Assessment of Selected Soil Fertility Status and Indigenous Soil

Fertility Management Practice under Different Land Use Type at

Molode Watershed Dedessa District, Buno Bedele Zone of
Oromiya Region, Ethiopia

MSc Thesis Research Proposal

By:
Hawi Bedru

Submitted to the Department of Natural Resources Management, College of

Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Jimma University, in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in
Watershed Management

Major advisor: Alemayehu Regassa (PhD)

Co-advisor: Obsu Hirko (MSc)

April, 2021
Jimma, Ethiopia

i
 APPROVAL SHEET
Thesis proposal Submission Form (F-01)

Name of student: Hawi Bedru TujumaID №:RU7908/11

Title: Assessment of Soil Fertility Status and Indigenous Soil Fertility Management Practice
under Different Land Use Type at Molode Watershed Dedessa District, Buno Bedele
Zone of Oromiya Region, Ethiopia

I declare that the proposed research work has not been done anywhere else before or is not
part of an ongoing work.

Name of the student: Hawi Bedru Signature____________ Date_____________

We have agreed to supervise the proposed research work. We have evaluated the content of
the proposal, found to be satisfactory, complete, and according to the standards and formats of
the university. We have also verified that the work has not been done anywhere else before.

Name Signature Date

Major advisor: Alemayehu Regassa (PhD) _____________ ____________

Co-advisor: Obsu Hirko (MSc)_____________ ____________

Decision / suggestion of Department Graduate Council (DGC)

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________

Chairperson (DGC) ____________________________ signature_________/______

Chairperson (CGS) _____________________________signiture_______/_________

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS.........................................................................................................ii
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................vi
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background and Justification............................................................................................1
1.2 Statement of the problem..................................................................................................3
1.3 Objectives of the study......................................................................................................4
1.3.1 General Objective...........................................................................................................4
1.3.2 Specific objectives......................................................................................................4
1.4 Research questions of the study........................................................................................4
1.5 Significance of the study...................................................................................................4
2. LITRATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................................5
2.1 Soil and Sustainable Agriculture.......................................................................................5
2.1.1 Concepts of Soil Quality.............................................................................................5
2.1.2 Concepts of Soil Fertility...........................................................................................6
2.2 Soil Fertility Depletion and Its Impacts............................................................................6
2.2.1 Soil fertility depletion.................................................................................................6
2.2.2 Causes of Soil Fertility Depletion..................................................................................7
2.3 Effects of Land Use Change on Biological and Physic-chemical Properties of soil........8
2.4 Soil fertility management interventions..........................................................................10
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS.......................................................................................11
3.1 Description of the Study Area.........................................................................................11
3.1.1 Location of the study area.......................................................................................11
3.1.2 Agricultural practices and land use systems...........................................................12
3.1.3 Soil types of the study area.....................................................................................12
3.1.4 Climate condition of the study area........................................................................12
3.1.5 Land use and vegetation..........................................................................................12
3.2 The livelihood of the community................................................................................13
3.2.1 Method of Data Collection...........................................................................................13

iii
 3.2.2 Site selection.............................................................................................................13
3.2.3Soil sampling.............................................................................................................14
3.2.4 Household sampling technique.................................................................................14
3.2.5 Household interviews...............................................................................................15
3.2.5.1 Focus group discussion......................................................................................15
3.2.5.2 Key informant’s interview.................................................................................16
3.2.5.3. Methods of Data Analysis.................................................................................16
3.2.5.4 Soil laboratory analysis......................................................................................16
3.2.5.5 Statistical analysis............................................................................................16
3WORK PLAN........................................................................................................................17
5. BUDGET BREAKDOWN..................................................................................................18
6. REFERENCES....................................................................................................................20
APPENDIX..............................................................................................................................30

iv
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Distribution of sampled household of the watershed

Table 2 Activities and time plan
Table 3 Cost of stationery and field materials
Table 4 Laboratory chemical cost
Table 5 Perdiems and transportation cost
Table 6 Budget summary

v
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Map of the study area......................................................................................................11

vi
 APPENDIX

Appendix 1:Household survey questionnaires..........................................................................30

Appendix 2:Check-list of focus group discussion....................................................................31
Appendix3:Key Informant Interview........................................................................................31

vii
 ACCRONYMS AND ABBREVATIONS

DWANRO Didessa Woreda Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Office

Al Aluminum

CEC Cat ion Exchange Capacity

IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute

ISFM Integrated Soil Fertility Management

K Potassium

N Nitrogen

NAEI National Agricultural Extension Intervention

NAEIP National Agricultural Extension Intervention Program

OC Organic Carbon

OM Organic Matter

P Phosphorus

PADETS Participatory Demonstration and Training Extension System

PH Power of Hydrogen

viii
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and Justification

The sub-Saharan Africa is the only region of the world where per capita food production has
remained stagnant for a long time (Sanchez, 2002). The majority of the resource poor people
in this region reside in rural areas and agriculture is the principal economic sector upon which
they depend for their livelihoods. Africa’s food security is directly related to insufficient total
food production. Low agricultural production results in low income, poor nutrition, low
consumption, poor education, poor health and lack of empowerment (Kanonge etal., 2015).
Although the low crop productivity is due to many factors, however, decline in soil fertility is
considered to be one of the major factors for this situation (Smaling and Braun, 1996;
(Vitouseket al., 2009).Depletion of soil fertility often results in low yields which threatens
household food security. Consequently, household food security and nutrition issues are at the
top of the planning agenda in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa (Babu, 2000).

Over the past several decades, the conversion of native forest to agricultural land use has
accelerated and featured in the development of Ethiopian landscapes and has apparently
contributed to the widespread occurrence of degraded land across most part of the country.
However, different land use practices have a varied impact on soil degradation and on both
physical and chemical property of soil (Chimdiet al., 2012). Physical and chemical properties
of soils on land under continuous cultivation could vary from the land that remains
uncultivated for a long period of time (Habtamu etal.,2014). The factors causing nutrient
depletion in the cultivated lands of Ethiopia include cultivation on steep and fragile soils,
limited recycling of dung and crop residues to the soil, deforestation, overgrazing and
torrential rainfall patterns (Heluf, 2009). Using crop residues as livestock feed and dung as
fuel instead of fertilizer for instance is estimated to reduce Ethiopia’s agricultural gross
domestic product (GDP) by 7% Hurni (1993) where the study area is not escaped from these
acute problems. Successful agriculture requires the sustainable use of soil resource, because
soil can easily lose its quality and quantity within a short period of time for different reasons
such as intensive cultivation, leaching and soil erosion (Kiflu and Beyene, 2013).Traditional
farming practices such as burning of crop residues, overgrazing, and continuous cultivation

1
without fallowing and excessive plowing is resulting in decline of soil fertility (Omotayo and
Chukwuka, 2009).The projected soil fertility decline by Mahmud et al. (2005) indicates that
about 2,106,000 km2 (9.6% of the total area of Ethiopia) was not able to sustain arable
cropping in 2010. Stoorvogel et al. (1993) estimated that about 41 kg of N, 6 kg of P and 26
kg of K is lost per hectare per year from Ethiopian highlands. On top of this, approximately
41% of the total farmland of the country is acidic, of which nearly one-third faces the problem
of aluminum toxicity (EATA, 2013).Agricultural practice, therefore, requires basic
knowledge of sustainable use of the land (Takele et al., 2014).Various studies have been
conducted on soil-land use interactions. Agoume and Birang (2009), reported significant
variation of sand, silt and clay fractions in soils of different land use types and also Cho et al.
(2004) observed different soil quality indices in forestland, cultivated land and fallow land.
Guo and Gifford (2002) reported reduction of organic carbon content by 59% due to land use
change from forest to cropland. Reduction in the soil quality index by 44% was also noted by
Islam and Weil (2000) due to land use change from forest to cultivated land.

The evaluation of soil fertility is perhaps the most basic decision making tool in order to
impose appropriate nutrient management strategies (Brady & Weil, 2002). There are various
techniques for soil fertility evaluation, among them soil testing is the most widely used in the
world (Havlin et al., 2010). Soil testing assess the current fertility status and provides
information regarding nutrient availability in soils which forms the basis for the fertilizer
recommendations for maximizing crop yields and to maintain the adequate fertility in soils for
longer period. The texture, structure, colour etc. are important soil physical parameters.
Similarly, soil reaction (pH), organic matter, macro and micronutrients etc. are also important
soil chemical parameters. The physical and chemical tests provide information about the
capacity of soil to supply mineral nutrients (Ganorkar & Chinchmalatpure, 2013). Therefore,
this study will be aimed to assess fertility status of selected soil physicochemical properties
and indigenous soil fertility management practice under different land use types at Molode
Watershed.

