategies In Karetha Watershed, Omo-Gibe Basin, Ethiopia. Asian Journal Of
Earth Sciences, 10(1), 22–32.
Yesuf, M. (2008). Analyzing The Determinants Of Farmers ’ Choice Of Adaptation Methods And
Perceptions Of Climate Change In The Nile Basin Of Ethiopia. September.

34