Resettlement is an increas ingly becoming attractive as a way of out of press ing problems caused byrnfood shortage, land fragmentation, population pressure, rampant unemployment, marginality of landrnand dec line in land productivity. With the aim to investi gate the live lihoods of ru ra l househo ld andrntheir strategies in resett lement area, the study was conducted using both quanti tati ve and quali tativernapproaches. Based on data generated fro m household survey, focus group discuss ion, key informantrninterview and observations, the study revealed that the area studi ed have experi enced higherrnpopulation trends due to continuous and ongo ing resettlement program. The program has twornedges, one with pos itive and enabling for better livelihood options and the other with negati ve andrndestructive side. As a result, the li ve lihood assets are ga ined, lost and shaped. From criti calrnli ve lihood assets, social asset, whi ch is the most important li ve lihood asset of households is foundrnto be the source of oth er livelihood assets and strengthened more by di ffe rent soc ial bondingrnmechani sms within and between host and settler community members. The ph ys ical asset ofrnhouseholds in the area is very limited, while the natural assets are gett ing less and less andrnexacerbated due the resettlement program.rnThe dominant on- fa rm livelihood activities of households in the study area are crop cultivation andrnanimal production being major and minor, respecti ve ly. Households have experienced the change inrnthe li velihood activities to use better opportunities for better li ve lihood options and to minimize thernri sks invol ved from constraining factors of resettlement program . The change in the livelihoodrnacti vities of households is manifested in three ways: the change within the same livelihoodrnactiv ities, from subsistence to commercial; seasonal shi ft between diffe rent acti vities, on-farmrndu ring rai ny season and off-farm during dry season; and the complete shift h om one type of activityrnto the other, which is from on-farm to off-fa rm income generating.rnThe result of assessment of food security situation indicated that settlers have shi fted from aidrnsee king to household food se lf-sufficiency. In general, majority of households in the area havernensured household food sufficiency th roughout the year. However, considerable num be rs ofrnhouseholds are still not atta ined household food sufficiency. Even though, most of households havernensured suffi ciency of household food throughout the year, transitory food insec urity, particu larlyrnduring the leafy stage of the crops is reported to occ ur in few households and it extends to better-offrnhouseholds during natural hazard s.rnFinally, thi s study recommended that resettlement programs should not be seen as panacea for allrnsoc io-economic problems of households other than so lving short-term problems at the expense ofrnnatural resources and if it is to be durable and long-lasting development intervention, it has tornensure sustainabil ity of livelihood of household s.rnKey words: Resettlement, households, livelihood, assets, and f ood security