2
1.2 Statement of the problem

Land use in tropical areas cause significant modifications in soil properties in which
agriculture have a major contribution (Pal et al.,2013) and especially cultivation of deforested
land, may rapidly diminish soil quality (Ayoubi et al.,2011). Even though, in the Molode
watershed, to meet the food demands of rapid increasing population, vast tract of land is being
cultivated more intensively and forestlands are being deforested inversely where as the crop
production is decreased from year to year due to inappropriate land management practice. The
conversion of natural ecosystem (forest land) to crop land resulted that nearby cultivated land
converted to cultivation land from 2010 to 2017 where 1579.25ha to 1825ha this also expand
in 24.71% (DWABNO , 2017) this can root cause of decline in soils physical, chemical and
biological properties (Arshad et al., 2010). So this condition lead to decline of soil
productivity that blows food demand and also high pressure on the resource of the study
watershed.

However Changes in land use and soil management can have also a clear effect on soil
fertility (Aluko and Fagbenro, 2000). In this study area insufficient researchers have been
conducted regarding the assessment of soil fertility status and effects of land use types on soil
physical and chemical properties. As a result this information gap in turn in inability to
practice sustainable land use and land management in the study area. So maintaining soil
quality mainly depends on the knowledge of the physicochemical properties of a given soil
(Soares et al., 2005).Assessing soil physicochemical properties helps to understand the
potential status of nutrients in soils of different land uses (Alexandra et al., 2013; Allen and
Pilbeam, 2007). Knowledge about an up-to-dated status of soil physical and chemical
properties of different land use systems plays a vital role in enhancing production and
productivity of the agricultural sectors on sustainable basis and practically oriented basic
information on the status and management of soil physicochemical properties as well as their
effect on soil quality and sustainable utilizations of land resources remains poorly under
stood. Therefore, this study was fill up the knowledge gap on the status of soil fertility
assessment and indigenous soil fertility management practice under different land-use types at
Molode watershed.

3
1.3 Objectives of the study

1.3.1 General Objective

The general objective of this study is to assess the fertility status of soils under different land
use types in the Molode watershed
Status of selected physicochemical properties of soils under different land use types in the
Molode watershed.

1.3.2 Specific objectives

1. To evaluate selected physicochemical properties of soil fertility status under different
land use type
2. To investigate farmers indigenous soil fertility management practice

1.4 Research questions of the study

The study will be addressed the following research questions.
1. What is selected physicochemical property of soil fertility status under different land
use types?
2. How the community of the study area manages soil fertility by indigenous soil
management practice?

1.5 Significance of the study

Assessing soil physical and chemical properties and nutrient status of soil under different land
uses assists policy makers, researchers, extension workers and farmers to have baseline
information to improve the soil fertility and productivity of soils of the study area and
elsewhere which have similar agro-ecology. Research on this line will have paramount
importance as the results obtained from such studies will be used for monitoring changes in
soil fertility and productivity. Moreover, the findings of the study will also be able to add
value to the documentation of the soil fertility status of the study area and provide future line
of work. Further, the findings of the study will assist the other similar studies by being a
reference.

4
 2. LITRATURE REVIEW

2.1 Soil and Sustainable Agriculture

Soil is the foundation for nearly all land uses (Herrick, 2000). Together with water, soil
constitutes the most important natural resource of our physical environment (Arshad and
Martin, 2002). The wise use of this vital resource is essential to promote sustainable
development, feed the growing world population and maintain environmental health (Wang
and Gong, 1998; Hartemink, 1998; Arshad and Martin, 2002). The manner in which soils are
managed has a major impact on agricultural productivity and sustainability (Scholes et al.,
1994). In the past few decades alone, the global grain production growth rate has dropped
from 3% in the 1970s to 1.3% in the early 1990s, which is one of the key indicators of
declining soil quality on a global scale (Steer, 1998). Many agree that no agricultural system
can be claimed to be sustainable without ensuring the sustainability of soil quality (fertility)
(King, 1990; Arshad and Martin, 2002). Indeed, the maintenance or enhancement of soil
quality is considered a key indicator of sustainable agricultural systems (Bouma, 1994).

The term sustainable soil nutrition implies that plant nutrients and the soil physical
environment suitable for plant growth remain at a steady state for the long-term. One way to
insure sustainable soil nutrition is to make sure that all nutrients taken up by plants during
growth are returned to the soil so that they can be used again by plants of the next production
cycle. In this manner, a nutrient cycling is established. In real agro-ecosystems, however, the
cycle never closes because of losses and/or gains. Managing the cycle to minimize losses plus
supplying necessary inputs to compensate for inevitable losses is the key to soil fertility
management and thus sustainable agriculture (King, 1990). The magnitude of nutrient losses
and the extent of input substitutions vary considerably depending on the socio-economic and
cultural setting of the agricultural system.

2.1.1 Concepts of Soil Quality

Soil quality can be denied as “the capacity of a specific kind of soil to function within natural
or managed ecosystem boundaries to sustain plant and animal productivity, maintain or
enhance water and air quality, and support human health and habitation” (Herrick, 2000). It is
usually considered to have three main aspects reflecting physical, chemical, and biological

5
soil properties and is important for assessment of land degradation and for identification of
sustainable land use practices (Dexter, 2004; Singh and Khera, 2009).
Soil quality has been defined by many authors in recent years (e.g. Ouedraogo, 2004; Arshad
and Martin, 2002). Although the definitions are slightly different, all refer to the functions of
the soil to supply plant nutrients and other physic-chemical conditions to plant growth,
promote and sustain crop production, provide habitats to soil organisms, ameliorate
environmental pollution, resist degradation and maintain or improve human and animal health
(Wang and Gong, 1998).

2.1.2 Concepts of Soil Fertility

Soil fertility is defined as ‘‘the quality of a soil that enables it to provide nutrients in adequate
amounts and in proper balance for the growth of specified plants or crops (Arshad and Martin,
2002). Soil fertility is a dynamic natural property which can change under the influence of
natural and human induced factors.

2.2 Soil Fertility Depletion and Its Impacts

2.2.1 Soil fertility depletion
In agriculture, depletion can be due to excessively intense cultivation and inadequate soil
management. Topsoil depletion occurs when the nutrient-rich organic topsoil, which takes
hundreds to thousands of years to build up under natural conditions, is eroded or depleted of
its organic material (Bjonnes, 1997).A decline in soil fertility implies a decline in the quality
of the soil, and soil fertility decline is defined as the decline in chemical soil fertility, or a
decrease in the levels of soil organic matter, pH, cation exchange capacity (CEC), and plant
nutrients. Growing agricultural crops implies that nutrients (N, P, K, etc.) are removed from
the soil through the agricultural produce (food, fibre, wood) and crop residues. Nutrient
removal may result in a decline of the soil fertility if replenishment with inorganic or organic
nutrient inputs are inadequate. Soil fertility depletion is the fundamental cause of declining
per capita food biomass, especially in developing countries (Omotayo and Chukwuka, 2009).
However, in many parts of the developing countries, the availability, use and profitability of
inorganic fertilizers have been low whereas, there has been intensification of land-use and
expansion of crop cultivation to marginal soil. As a result, soil fertility has been declined.

6
Soil fertility decline thus includes;-nutrient depletion or nutrient decline (larger removal than
addition of nutrients), Nutrient mining (large removal of nutrients and no inputs), acidification
(decline in pH and=or an increase in exchangeable Al), the loss of organic matter, an increase
in toxic elements (e.g., Al, Mn).

2.2.2 Causes of Soil Fertility Depletion

Population growth, intensification of land-use and expansion of crop cultivation to marginal
soil, deforestation, over cultivation, over grazing etc are the major factors of soil fertility
depletion (Adugnaw, 2014). Complex sets of socioeconomic, institutional and technological
variables that hinder adoption of sustainable soil fertility management technologies are also
underlying causes of soil fertility decline (Bekele & Holden, 2000). Among others, rural
poverty, which is believed to trap small-scale Ethiopian farmers in vicious circles of poverty
and soil fertility depletion, is thought to be the major socioeconomic factor that threatens
sustainable soil fertility management, soil health and agricultural yield in the country (Assemu
& Shigdaf, 2014; Edwards, 2010).

