Status And Determinants Of Rural Households Livelihoods Poverty And Access To Agricultural Extension Services In Jimma Geneti Woreda Ethiopia

The general objective of this study was to analyze the status and determinants of rural households‟rnlivelihoods, poverty, and access to agricultural extension services in Jimma Geneti woreda, Ethiopia. Arnmixed-research design was employed. The subjects of the study were 387 surveys and 90 qualitative studyrnparticipants. Multi-stage sampling techniques were used to include samples in this study. Both primaryrnand secondary data sources were used to collect and establish the dataset of this study. Surveyrnquestionnaires, in-depth interviews, non-participatory observation, and focus group discussion tools werernused to collect primary data. To analyze the data, both quantitative and qualitative data analysisrntechniques were employed. Both the specific and general livelihood indices of the study area show arnlow/depleted state of livelihood sources. Enhancing rural households‟ information, financial, social,rnnatural, physical, and human capital should not be circumvented. The extent of sample heads‟ livelihoodrndiversification (measured by Simpson Index Diversity) was found low (0.27). That is, sample heads of thernstudy area remained in low-return non-farm livelihood activities only (61.26%). Having a relative riskrnratio (greater than 50%), multinomial regression analysis shows that households‟ place of residence, sex,rneducation, marital status, and membership in cooperatives are found significant determinants of ruralrnlivelihood‟s choice of livelihood strategies at a 5% significant level. Hence, encouraging ruralrnhouseholds to engage in remunerative livelihood strategies (non-farm, off-farm, and/or a combination ofrnactivities) requires action-oriented policies. Furthermore, the composite multidimensional livelihoodrnsecurity of samples was found 2.406. Ordered Logit model results show rural heads' Sex, Marital Status,rnmember of cooperatives, Age, F_size, Dependency Ratio, and landholding significantly impacted theirrnstate of multidimensional livelihood security. Hence, wider considerations of rural households‟rnmultidimensional livelihood security analysis should be in place than narrow analysis of food and/orrnnutritional security alone. Results of descriptive statistics show that sample heads‟ state ofrnmultidimensional poverty was found higher (53.1%) than other developing countries like Indonesia,rnSierra Leone, and Nigeria but less than the national average. Results of the ordered logistic regressionrnanalysis revealed that kebele, marital status, literacy status, landholding, and membership inrncooperatives of the household heads were among the determinants. Hence, policies and programs aimingrnto reduce rural heads‟ multidimensional poverty in the most deprived multidimensional poverty indexrnindicators like school attendance and years of schooling should be a priority area. Attentions torndecompose rural poverty into different categories enable planners to comprehensively understand it andrnreduce rural poverty. Alongside multidimensional poverty analysis, the involvement of the poor in povertyrnanalysis shouldn‟t be overlooked. Sample heads access to agricultural extension services was found low.rnWeak links between agricultural research and farmers' extension problems, lack of coordination andrncommunication between agricultural sectors and higher learning institutions, and lower salary level andrnfewer resources for field agricultural extension agents are found the major potential reasons/challengesrnthat make sample households‟ non-accessed. Furthermore, the Logit model result shows thatrnKebele/”ganda” of the household head, access to agricultural extension training, access to credit service,rnirrigation use, and rural households‟ having a telephone were found the major determinant factors. Thus,rnagro-ecology and need-based, participatory, and pluralistic agricultural extension policy is needed

Get Full Work

Report copyright infringement or plagiarism