Merihun Mengistu et al.

TEIEE 2(3) 2024

RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS

https://doi.org/10.62622/TEIEE.024.2.3.26-34 ISSN 2956-9761

EXPLORING POTENTIAL ADAPTATION STRATEGIES

FOR SMALLHOLDER FARMERS TO CLIMATE CHANGE:
A CASE STUDY AT ABALA ABAYA, WOLAITA ZONE, SOUTH ETHIOPIA
Merihun Mengistu1, Mesfin Tebeje2*, Almaz Balta2, Debalke Debala2 and Belete Limani3
1
Terepeza Development Association, Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia
2
Department of Rural Development and Agricultural Extension, College of Agriculture, Wolaita Sodo University, Ethiopia
3
Department of Natural Resources Management, College of Agriculture, Wolaita Sodo University, Ethiopia
*Corresponding email: [email protected]
Received: 20.09.2024; Accepted: 27.10.2024; Available online: 30.10.2024 Published: 30.10.2024
Cite this article: Mengistu, M., Tebeje, M., Balta, A., Debala, D., & Limani, B. (2024). Exploring Potential Adaptation Strategies for Smallholder
Farmers to Climate Change: A Case Study at Abala Abaya, Wolaita Zone, South Ethiopia. Trends in Ecological and Indoor Environment Engineering,
2(3), 26–34.

Background: The frequency and intensity of extreme weather events are expected to increase as a result of climate change, which will contribute to
changes in precipitation and temperature, and therefore will affect food security. Research issues related to increasing the sustainability of the
agricultural sector, eliminating climate risks in agriculture are coming to the fore. This is especially relevant in arid regions. Objectives: This study
aimed to assess the adaptation strategies of smallholder farmers to climate change in Abala Abaya, Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Finding
optimal practices adapted to random extreme events is fundamental for sustainable food production. In particular, the study attempted to understand
the preferences of smallholder farmers in adaptation strategies to climate change in the study area; the main influencing fac tors determining the
choice of adaptation strategies to climate change by smallholder farmers in the study area. Methods: To investigate this issue, qualitative and
quantitative data were used within a descriptive research approach to assess potential adaptation strategies of smallholder f armers to climate change.
Data on demographic, socio-economic, institutional, physical and psychological factors for adaptation strategies of smallholder farmers were
collected through specially designed and pre-tested questionnaires, interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs). Rural counties for the study
were selected using simple random sampling due to the same agroecology. The Multi -Variate Probit (MVP) model was used as it is a type of
correlated binary response regression model that allows for the simultaneous identification and assessment of the impact of a set of independent
factors on each of the possible approaches. Five adaptation methods are identified as dependent variables for the Multi -Variate Probit. These include
Soil and Water Conservation (SWC) practices, use of drought-tolerant varieties, adjustment of planting dates, use of agroforestry, and
implementation of water harvesting. The following were selected as independent variables for the current study . Results: Most farmers (96.7%)
acknowledge the ongoing climate change and are concerned that their agriculture will not suffer under the new conditions. This is ju stified by the
fact that farmers confirm their observations regarding the increase in air temperature, the increase in the frequenc y of plant diseases and the decrease
in precipitation. At the same time, only 36.2% of the surveyed farmers reported that society is aware of the possible risks a ssociated with global
warming and is trying to adapt agricultural activities to new climatic conditions. In particular, the current study revealed for the first time that
smallholder farmers in Abala Abaya primarily prefer approaches such as soil and water conservation (71.6%), adjustment of planting dates (59.4%),
and agroforestry (44.5%). Conclusion: The study identified the most influential factors on the adoption of adapted agricultural practices in a
specific region of Abala Abaya (Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia), namely, household heads’ access to education, frequency of extension visits,
access to climate information and land slope. Thus, decision makers can design and adopt appropriate programs based on the curre nt results to
preserve smallholder farming and maintain food security at the national level.
Keywords: climate change; crop vulnerability; drought; land degradation; sustainable development; agriculture.