2.2.3 Impacts of soil fertility depletion

Soil fertility decline is the major environmental challenge that threatens agricultural
productivity and the livelihoods of millions of rural households in Ethiopia (Mitiku et al.,
2007). The projected soil fertility decline by Mahmud et al. (2005) indicates that about
2,106,000 km2 (9.6% of the total area of Ethiopia) was not able to sustain arable cropping in
2010. Stoorvogel et al. (1993) estimated that about 41 kg of N, 6 kg of P and 26 kg of K is
lost per hectare per year from Ethiopian highlands. On top of this, approximately 41% of the
total farmland of the country is acidic, of which nearly one-third faces the problem of
aluminum toxicity (EATA, 2013). The direct cost of this soil fertility depletion was estimated
to be 3-7% of agricultural GDP (Berry et al., 2003). Even though the extent of this problem
varies spatially depending on variation in geology, relief, ecology, rainfall, land use, soil types
and population density (Adugnaw, 2014), the problem is exceptionally severe in the highlands
of the country, where 88% of human and 77% of the total livestock population is concentrated
(Teklu, 2005).

7
The severity of the problem is partly attributed to topographic and climatic variables (Wood,
1993). But, it has been severely intensified by anthropogenic factors, such as land use/land
cover change, overgrazing, over cultivation, farming of fragile steep slopes and inappropriate
soil management practices (Adugnaw, 2014). Due to the strong association that exists
between land use and soil properties, land use change from natural ecosystem to agricultural
landscape is one of the major human induced factors that threaten soil nutrient content in
Ethiopia (Tsehaye & Mohammed, 2013; Woldeamlak, 2003). This intimate soil-land use
interaction is directly reflected through the impacts of vegetation which acts both as
independent and dependent variable in its interaction with soil properties (Jenny, 1994).

2.3 Effects of Land Use Change on Biological and Physic-chemical Properties of soil

Conversion of land-uses results in change in soil characteristics which in turn affects the soil
fertility (Onwudike et al., 2015). Various studies have been conducted on soil-land use
interactions. Agoume and Birang (2009), reported significant variation of sand, silt and clay
fractions in soils of different land use types. Cho et al. (2004) observed different soil quality
indices in forestland, cultivated land and fallow land. Guo and Gifford (2002) reported
reduction of organic carbon content by 59% due to land use change from forest to cropland.
Reduction in the soil quality index by 44% was also noted by Islam and Weil (2000) due to
land use change from forest to cultivated land. In Cote d’Ivoire, natural forest, multi-tree
species plantation, teak plantation, cocoa plantation and mixed crop fields significantly varied
in their organic matter contents and soil pH values (Yao, 2010). Variations in abundance and
diversity of soil microorganisms were also noted in soils of different land use types in the
Taita Taveta region of Kenya (Wachira et al., 2009). These effects of land use were found to
be more marked on chemical and biological properties of soil than on physical soil
characteristics (Schipper & Sparling, 2000).

Soil properties also vary within the same land use type due to variation in types and intensity
of soil management (Cox et al., 2002; Dang, 2007; Jin et al., 2011). Soils fertilized using
organic fertilizers are characterized by larger carbon pools, faster humification rates, greater
nitrogen contents and better efficiency of organic matter turnover than soils fertilized by
inorganic fertilizers (Canali et al., 2012). Amare et al. (2005) observed spatial variations of
soil fertility levels in the mixed farming system of Ethiopia. Fantawet al. (2015) found a

8
significant variation of soil organic carbon content due to land use, soil depth and the land
use-soil depth interactions in the Central Rift Valley area of Ethiopia. Tilahun and Assefa
(2009) observed significant variation of soil nutrient content in cultivated land, fallow land,
forestland and grassland of Bale highlands. Mulugeta and Stahr (2010) reported statistically
significant variation of soil organic matter, total nitrogen and available phosphorus contents
between conserved and non-conserved soils of similar land use types.

Soil pH, organic carbon and total nitrogen contents varied significantly across soils of
natural vegetation, tree plantation, cropland and grazing land in the Central Highlands of
Ethiopia (Aklilu, 2006). Woldeamlak (2003) noted lower exchangeable bases, and higher
sand contents in soils of cultivated fields, grazing land and eucalyptus plantations as
compared to soils of natural forests in the Blue Nile Basin of Ethiopia. Differences in particle
size distribution, field capacity, permanent wilting point, soil organic matter, total nitrogen,
exchangeable base content, and soil pH value were also observed across soils of natural
forest, cultivated land, grassland and plantation forest in Northern Highlands of Ethiopia
(Tsehaye & Mohammed, 2013). Teshome et al. (2013) reported that soil organic matter
content of cultivated land was significantly lower than forest and grazing lands in Western
Ethiopia. Total nitrogen content under grazing and native forest was found to be significantly
higher than that of cropland in the Bale Mountains of the South-eastern Ethiopian Highlands
(Fantaw et al., 2007). Assefa et al. (2016) reported higher soil organic carbon stocks in soils
of shrub and forest lands than in soils of cultivated and grazing lands in the landscape of the
Upper Blue Nile Basin of Ethiopia.

Deforestation and cultivation of virgin tropical soils often lead to depletion of N, P, sulfur (S)
and other plant nutrients that lead to aluminum (Al), iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) toxicity
which increase soil acidity (Barauah, and Barthakulh, 1997; Barry and Ejigu, 2005). Physical
and chemical properties of the soils on land under continuous cultivation could vary from the
other land uses (Bationo, 2007; Belay, 2005). Cultivated soils are poor in its fertility status as
it has high bulk density (ƥb) (Cardelli, 2012), low total porosity (ƒ) low pH (Chorowicz,
1998) and very low OM or organic carbon (OC) content (Diaz, 2005; Chorowicz et al., 1998).
Cultivation has also altered other soil chemical properties and characterized by low in total N
(Eyayu et al., 2009; FAO, 2006a; FAO, 2006b), available S (Gao, and Chang, 1996; FAO,

9
2006b) cation exchange capacity (CEC) (Arshad, 2010) and exchangeable bases of calcium
(Ca), magnesium (Mg), potassium (K) and sodium (Na) (Gebeyaw, 2007; Gebreyohannes,
2001) but relatively high in available P (Guo and Gifford, 2001; Belay, 2003; Blair, 1996).

2.4 Soil fertility management interventions

Various mechanical and biological soil conservation programs were launched since 1970s to
address the problem of soil fertility decline in Ethiopia (Tesfa & Tripathi, 2015). These
programs mainly focused on arresting soil erosion by using structural soil conservation
measures without sufficiently considering the underlying causes of soil nutrient depletion,
socio-economic factors, and the tangible benefits to poor farmers (FAO, 2003). Farmers’
priorities for various soil fertility management techniques were given less attention as the
programs were mostly designed by a top-down approach (Betru, 2002). Hence, soil
conservation strategies that were oriented towards physical structure could not adequately
address the problem of soil fertility decline and agricultural yield stagnation in the country
(Gerishu & Mvena, 2011). A number of efforts were also made to improve soil fertility and
agricultural productivity under the framework of national economic development strategy of
the country, known as Agriculture Development Led Industrialization, that has been
underway since the mid 1990s (Kassa, 2003).

Irreplaceable option for soil fertility management in the highly dissected topography and
increasingly fragmented land units due to population pressures in the Ethiopian highlands
(Badege & Abdu, 2003). However, without due scientific experimentation, wider adoption
and/or adaption in the country, indigenous agroforestry perpetuates only by the traditional
practices of smallholder farmers (Tesfaye et al., 2006). In order to promote wider adoption
and/or adaption of these soil fertility management techniques, an understanding of farmers’
knowledge of soil fertility change and their preferences for various soil fertility management
techniques were found to play an important role in facilitating communication among
farmers, researchers, development agents and policy makers (Barrios et al., 2006; Maro et al.,
2013). A number of previous soil fertility management interventions were found to be less
sustainable than biophysical measures would suggest, partly due to little valuation of farmers’
preferences for the various soil fertility management techniques (Zenebe et al., 2003).

