Assessing the Impact of Productive Safety Net Program on Asset Building and Sustainable Land Management Practices in Agro-Pastoralist

Reader Impact Factor Score
[Total: 7 Average: 5]

Published on International Journal of Agriculture & Agribusiness
ISSN: 2391-3991, Volume 2, Issue 1, page 1 – 39
Publication Date: 4 February 2019

Ahmed Mohammed & Abdikadir Mohammed
Jigjiga University
Jigjiga, Ethiopia

Journal Full Text PDF: Assessing the Impact of Productive Safety Net Program on Asset Building and Sustainable Land Management Practices in Agro-Pastoralist.

Abstract
The main objective of the study is to assess the impact of productive safety net program (PSNP) on asset accumulation and sustainable land management (SLM) practices in agro pastoralist zone of fafan. To this effect primary and secondary data were collected from the rural households of the study area. Both descriptive analysis and econometrics models were used for data analysis. The study was also had two main impact indicators, i.e, asset holding and sustainable land management. Under asset the livestock asset is converted to the Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) while the non-livestock assets are measured based on their current market value as reported by the respondents. Under the land management there are two groups: soil conservation (stone and soil bunds, in meter per timad) and fertility improvement practices (chemical and natural fertilizer application, in kg and quintal per timad respectively). Based on the econometrics estimation results selection (participation in the productive safety net programs) was significantly influenced by household demographic characteristics, such as household head gender, family size, number of active female labor, and housing condition and number of food gap months per year experienced by the household. The second stage outcome that is the impact of program participation was found to be positive and significant for both asset formation (livestock, productive and non-productive) and land management (soil and stone bund, and chemical and natural fertilizer). Generally the result indicated that, due to program participation beneficiary households have higher asset size and more involved in land management as compared to non-beneficiary households

Keywords: Agro-Pastoralist, Sustainable Land Management

1. Introduction
1.1. Background
In all parts of the world the rural poor are vulnerable to both internal and external shocks like natural disasters, seasonal hardship etc. They lack enough resource capabilities to sustain their livelihood which is emanated from limited access to credit and their engagement in low income generating activities. This vulnerability to external shocks and almost negligible capacity to mitigate those shocks forces them to sell their asset and destroy their environment and these reaction pushes them to deeper dimness of poverty (Khaleque et al., undated).Worldwide, Government and Nongovernmental organizations adopts social protection measures that aims to help the poor households to sustain their minimum livelihood, deals with shocks and thus preserve their natural endowments (Ibid).
‘Agriculture is the mainstay of Ethiopia economy, since more than 80% of the country’s 80 million labor force are farmers, 90% of the exports are agricultural commodities and about half of the GDP is generated from this sector (Teshome 2010;cited in Tessema 2011)’.Given this facts economic progress of the country is highly dependent on the performance of the sector.
In Ethiopia, according to the recent information from the ministry of agriculture, despite the recent encouraging works from both the people and government of Ethiopia that resulted in two digit economic growth for the last decade and the resulting substantial reduction in the national poverty figure, the ministry of agriculture recently announced that still over 4 million people are facing the problem of food insecurity.
The poor performance of the agricultural sector, a sector in which the country’s economy is hugely relied on, is to be blamed for the immense gap between food demand and food supply which makes many Ethiopians food unsecured. Moreover, as cited in Abebaw, (FAO, 2001) further indicated the fact that the base of Ethiopia’s food self-sufficiency problem is its poor agricultural productivity. The major bottlenecks of agricultural productivity includes: Adverse changes in climate, along with long term factors (technology, environmental and institutional) resulted in a diminished land holding, soil degradation and a deteriorated yield per hectare (FDRE, 2001. The decline in land holding has forced in almost no fallow periods and continuous cropping, and by minimizing the efforts to recycle crop residues or other organic matter into the soil have resulted in farmers having to invest in chemical fertilizer to produce enough for their subsistence requirement (FAO, 2001; cited in Abebaw, 2003).
The inability of agriculture to feed the growing population and deterioration of natural resource base forced the country to be food insecure and hence reliant on food aids for the last four decades (Gilligan et al., 2008). Ethiopia stands first in terms of getting emergency aid for survival per capita in sub-Saharan African nation, with an average of …..

1.2. Statement of the Problem
As cited in Habtamu (2011), “ When poor people encounter shocks, they suffer from the direct effect of poverty and hunger making them less productive and less able to earn a living. They are also forced to employ negative coping strategies such as reducing food consumption, selling productive assets, and removing children from school (Barret, 2001). These strategies further diminish their asset base and make them more vulnerable to the next shock, which leads them to further worse condition. This vicious cycle is referred to as poverty trap. It is difficult for the poor to escape the poverty trap unaided. They require a combination of development activities complemented by social protection transfers such as safety nets (Yadete, 2008).” …….