Gully rehabilitation in Southern Ethiopia – value and impacts for farmers

IF 5.8 2区 农林科学 Q1 SOIL SCIENCE
Soil Pub Date : 2024-04-24 DOI:10.5194/egusphere-2024-1125
Wolde Mekuria, Euan Phimister, Getahun Yakob, Desalegn Tegegne, Awdenegest Moges, Yitna Tesfaye, Dagmawi Melaku, Charlene Gerber, Paul Hallett, Jo Smith
{"title":"Gully rehabilitation in Southern Ethiopia – value and impacts for farmers","authors":"Wolde Mekuria, Euan Phimister, Getahun Yakob, Desalegn Tegegne, Awdenegest Moges, Yitna Tesfaye, Dagmawi Melaku, Charlene Gerber, Paul Hallett, Jo Smith","doi":"10.5194/egusphere-2024-1125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Abstract.</strong> Gully erosion can be combatted in severely affected regions like sub-Saharan Africa by a range of low-cost interventions that are accessible to affected farmers. However, for successful implementation, biophysical evidence of the effectiveness of interventions needs to be combined with buy-in and input from local communities. Working with farmers in a watershed in Southern Ethiopia, we investigated (a) the effectiveness of low-cost gully rehabilitation measures to reduce soil loss and upward expansion of gully heads, (b) how farmers and communities view gully interventions, and (c) whether demonstrating gully interventions in-context changes farmers’ knowledge and perceptions of their capacity to act. On-farm field experiments, key informant interviews, focus group discussions and household surveys were used to collect and analyze data. Three gully treatments were explored, all with riprap, one also with grass planting, and one with grass planting and check-dam integration. Over a period of 26 months these low-cost practices ceased measurable gully head expansion, whereas untreated gullies had a mean upward expansion of 671 cm resulting in a calculated soil loss of 11.0 tonnes. Farmers viewed these gully rehabilitation measures positively, apart from the high cost of input materials and technical requirements of gabion check-dams. Ongoing rehabilitation activities and on-farm trials influenced knowledge and understanding of similar gully treatments among survey respondents. On-farm experiments and field day demonstrations empowered farmers to act, addressing pessimism from some respondents about their capacity to do so.","PeriodicalId":48610,"journal":{"name":"Soil","volume":"142 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1125","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract. Gully erosion can be combatted in severely affected regions like sub-Saharan Africa by a range of low-cost interventions that are accessible to affected farmers. However, for successful implementation, biophysical evidence of the effectiveness of interventions needs to be combined with buy-in and input from local communities. Working with farmers in a watershed in Southern Ethiopia, we investigated (a) the effectiveness of low-cost gully rehabilitation measures to reduce soil loss and upward expansion of gully heads, (b) how farmers and communities view gully interventions, and (c) whether demonstrating gully interventions in-context changes farmers’ knowledge and perceptions of their capacity to act. On-farm field experiments, key informant interviews, focus group discussions and household surveys were used to collect and analyze data. Three gully treatments were explored, all with riprap, one also with grass planting, and one with grass planting and check-dam integration. Over a period of 26 months these low-cost practices ceased measurable gully head expansion, whereas untreated gullies had a mean upward expansion of 671 cm resulting in a calculated soil loss of 11.0 tonnes. Farmers viewed these gully rehabilitation measures positively, apart from the high cost of input materials and technical requirements of gabion check-dams. Ongoing rehabilitation activities and on-farm trials influenced knowledge and understanding of similar gully treatments among survey respondents. On-farm experiments and field day demonstrations empowered farmers to act, addressing pessimism from some respondents about their capacity to do so.
埃塞俄比亚南部的沟壑恢复--对农民的价值和影响
摘要。在撒哈拉以南非洲等受影响严重的地区,可以通过一系列受影响农民可以利用的低成本干预措施来防治沟壑侵蚀。然而,要成功实施干预措施,需要将干预措施有效性的生物物理证据与当地社区的支持和投入相结合。通过与埃塞俄比亚南部一个流域的农民合作,我们调查了:(a) 低成本沟壑恢复措施在减少土壤流失和沟头向上扩展方面的有效性;(b) 农民和社区如何看待沟壑干预措施;(c) 在沟壑干预措施的背景下进行演示是否会改变农民对其行动能力的认识和看法。收集和分析数据的方法包括农场现场实验、关键信息提供者访谈、焦点小组讨论和家庭调查。共探讨了三种沟壑处理方法,一种是使用护坡,另一种是植草,还有一种是植草与拦水坝相结合。在 26 个月的时间里,这些低成本的做法使沟壑不再明显扩张,而未经处理的沟壑平均向上扩张了 671 厘米,计算得出的土壤流失量为 11.0 吨。除了投入材料的高成本和石笼拦水坝的技术要求外,农民对这些沟壑修复措施给予了积极评价。正在进行的修复活动和农场试验影响了调查对象对类似沟壑处理方法的认识和理解。农田试验和田间日示范增强了农民的行动能力,消除了一些受访者对其行动能力的悲观情绪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Soil
Soil Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Soil Science
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
44
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: SOIL is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of high-quality research in the field of soil system sciences. SOIL is at the interface between the atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere. SOIL publishes scientific research that contributes to understanding the soil system and its interaction with humans and the entire Earth system. The scope of the journal includes all topics that fall within the study of soil science as a discipline, with an emphasis on studies that integrate soil science with other sciences (hydrology, agronomy, socio-economics, health sciences, atmospheric sciences, etc.).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信