10
 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Description of the Study Area

3.1.1 Location of the study area

The study will be conducted at Molode Watershed. Administratively, it is located at Dedessa

District, Buno Bedele Zone of Oromiya Region Ethiopia. The study area is located at a
distance of 420km South Western of Addis Ababa which is the capital city of Ethiopia and
50km away from Bedele town, the administrative centre for Buno Bedele Zone. The study
area is bounded by Gatira district in the west, Gechi in the North and Gummay District in the
South and Goma District in east (Didessa woreda Administration Office,
2017).Geographically, Molode watershed is situated between8º 4' 30"N - 8º 14' 50" N
latitudes and 36º 15' 53" E - 36º 30' 36" E longitudes. The elevation of the watershed is ranges
from 1650 – 2409 meter above sea level. The overall area coverage of the watershed is 3035
hectare (Woreda ANRM office, 2010).

11
Figure 1. Map of the study area

3.1.2 Agricultural practices and land use systems

The farming system of the study watershed is characterized by mixed farming system. The
most dominant land uses in the study watershed are; forest, cultivated and grass lands. From
total land use types of the watershed, cultivated land has major area coverage which covered
1579.25 ha (52%) of the total area where as the rest 355.8ha (11%) of the watershed is
covered by forest where as 473.4ha (15.5%) of the area is Coffee , 291.15(9.5%) covered by
grass lands, 215covered by vegetables and fruit The People who live under this watershed
produce different kinds of crops, vegetables, livestock, Pulse crops and coffee is an important
cash crop of this study watershed (Didessa Woreda Agriculture and Natural Resource, 2010).

3.1.3 Soil types of the study area

The soil type in the study watershed is described as red soil derived from volcanic parent
material due to the occurrence of high rainfall has masked other soil forming factors and
hence, very similar soils have developed on a variety of parent materials. These volcanic

12
rocks belong to the Magdala group. They include rhyolites, trachytes, trachytic and rhyolitic
tuffs, ignimbrite and basalts which are deposited during the latest phase of the trap series in
the upper Miocene to Pleistocene. The major soil groups and the dominant include Leptosols,
Vertisols, and Cambisols (Regassa, 2015).

3.1.4 Climate condition of the study area

The mean annual temperature and rainfall of the study area are 20.7ºC and 1800 mm
respectively. It has unimodal rainfall pattern having two distinct seasons. The rainy season
starts in late March and ending in October and the dry season occurring during November to
early March. Moreover, the study area is also characterized by having more than 85%
highland and the rest 15% mid land agro ecologies.

3.1.5 Land use and vegetation

Molode watershed is one of the vast forest areas that consist of many species of vegetation
within it and it was incorporated into forest priority area. From the total of 3035 hectares land
area in the Watershed, coffee forestland covers291.15hactare (9.5%); on the other hand,
473.4ha (15.5%) of land is covered by forest and The remaining 1579.25 hectares (52%) of
land is covered by cultivated area (Didessa Woreda ANRM office, 2017).

3.2 The livelihood of the community

At the study area of Molode watershed Agricultural activities like Crop production is the
major activities that can role a lion allotment for the livelihood of local communities which
account for 65% of local livelihood strategies. Crop that produced at the area of the watershed
are: like maize, barley, teff, wheat, pulse crop (beans, peas) and barley, teff, pulse crop
(beans, peas) are were grown in the highest proportion and livestock productions rising like
(cattle, sheep, goat, and hours) and also Honey bee are that all account 25% of the livelihood
strategy of the community. Forest Coffee production also account in 10% (Didessa Woreda
Agriculture and Natural Resource, 2017).

3.2.1 Method of Data Collection

3.2.2 Site selection
The study watershed Purposively selected why from the others was the site is adjacent to
forest and also large coverage of natural forest but now days it came to highly deforested and

13
through a time soil productivities reduced top up from the previous one. So why interested
study to solve and show the result of quickly forest conversion to cultivation without
considering any soil management practice. At the beginning, a reconnaissance survey will be
conducted to have a general view of the variations and the overall characteristics of the study
watershed. Then, the landscape of the watershed will be divided in to three slope gradient
namely, lower (3 - 10%), medium (10 - 25%) and upper (>25%) slope gradient (Escobedo,
1990). This will be done to identify topographic effect on soil properties. Then, by discussing
and supported with woreda and Kebele respective bodies two land use types will be selected
based on historical land uses and land use changes. Accordingly, three land use type with
cultivated land with ten years after conversions and cultivated land with twenty years after
conversions from forest land will be selected from each slope gradient. To select cultivated
land use type, two age intervals will be considered, which is land use type changed from
forest to cultivated land before ten and twenty years. For forest land use type, natural forest
will be selected. To divide the watershed in to three different slope gradients, GIS
environment will be used.

3.2.3 Soil sampling

For assessing some of the selected physical and chemical properties of soil in the study
watershed, composite soil samples will be collected from different sites of cultivated and
forest land use types under three slope classes which are; lower slope, middle slope and upper
slope classes in the watershed. Soil sample will be collected from the depth of 0-20cm at four
corners and center of a plot of 10m x 10m size using “X” sampling design (Margesin et al.,
2005)with sharp edged and closed, circular auger pushed manually down the soil profile.
Accordingly, 27 separate sample soils will be collected from each land use type to analyze
soil chemical properties: pH, Total Nitrogen(TN), Organic Carbon (OC), Available
Phosphorous (AP), Bulk density(Db) and land plot in a Randomized Complete block Design
(RCBD) layout by using 2 land use types (cultivated and forest lands) by two age intervals for
cultivated land(before ten and before twenty years) with three slope classes (lower, middle
and upper slope classes) by one soil depths (0 - 20 cm) with three replications. The samples
will be mixed thoroughly in a plastic bucket to form a composite sample. Moreover,
undisturbed samples will be taken from separate plot of land use type with a core sampler of
height 10cm and diameter 7.2cm for soil bulk density determination.

14
3.2.4 Household sampling technique
In order to select household respondents of the study watershed multi stage stratified sampling
technique will be used. First, the study watershed will be divided in to three landscape
positions as, lower, middle and upper part based on the elevation ranges. Secondly, the
villages found in each watershed part will be stratified according to their elevation ranges.
Third stage will be the selection of representative villages. Accordingly, three parts will be
selected. The parts that will be selected are the representative of each part of the watershed.
Finally, the total household respondents will be selected. The total number of sample size for
the questionnaire will be determined using Yamane (1967) standard formula with marginal
error of 0.07% and confidence interval of 93%.Accordingly, a total of 161 sample
households’ head will be selected from 1130 households head using random sampling
techniques for the study. The sample households’ head will be distributed proportionally for
the respective part of the watershed. Accordingly, 53, 56and 52 households’ head will be
randomly selected from the upper, middle and lower part of the watershed respectively for
household survey.

N
n= 2 Where, n= number of sample size
1+(N∗e )
N = total number of population
e = degree of error in %
Table 1 Distribution of sampled household of the watershed
Watershed Elevation ranges Total population Sampled HH
part
Lower 1650-1903 370 53
Middle 1903-2156 395 56

Upper 2156-2409 365 52

3.2.5Household interviews
Data on community perceptions of soil fertility status and farmer’s perceptions of soil fertility
status will be gathered by using structured questionnaires through individual interviews which
took place in the interviewee’s house. Only field owned farmers will be selected as household
interviewee.The set-up of transect will be made through classifying the sub-watershed into

15
three parts based on the elevation difference. Accordingly, three transect walks will be
conducted across the slope that is, transect walk in the highest elevation area, transect walk in
the medium elevation area and transect walk in the lowest elevation area. In each transect
walk, random sampling procedure will be used to select total sample households from
representative villages. List of farmers which will be obtained from the respective kebele
office will be used as a sample farmer for the randomly selected household interview. Based
on household survey, demographic and socio economic characteristics of the farmers’
perception of soil fertility and factors affects soil fertility status will be collected.

3.2.5.1 Focus group discussion

Focus group discussion after detail survey will be held using semi-structured questionnaires
interviews. The questions will be focused on identifying the local indicators of soil fertility
and management practices to enhance soil fertility under different land uses and farmers
indigenous soil management practice and soil fertility status of the study area. The discussion
will be conducted with purposely selected farmers who are more experienced. Based on these,
ten farmers for each group from upper, middle and lower slope gradient of the watershed will
be selected purposely to form a discussion group. Accordingly, a total of three focus group
discussion will be conducted. During the discussion, topics covered will include indigenous
soil fertility management practice, local indicators used to assess soil fertility status.

