Evaluating land policies in highland Ethiopia

People living in the rural highlands of Ethiopia suffer from land degradation, low agricultural productivity and poverty. Finding solutions to these connected problems requires policymakers to understand the potential impacts of different interventions.

Research from the Norwegian University of LifeSciences in collaboration with the International Food Policy ResearchInstitute, USA, uses a bio-economic model of land management and agricultural productionto assess the impact of possible policies on farm households in eastern Amhara.In this area, people’s welfare and land quality are both deteriorating. Duringthe last 20 years, most households have shifted from selling surplus grain tobuying grain for their own survival. Farmers have little or no opportunity todiversify their income sources and droughts make many people dependent on foodaid for survival.

Researchers have developed a bio-economic modelthat considers the economic, social and ecological factors that influence foodsecurity. This model explores the links between households and ecosystems and the effects ofthese links over time. One benefit of dynamic models like this is that itdescribes the relationship between human activities and natural resources.Modern computer power allows models that are far more complex than what waspossible only a few years ago.

Using data from more than fifteen years, theresearch describes the potential impacts of different programmes, including increasedaccess to credit for fertiliser, food-for-work, tree planting and off-farmemployment opportunities. The model predicts the effect that each of these hason land management, productivity, food security and poverty amongst smallfarmers in Eastern Amhara. The research shows:

• Increasing fertiliser credit can increase agricultural productivity, foodsecurity and income, but could also undermine farmers’ incentives to invest insoil and water conservation. This would probably increase land degradation.
• Increased employment opportunities through programmes such asfood-for-work can increase household incomes substantially. However, these alsolikely to reduce food production and soil conservation unless food-for-work istargeted towards soil conservation.
• Promoting tree planting on degraded land could increase incomessignificantly without compromising food production or soil conservation. Ifcombined with conservation incentives, this could result in improved landmanagement as well as increased incomes and food security.

A combination of different policies is likely tobe the most successful at increasing food security and reducing landdegradation. It is important to design and select these policies carefully tomaximise benefits and implement them effectively. The research suggests:

• Policies should focus on developing thenon-farm sector. These should be complemented with policies that focus onconserving the natural resource base in the region.
• Food-for-work programmes undermine foodproduction. However, linking these to conservation investments may reduce thisnegative effect and make food production more sustainable.
• Local participation in conservation mustbe encouraged to ensure that investments have lasting effects.
• Food-for-work can stimulate tree plantingprogrammes, particularly if markets for tree products can be developed. Thismay reduce the level of land degradation.