3.2.5.2 Key informant’s interview

Primary data will be generated by informal interview with local extension agents in addition
to direct field observations and a number of informal discussions with village elders and
farmers groups. Key informants will be selected from each part of the sub-watershed to
supplement the data that will be collected from households.

Methods of Data Analysis

3.2.5.4 Soil laboratory analysis

The soil samples that to be collected will be air-dried at room temperature, homogenized and
passed through a 2mm sieve before laboratory analysis. The collected soil samples will be
analyzed at Jimma University College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine soil laboratory
through the following standard procedures and soil analysis methods. Soil pH will be
determined at a 1:2.5 soil-to- water ratio and particle size analysis will be determined by the

16
hydrometer method (Day 1965). Organic carbon (OC) content will be determined by the
dichromate oxidation method (Walkely and Black, 1934). Total N will be determined using
the micro-Kjeldahl digestion, distillation and titration procedure as described by (Bremner
and Mulvaney, 1982). Available P will be determined using Olsen’s extraction method (Olsen
and Dean 1965). Soil bulk density (Db) will be determined by the core method (Blake and
Hartge 1965), Particle density (DP) will be determined by the pycnometer method (Devis and
Freitans, 1984).

3.2.5.5 Statistical analysis

Quantitative data that will be generated by household questionnaire survey will be analyzed
through descriptive statistics using SPSS software version 20.0.The qualitative data that will
be obtained from field observation, semi-structured interviews and informal interviews from
key informants and focus groups will be written in the form of verbal or narrate information.
The results of physical and chemical properties of soil parameters will be analyzed by using R
software version 3.5.3

3 WORK PLAN

Table 2 Activities and time plan

N Activities 2020/21
o ND J F M M A J Ju A S O
1 Research proposal title selection X
2 Proposal write up X
3 First draft proposal submission x
4 Proposal defense X
5 Study area selection X
6 Discussion with woreda office X
7 Material and logistic arrangement X
8 Sampling the area X
9 Field data collection and soil sampling x
10 Data summary x

17
 11 Data analysis and interpretation X
12 first draft thesis report and submission X
13 Final thesis submission and internal defense X
14 Final thesis submission and external defense X

15 Submission of final report X

5. BUDGET BREAKDOWN

Table 3Cost of stationery and field materials

SN Material items Unit Quantity Unit price Total price in ETB

1 Computer paper Pack 05 120 600.00

2 Note book No 02 50 100.00

3 Flash disck No 01 300 300.00

4 Field bag No 02 600 600.00

5 Polythen tube Pack 02 100 200.00

5 Total 1800.00

Table 4Laboratory chemical cost

SN Material items Unit Quantity Unit price Total price in

18
 ETB

1 Sodium Hexameta phosphate (NaPO3) Kg 1 5550 5550.00

2 Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) Lit 1 3220 3200.00

3 Standard buffer solution Lit 1 598 598.00

4 Ammonium acetate (CH3COONH4) Kg 1 1246 1246.00

5 Total 10594.00

Table 5Perdiems and transportation cost

SN Activities Field duration Payment/day in Total price in ETB

ETB

1 Researchers 15 400 6000

2 Technical assistant 20 200 4000

3 Lab assistances 10 350 3500

4 Major advisor 04 1000 4000

5 Co-Advisor 03 1000 3000

6 Transportation 30 66.6 2000

7 Wage 30 133 4000

8 Total 25,500

19
Table 6Budget summary

SN Activities Total price in ETB Remark

1 Stationary material 1800

2 Lab and chemicals 10594

3 Perdiems and transportation 25500

4 Sub total 37894

5 Contingency (10%) 3789.4

6 Grand total 41,683.4

6. REFERENCES

Abreha, K., 2013. Soil Acidity Characterization and Effects of Liming and Chemical
Fertilization on Dry Matter Yield and Nutrient Uptake of Wheat (Triticum Aestivum
L.) on Soils of Tsegede District, Northern Ethiopia. PhD Dissertation, Haramaya
University, Ethiopia.

Adesodun, J. K., Adeyemi, E. F. and Oyegoke, C.O., 2007. Distribution of nutrient elements
within water stable aggregates of two tropical agro-ecological soils under different
land-uses. Journal ofSoil and Tillage Research, 92, 190-197.

Adugnaw, B., 2014. Environmental degradation and management in Ethiopian Highlands:

review of lessons learned. International Journal of Environmental Protection and
Policy, 2(1), 24-34.

Agoume, V., & Birang, A. M., 2009. Impact of land use systems on some physical and
chemical soil properties of an oxisol in the humid forest zone of Southern Cameroon.
Journal of Tropicultura, 27(1), 15-20.

Ahmed, H., 2002. Assessment of Spatial Variability of Some Physicochemical Properties of

Soils under Different Elevations and Land Use Systems in the Western Slopes of
Mount Chilalo, Arsi. MSc Thesis, Alemaya University, Ethiopia. 111p.

Ajayi, O., Akinnifesi, F., Sileshi, G., Chakeredza, S., Mngomba, S., Mullila-Mitti, J., &
Gondwe, F. (2008). Strategies for promoting smallholder agroforestry for
environmental stewardship in Southern Africa: Wielding the stick or dangling the

20
 carrot? Paper presented at the CTA Climate Change Seminar, 26-31 October 2008,
Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

Akamigbo, F.R and Asadu, C.A., 2001. The influence of parent materials on the soils of
Southeastern Nigeria. East African Journal ofAgriculture and Forest, 48, 81-91.

Aklilu, A., 2006. Caring for the land: best practices in soil and water conservation in Beressa
watershed, highlands of Ethiopia (PhD dissertation). The Netherlands: Wageningen
University.

Alexandra, M., Charles, R., Jeangros, B. and Sinaj, S., 2013. Effect of organic fertilizers and
reduced-tillage on soil properties, crop nitrogen response and crop yield: Results of a
12-year experiment in Changins, Switzerland. Journal ofSoil and Tillage Research,
126, 11-18.

Allen, V.B. and Pilbeam, D.J., 2007. Handbook of Plant Nutrition, Taylor and Francis Group.

Aluko, A.P. and Fagbenro, J.A., 2000. The role of tree species and land use systems in
organic matter and nutrient availability in degraded Ultisol of Onne, Southeastern
Nigeria. Proc. Annual Conf. Journal ofSoil Science Society of Nigeria, 3, 89-292.

Amare, H., Priess, J., Veldkamp, E., Demil, T., & Lesschen, J. P., 2005. Assessment of soil
nutrient depletion and its spatial variability in smallholder’s mixed farming systems
using partial versus full nutrient balances in Ethiopia. Journal ofAgriculture,
Ecosystem and Environment, 108, 1-16.

Arshad, J., Moon, Y.S. and Abdin, M.Z., 2010. Sulfur -a general overview and interaction
with nitrogen. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 4, 523-529.

Arshad, M.A. and Martin, S., 2002. Identifying critical limits for soil quality indicators in
agro-ecosystem. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystem & Environment, 88, 153 –160.

Arthur W.B., 1994. Urban systems and historical path dependence. Increasing Returns and
Path Dependence in the Economy Ed.W B Arthur. University of Michigan Press, Ann
Arbor, 99 – 110.

Assefa, A., Winowiecki, L. A., Vagenc, T. G., Langan, S. & Smith, J. U., 2016. Spatial and
temporal dynamics of soil organic carbon in landscapes of the Upper Blue Nile Basin
of the Ethiopian Highlands. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment,
218, 190-208.

Assemu, T., & Shigdaf, M., 2014. The effect of land degradation on farm size dynamics and
crop-livestock farming system in Ethiopia: A review. Journal of Soil Science, 4, 1-5.

Badege, B., & Abdu, A., 2003. Agroforestry and community forestry for rehabilitation of
degraded watersheds on the Ethiopian Highlands. Paper presented at International
Symposium on Contemporary Development Issues in Ethiopia, 11-12 July 2003,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

21
Banafshe, K.N., Nili, F., Nourbakhsh, B., Sharifnabi and Khademi, H., 2011. Does cultivation
influence the content and pattern of soil proteins? Journal ofSoil and Tillage Research.
111, 162-167.

Barauah, T.C. and Barthakulh, H.P., 1997. A Text Book of Soil Analysis. Vikas Publishing
House, New Delhi, India.

Barber, S., 1984. Soil Nutrient Bioavailability. Mechanistic Approach. Wiley and Sons, Inc.
New York, 398p.

Barrios, E., Delve, R., Bekunda, M., Mowo, J., & Agunda, J., 2006. Indicators of soil quality:
A south-south development of a methodological guide for linking local and technical
knowledge. Journal of Geoderma, 135, 248-259.

Barry, P. and Ejigu, J., 2005. Soil Fertility Practices in Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia:
Learning from Farmers, Policy and Research Series.

Bationo, A., Waswa, B., Kihara, J. and Kimetu, J., 2007. Advances in Integrated Soil Fertility
Management in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. Springer,
Dordrecht, the Netherlands.

Bekele, S., & Holden, S., 2000. Policy instruments for sustainable land management: The
case of highland smallholders in Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 22,
217-232.

Belay, K., 2003. Agricultural extension in Ethiopia: The case of participatory demonstration
and training extension system. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 18(1), 49-
84.

Belay, S., 2003. Integrated watershed management approach to sustainable land management
(Experience of SARDP in East Gojjam and South Wollo). The Ethiopian Society of
Soil Science. 127-136. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Berry, L., Olson, J., & Campbell, D., 2003. Assessing the extent, cost and impact of land
degradation at the national level: Findings and lessons learned from seven pilot case
studies. Report commissioned by Global Mechanism of the United Nations
Convention to Combat Desertification, with support from the World Bank.

Betru, N., 2002. Soil and water conservation program in the Amhara National Regional State.
In A. Tilahun (Ed.), Natural resources degradation and environmental concerns in the
Amhara National Regional State: Impact on food security. Proceedings of the Natural
Resources Management Conference (pp 155-172), 24-26 July 2002, Bahir Dar,
Ethiopia.

Bjonnes, R., 1997. Food vs Feed. People's News Agency; Frederiksberg C, Denmark.

Blair., G.J., Chinoim., N., Lefroy., R.C.B., Anderson., G.C. and Crocker.G.J. 1991. A soil
Sulfur test for pastures and Crops. Australian Journalof Soil Resources, 29, 619-626.

22
Blake, G. and Hartge, K., 1965. Bulk density. In: Black CA (ed) Methods of soil analysis.
Physical and mineralogical methods. Journal of American Society of Agronomy, 1(9),
374– 390.

Bot, A. and Benites, J., 2005. The importance of Soil Organic Matter: Key to drought-
resistant soil and sustained food and production. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nation.

Bouma, J., 1994. Sustainable land use as a future focus for Pedology (a guest editorial). Soil
Science Society of America Journal,58, 645-646.

Bremmer, J., 1965. Total nitrogen. In: Black CA (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2:
Chemical and microbiological properties. Journal of America Society of Agronomy, 9,
1149–1178.

Bremner, J. and Mulvaney, C., 1982.Nitrogentotal. In: Page, A. L., Miller, R. H. and Keeney,
D.R.(eds). Methods of soil analysis. Journal of American Society of Agronomy, 2,
595-624.

Canali, S., Roccuzzo, G., Tittarelli, F., Ciaccia, C., Fiorella, S. & Intrigliolo, F., 2012.
Organic citrus: soil fertility and plant nutrition management. In A. Srivastava (Ed.),
Advances in citrus nutrition (353-368). Netherlands: Springer International
Publishing AG.

Cho, K. M., Zoebisch, M. A. & Ranamukharachi, S. L., 2004. Land use dependent soil
quality in the Lamphra Phloeng watershed, Northeast Thailand. Paper presented at 13 th
International Soil Conservation Organization Conference, July 2004, Brisbane,
Australia.

Cotrufo,. F.,Conant,. R and Paustian, K., 2011. Soil organic matter dynamics: land use,
management and global change. Journal ofPlant and Soil. 338, 1-3.

Cox, S. B., Willing, M. R. & Scatena, F. N., 2002. Variation in nutrient characteristics of
surface soils from the Luquillo experimental forest of Puerto Rico: a multivariate
perspective. Journal of Plant and Soil, 247, 189-198.

Dang, M. N., 2007. Quantitative and qualitative soil quality assessments of tea enterprises in
Northern Vietnam. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 2 (9), 455-462.

Day, PR., 1965.Hydrometer method of particle size analysis. In: C.A. Black (Ed.). Methods
of Soil Analysis. Journal ofAmericanSociety of Agronomy, 1(9), 562-563.

Devis, J. and Freitans, F., 1984. Physical and chemical methods of soil and water analysis,
Food and Agriculture Organization. Journal of Soil Bulletin, 10, 275-289.

Dexter, A.R., 2004. Effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root
growth, Geoderma, 3: 201–214.

23
EATA Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency, 2013. Status of soil resources in
Ethiopia and priorities for sustainable management. GSP for Eastern and Southern
Africa, 25-27 March 2013, Nairobi, Kenya.

Edwards, S., 2010. Ethiopian environment review, no. 1. Addis Ababa: Forum for
Environment

Escobedo, J., 1990. Survey of soils and land classification Guide-line. Field Document.
Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa. Ethiopia

Fantaw, Y., Getachew, A., & Abdu, A., 2015. Soil property variations in relation to exclosure
and open grazing land use types in the Central Rift Valley area of Ethiopia. Journal of
Environmental System Research, 4, 17.

Fantaw, Y., Ledin, S. & Abdu, A., 2007. Changes in soil organic carbon and total nitrogen
contents in three adjacent land use types in the Bale Mountains, South-Eastern
Highlands of Ethiopia. Journal of Forest Ecology and Management, 242, 337-342.

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2003. Integrated natural
resources management to enhance food security: The case for community-based
approaches in Ethiopia. Working Paper No. 16. Rome:

Fischer, G., Velthuizen, H., Shah, M. and Nachtergaele, F., 2002. Global Agro-ecological
Assessment for Agriculture in the 21st Century: Methodology and Results
(International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria)

Gerishu, B., & Mvena, Z., 2011. Determinants of the adoption of physical soil bund
conservation structures in Adama District, Oromia Region, Ethiopia. EAJS, 3(2), 142-
152.

Guo, L. B., & Gifford, R. M., 2002. Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta analysis.
Journal of Global Change Biology, 8, 345-360.

Hartemink, E.A., 1998. Soil chemical and physical properties as indicator of sustainable land
management under sugar cane in Papua New Guinea. Journal of Geoderma, 85, 283-
306.

IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute, 2010. Fertilizer and soil fertility potential
in Ethiopia: Constraints and opportunities for enhancing the system, Working Paper

Islam, K. R., & Weil, R. R., 2000. Land use effects on soil quality in a tropical forest
ecosystem of Bangladesh. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 79, 9-
16.

Jenny, H., 1994. Factors of soil formation: A system of quantitative pedology. New York:
Dover Publications, Inc.

24
Jin, J., Xu, Y., Ye, H., Shen, Ch., & Huang, Y., 2011. Effect of land use and soil management
practices on soil fertility quality in North China cities' urban fringe. African Journal of
Agricultural Research, 6(9), 2059-2065.

Kang, B. & Akinnifesib, F. 2000. Agroforestry as alternative land use production systems for
the tropics. Natural Resources Forum, 24, 137-151.

Karlen, D. L., Ditzler, C.A. and Andrews, A.S. 2003. Soil Quality: Why and How? Journal of
Geoderma 114, 145–156.

Kassa, H. B., 2003. Livestock and Livelihood Security in the Harar Highlands of Ethiopia:
Implications for Research and Development. Doctoral thesis Swedish university of
agricultural Sciences, Department of Rural Development Studies, Uppsala.

Kiflu, A. and Beyene, S. 2013. Effects of different land use systems on selected soil
properties in South Ethiopia. Journal of Soil Science and Environment Management,
4(5), 100-107.
King, D.L., 1990. Sustainable soil fertility practices. In: Francis, A.C., Flora, B. C. and King,
D.L.(eds). Sustainable Agriculture in Temperate Zones. John-Wiley & Sons, Inc.
USA.pp. 144-173.
Khadka, D., Lamichhane, S., Khan, S., Joshi, S., Pant, B. B., & Division, S. S. (2016).
Assessment of soil fertility status of Agriculture Research Station ,. 2, 43–57.
Leggett, C.G. and Bockstael, N E., 2000. Evidence of the effects of water quality on
residential land prices. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 39,
121 – 144

Mahmud, Y., Alemu, M., Menale, K., & Pender, J., 2005. Cost of land degradation in
Ethiopia: A critical review of past studies. Addis Ababa: Environmental Economics
Policy Forum for Ethiopia.

Margesin, R. and Schinner, F. Manual of Soil Analysis-Monitoring and Assessing Soil

Bioremediation. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Innsbruck, Austria, 2005.

Maro, G., Mrema, J., Msanya, B., & Teri, J., 2013. Farmers’ perception of soil fertility
problems and their attitudes towards integrated soil fertility management for coffee in
Northern Tanzania. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management, 4(5),
93-99.

Mertens, B., Sunderlin W.D., Ndoye, O. and Lambin, E.F., 2000. Impact of macroeconomic
change on deforestation in south Cameroon: integration of household survey and
remotely-sensed data. Journal of World Development, 28: 983-999

Mitiku, H., Herweg, K., & Stillhardt, B., 2007. Sustainable land management: a new
approach to soil and water conservation in Ethiopia. Land Resources Management and
Environmental Protection Department of Mekelle University, Ethiopia, and North-
South University of Bern, Switzerland.

25
Mulugeta, D., & Stahr, K., 2010. Assessment of integrated soil and water conservation
measures on key soil properties in South Gonder, North-Western Highlands of
Ethiopia. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management, 1(7): 164-176.

Nelson, G.C., Harris, V. and Stone, S.W., 2001, ``Deforestation, land use, and property rights:
empirical evidence from Darien, Panama. Journal of Land Economics,77: 187 -205

Olsen, S. and Dean, L.,1965. Phosphorous. In: Black CA (ed) Methods of soil analysis.
Chemical and microbiological properties. Journal of American Society of Agronomy,
2(9), 1035–1049.

Omotayo, O.E. and Chukwuka, K.S., 2009. Soil fertility restoration techniques in sub-Saharan
Africa using organic resources.

Onwudike, S. U., Ihem, E.E., Irokwe, I.F. and Onwuso,, G., 2015 Variability in the Physico-
chemical Properties of Soils of Similar Lithology in Three Land Use Types in Ahiazu
Mbaise, Imo State Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Crops. 1(3): 38-43.

Ouedraogo, E., 2004. Soil quality improvement for crop production in semi-arid West Africa.
Tropical Resource Management Papers No. 51 (2004). Wageningen University.

Penning de Vries, F., Teng, P. and Metsalaar, K., 1992. Systems Approaches for Agricultural
Development. Kluwer Academic, London.

Regassa, B. A. (2015). Characterization of Agricultural Soils in CASCAPE

InterventionWoredas in Western Oromia Region. Final Report.pp.107.

Rich, C., 1965. Elemental analysis by flame photometery. In: Black CA (ed) Methods of soil
analysis. Part 2: Chemical and microbiological properties. Journal of American
Society of Agronomy, 9, 849–864.

Sanginga, N., & Woomer, P., 2009. Integrated soil fertility management in Africa: Principles,
practices and developmental process. Nairobi: Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility
Institute of the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture.

Sarawathy, R.., Suganya, S. and Singaram, P., 2007. Environmental Impact of Nitrogen
Fertilization in Tea Eco- system. Journal of Environmental Biology. 28:779 -788.

Schipper, L. A. & Sparling, G. P., 2000. Performance of soil condition indicators across
taxonomic groups and land uses. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64, 300-
311.

Scholes, M.C., Swift, M.J., Heal, O.W., Sanchez, P.A., Ingram, J.S.I. and Dalal, R.C., 1994.
Soil fertility research in response to the demand for sustainability. In: Woomer, P.L.,
Swift, M.J. (eds.). The Biological Management of Tropical Soil Fertility. Wiley,
Chichester,1-14.
Singh, M.J. and Khera, K.L., 2009. Physical indicators of soil quality in relation to soil
erodibility under diferent land uses. Journal of Arid Land Research and Management,
26
 2:152–167.

Smith, C. J. and Goh, G., 1995. Effects of organic and inorganic calcium compounds on soil
solution pH and Al concentration. European Journal of Soil Science. 46: 53-63.

Spielman, D., Dawit, K., & Dawit, A., 2011. Seed, fertilizer, and agricultural extension
in Ethiopia. Ethiopia Strategy Support Program, ESSP II Working Paper no. 20).
Addis Ababa: International Food Research and Policy Institute.

Steer, A., 1998. Making development sustainable. Journal of Advance in Geo-Ecology, 31:
857-865

Stoorvogel, J.J.; Smaling, E.M.A.,1990. Assessment of Soil Nutrient Decline in Sub-Saharan

Africa, 1983–2000. Winand Staring Centre-DLO: Wageningen.

Takele, L., Chimdi, A., Abebaw, A., 2014. Dynamics of Soil fertility as ınfluenced by
different land use systems and soil depth in West Showa Zone, Gindeberet District,
Ethiopia. Journal ofAgriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 3(6): 489-494.

Teklu, E., 2005. Land preparation methods and soil quality of vertisol area in the central
highlands of Ethiopia. Stuttgart: Universitat Hohenheim (310) D-70593.

Tesfa, W., & Tripathi, S., 2015. An evaluation of watershed management practice in Ethiopia:
a preliminary review. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 4 (1), 24-30.

Tesfaye, A., Wiersum, K., Bongers, F., & Sterck, F., 2006. Diversity and dynamics in home-
gardens of Southern Ethiopia. In B. Kumar, & P. Nair (Eds.), Tropical home-gardens:
A time tested example of sustainable agroforestry. Springer, 123-142.

Teshome, Y., Heluf, G., Kibebew, K. & Sheleme, B., 2013. Impacts of land use on selected
physico-chemical properties of soils of Abobo area, Western Ethiopia. Journal of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2 (5): 177-183.

Tilahun, Ch. & Assefa, T., 2009. Assessment of soil organic matter under four land use
systems in the major soils of Bale Highlands, Southeast Ethiopia. Journal of World
Applied Sciencesl, 6 (11): 1506-1512.

Tsehaye, G., & Mohammed, A., 2013. Effects of land-use/cover changes on soil properties in
a dry land watershed of Hirmi and its adjacent agro-ecosystem: Northern Ethiopia.
International Journal of Geosciences Research, 1 (1), 45-57.

Turner II B L, Kasperson, R.E., Meyer, W.B., Dow, K.M., Golding, D., Kasperson, J.X.,
Mitchel, R.C. and Ratick, S.J., 1990. Two types of global environmental change;
definitional and spatial-scale issues in their human dimensions. Journal of Global
Environmental Change,1: 14 – 22.

27
Ufot, U.O., Iren, O.B., Chikere Njoku, C.U., 2016. Effects of land use on soil physical and
chemical properties in Akokwa area of Imo State, Nigeria. International Journal of
Life Sciences Scientific Research. 2(3): 273-278.

Van Kempen, R,, Hooimeijer, P., Atzema, O., Dijst, M. and Verhoeff, R., 2000. Social and
cultural development in relation to spatial pattern. (Van Gorcum, Assen)

Vanlauwe, B., Descheemaeker, K., Giller, K., Huising, J., Merckx, R., Nziguheba, G.,
Zingore, S., 2014. Integrated soil fertility management in Sub-Saharan Africa:
unraveling local adaptation. SOIL Discussions, 1: 1239-1286.

Wachira, Peter, Okoth, Sheila, Kimenju, & John, 2009. Influence of land use and soil
management practices on the occurrence of nematode destroying fungi in Taita
Taveta, Kenya. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 10: 213-223.

Walkley, A. and Black, C., 1934.An examination of the degrjareff method of determining soil
organic matter and a proposed modification of chromic acid titration method. Journal
of Soil Science, 37, 29-38.

Wang, X. and Gong, Z.,1998. Assessment and analysis of soil quality changes after eleven
years of reclamation in subtropical China. Journal of Geoderma, 81: 339-355.

Woldeamlak, B., 2003. Towards integrated watershed management in highland Ethiopia: the
Chemoga watershed case study. Journal of Tropical Resource Management, Paper 44.
The Netherlands: Wageningen University.

Wood, A., 1993. Natural resource conflicts in South-Western Ethiopia: state, communities,
and the role of the national conservation strategy in the search for sustainable
development. Nordic Journal of African Studies, 2(2), 83-99.

Yamane, T., 1967. Statistics, An Introductory Analysis, 2nd Ed., New York: Harper and Row.

Yao, M. K., 2010. Effects of land use types on soil organic carbon and nitrogen dynamics in
Mid-West Cote d’Ivoire. European Journal of Scientific Research, 40(2), 211-222.

Yeh, A.G. and Li, X., 2001. A constrained CA model for the simulation and planning of
sustainable urban forms by using GIS. Environment and Planning B: Journal of
Planning and Design, 28: 733-753

Zenebe, A., Bezaye, G., Demeke, N., Mowo, J.,& Kidist, H., 2003. Farmers’ preference for
soil and water conservation practices in Central Highlands of Ethiopia. African
Crop Science Journal, 21, 78-790.

Zone, S. W., & Yeshaneh, G. T. (2015). Assessment of micronutrient status in different land
use soils in Maybar lake watershed of Albuko District ,. 3(1), 143–150.

28
Kanonge, G., Mtambanengwe, F., Manzeke, M.G., Nezomba, H. and Mapfumo, P., 2015.
Assessing the potential benefits of organic and mineral fertiliser combinations on
legume productivity under smallholder management in Zimbabwe. South African
Journal of Plant and Soil, 32(4), pp.241-248

Babu, S.C. 2000. Rural nutrition interventions with indigenous plant foods-a case study of
vitamin Adeficiency in Malawi. Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 4 (3): 169-179.

Sanchez, P.A. 2002. Soil fertility and hunger in Africa. Science 295: 5562-5572.

Vitousek, P.M., Naylor, R., Crews, T., David, M.B., Drinkwater, L.E., Holland, E., Johnes,
P.J., Katzenberger, J., Martinelli, L.A., Matson, P.A. and Nziguheba, G., 2009.
Nutrient imbalances in agricultural development. Science, 324(5934), pp.1519-1520..

Ngetich, F.K., Shisanya, C.A., Mugwe, J., Mucheru-Muna, M. and Mugendi, D.N., 2012. The
potential of organic and inorganic nutrient sources in sub-Saharan African crop
farming systems.

Campos A, Klaudia OL, Jorge EB 2007. Exploring the effct of changes in land use on soil
quality on eastern slope of the cotre de perote volcano Mexico. For Ecol Manag
248:174–182.

Habtamu, A., Heluf, G., Bobe, B. and Enyew, A., 2014. Fertility status of soils under different
land uses at Wujiraba Watershed, North-Western Highlands of Ethiopia. Agriculture,
Forestry and Fisheries, 3(5), pp.410-419.

Brady, N.C., & Weil, R.R. (2002). The nature and properties of soils (13 th edition). Pearson
Education, New Jersey.( Brady, N.C. and Weil, R.R., 2008. The soils around us. The
Nature and Properties of Soils, 14th ed Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey and Ohio,
pp.1-31.)

Ganorkar, R.P., & Chinchmalatpure, P.G. 2013. Physicochemical assessment of soil in Rajura
Bazar in Amravati district of Maharastra (India). International Journal of
Chemical,Environmental and Pharmaceutical Research, 4(2&3), 46-49.

Havlin, H.L., Beaton, J.D., Tisdale, S. L., & Nelson, W. L. 2010. Soil Fertility and
Fertilizersan introduction to nutrient management th edition. PHI Learning Private
Limited, New Delhi.

Chimdi, A., Gebrekidan, H., Kibret, K. and Tadesse, A., 2012. Status of selected
physicochemical properties of soils under different land use systems of Western
Oromia, Ethiopia. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences, 2(3), pp.57-71.

29
Ayoubi, S., Khormali, F., Sahrawat, K.L., Rodrigues de Lima, A.C., 2011, Assessing Impacts
of Land Use Change on Soil Quality Indicators in a Loessial Soil in GolestanProvince,
Iran, J. Agr. Sci. Tech., 13,727-742.

Pal, S., Panwar, P., and Bhardwaj, D.R., 2013, Soil Quality Under Forest Compared to Other
Land Uses in Acid Soil of North Western Himalaya, India, Ann. For. Res., 56(1),187-
198.

APPENDIX
DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA COLLECTION SHEET

Assessment of soil fertility status and Indigenous soil fertility management practice under
different land use types at Molode watershed South Western Ethiopia

Appendix 1: Household survey questionnaires

I. General information
Region____________ Zone__________ Woreda _____________ Village ___________
Questioner number (Code) _________Date___________
II. Demographic characteristics of the households

1. Name: _________________________Sex:_______ Male(M) Female(F) Age: _____

2. Educational level:__________

30
a. 1-4 b. 5-8 c. 9-10 d. Certificate and above e. Illiterate
3. Religion: a. Orthodox b. Muslim c. Protestant d. Catholic e. other (specify): ________
4. Member of household: ________ Male _________ Female ________Total._________

III. Economic characteristics of the households

5. Land use pattern

5.1 Total land holding ________ha/timad

5.2 Cultivated (crop) land _________ha/timad and

5.3 Grazing land _________ha/timad

5.4 Forest land_____________

5.5 Irrigated land _________ha/timad

6. What are your major sources of income?

a. Crop production b. Livestock production c. Off-farm activities d. Others (specify)

7. What are your major livestock production systems?

a. Fattening b. Milking c. Poultry production d. Honey bee production
1. Farmers’ understanding of soil fertility change
2. Local indicators of soil fertility change
3. Major soil fertility management practices in Molode Watershed.
4. Towards prioritization of farmers’ preference for soil fertility management planning
5. Farmers’ perspectives on soil fertility status for three land use types
6. Farmers’ Indigenous soil fertility management practice change in annual and perennial
cropland
Appendix 2: Check-list of focus group discussion
1.1. How many types of soils do you recognize in your kebele?

1.2. Can you name them (use local naming)?

31
1.3. On what basis do you distinguish these soil types (your criteria of classification)?

1.4. Can describe these soils according to their properties?

1.5. Local soil description according to their properties

1.6. Can you please map for me the distribution of the different soil types in the kebeles?

Appendix3: Key Informant Interview

 Greet the person I am interviewing, and introduce myself;

 Explain the purpose of the study that the questionnaire aims to capture on the soil fertility
management practices employed by the farmer;

 Inform the respondent that the study will be used to advice policy, extension and research
interventions that favor the farmer him/herself;

 Ask if the respondent is willing to be interviewed or not. If he/she agrees, start the
interview.

Farmersname___________________Kebele______________________Date______________

1. Household Asset ownership and income

1.1. What is the farm size of the total area of cultivated land in hectares? __________

1.2. Total number of animals owned by the household

1.3. What is the total annual income of your household? Indicate by source in the table
below?

2. Soil fertility management practices employed by the farmer

2.1. If soil fertility is a major issue, how do you maintain fertility of your fields?

a. Apply mineral fertilizer c. Apply compost e. Crop rotation

b. Apply farmyard manure d. All the above e. Other, Specify

32
2.2. Do you apply fertilizer on your crop fields?

a. Yes b. No

2.3. If you apply mineral fertilizer, which crop benefit from the fertilizer Application?

2.4. Type and amount of fertilizer used?

2.5. If you do not apply fertilizer, what are the major reasons for not using fertilizer? Give
response in order of importance?

a. High cost of fertilizer b. Lack of credit c. Risk of crop failure due to moisture stress

d. Fertilizer is not available on time

2.6. Do you apply farm yard manure to crop fields?

a. Yes b. No

2.6.1 If you apply farm yard manure to fields, which fields do you apply to?

a. Home gardens b. Outer fields c. Both fields

2.6.2. If you apply farm yard manure to crop fields, indicate amounts in basket per field type?

2.7. Do you make compost and apply to your fields?

a. Yes b. No

2.7. 1.If you apply compost, specify amount and type of crop applied?

2.8. Do you practice crop rotation in your fields?

a. Yes b. No

2.8.1. If you rotate crops, indicate rotational pattern in the same plot in the

2.9. Crop residue return

2.9.1. Do you remove crop residue from fields?

33
 a. Yes b. No

2.9.2 What do you do with crop residues removed from fields?

a. Burn as household fuel b. Feed animal’s c. Both a. and b d. Other, specify

2.9.3. Do you return crop residues back to fields?

a. Yes b. No

2.9.4..If you feed crop residue to animals, how do you manage the manure

a. Burn as household fuel b. Apply to crop fields mainly gardens c. Other, specify

34