INTRODUCTION of many other stressors (Yeleliere et al., 2023; Deng et al., 2023;
Sinore & Wang, 2024). Sustainable Development Goal 2
Extensive research has now been conducted to study and (SDG 2) aims to end hunger, achieve food security and improved
understand the relationship between climate change, rising nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. FAO has
temperatures, drought, desertification, floods and the impacts repeatedly reported in 2017 (FAO, 2017) that extreme climate
of these phenomena (Javan & Darestani, 2024). The frequency conditions are reducing crop yields in Asia and Africa, which in
and intensity of extreme weather events due to climate change turn impedes the achievement of SDG 2. Today, most African
are also expected to increase (Jung et al., 2024; Clemens & countries cannot achieve SDG 2, and the prevalence of
Beckage, 2023). Continued global warming, which causes undernourishment is increasing, so hunger levels are higher than
changes in precipitation and temperature, is projected to the global average (FAO, 2020). Regardless of that, Africa as a
significantly impact future crop yields and disrupt food whole, including Ethiopia, has a low adaptive capacity to
production systems (Atiah et al., 2021). In this regard, withstand extreme events associated with climate change;
scientists are conducting research aimed at increasing the farmers are implementing (testing/experimenting/applying) their
resilience of the agricultural sector, namely, assessing the adaptation strategies for crop cultivation. The practical
financial implications for agriculture and crop selection for approaches to overcoming difficulties indicated are highly
cultivation in dryland regions (Javan & Darestani, 2024), relevant in drought-prone areas and frequent climate hazards.
understanding the impact of climate change on legume yields Deressa & Hassan (2009) conducted a study based on farmer
(Yeleliere et al., 2023), addressing climate risks in agricultural responses to climate change and agricultural production in
systems through the use of innovative adaptation techniques different agroecological zones of Ethiopia. The findings
and soil-based strategies (Deng et al., 2023; Hasegawa et al., predicted a gradual decline in net income per hectare by 2050,
2022), etc. indicating the detrimental effects of climate change.
Strengthening the adaptation of agricultural systems is crucial to
Developing countries are particularly vulnerable to the impacts
reducing the impact and vulnerability to climate change
of climate change due to their low adaptive capacity,
(Pörtner et al., 2022).
over-reliance on the agricultural sector, and the presence
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
26 journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/
BACKGROUND and their perception of their severity are crucial to motivating or
inhibiting their participation in adaptive actions. Some personal
Characteristics of the phenomenon "climate change" and factors, such as education, knowledge, and experience related to
associated risks climate events, further shape an individual's willingness to adapt
Climate change is a variation of meteorological parameters in (Sinore & Wang, 2024).
a region from the usual (long-term historical data and In this regard, adaptation measures at the micro level of the farm
expectations) for a given climate zone. The annual increase in are needed to obtain the appropriate mechanism. Implementing
the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere appropriate adaptation approaches for specific population
contributes to the rise in the Earth's temperature. The quality groups can help overcome the adverse effects of global warming
of ecosystem services is highly dependent on climate change (Füssel, 2007).
(Yang et al., 2020; Rastegaripour et al., 2024). Climate change
impacts many components of nature, including water More than 80% of Ethiopia's population lives in rural areas and
resources, the agro-industrial sector, food security, relies heavily on agriculture. Therefore, agri- and cultural
infrastructure, biogeocenosis, the diversity of flora and fauna, adaptation to climate change contributes to the country's
population health, and coastal zones. sustainable development. This justifies the need to know
accurately the type and extent of adaptation practices used by
Climate change-related risks include temperature increases, smallholder farmers at the regional (local) level and the need to
extreme precipitation events leading to floods, droughts, and improve existing adaptation frameworks further. In this regard,
drying up of natural water bodies, especially in semi-arid and it is helpful to understand how smallholder farmers perceive
arid regions (Vogel et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2024). climate change and what factors shape their adaptive behaviour.
Precipitation and temperature are susceptible parameters that
may be affected by climate change more than any other According to Abela Abaya Woreda Agricultural Office
hydrological components (Nigatu et al., 2023). Precipitation (AAWAO, 2020/21). Abala Abaya woreda is one of the most
extremes are projected to increase with global warming over vulnerable areas to global warming in the Wolaita Zone. The
much of the globe. A study (Yang et al., 2023) found that impacts of climate change seriously affect agriculture and
precipitation compared to annual precipitation and livestock production in the study area. The variability in
temperature compared to historical averages are projected to warming and rainfall reduces the agricultural output of
increase by 8.6% to 24.8% and 1.84℃ to 4.08℃, respectively, smallholder farmers (AAWAO, 2020/21). Given the above
from 2071 to 2100. Climate change is the primary driver of context, the current study aimed to assess the adaptation
more frequent floods and droughts in the future, and the impact strategies of smallholder farmers to climate change in Abela
of regional land use changes cannot be ignored. Further Abaya, Wolaita Zone of Southern Ethiopia. Despite the different
deforestation and cropland expansion will slightly increase adaptation strategies adopted by smallholders, there is no
average annual run-off and exacerbate future flood risks systematic and empirical study on what factors influence
(Yang et al., 2023; Rastegaripour et al., 2024). smallholders' choices and implementation of adaptation
strategies. This justifies the need to address the information and
Research studies over the years have shown that rising knowledge gaps to better plan and promote the most appropriate
temperatures and floods are among the major natural disasters approach to improve the region's smallholders' livelihoods and
in Ethiopia, which can significantly reduce crop yields or economic development efforts. Finding optimal techniques
destroy crops in some parts of the country (Masih et al., 2014; adapted to random extreme events is fundamental for sustainable
Nigatu et al., 2023; Deng et al., 2023; Jung et al., 2024). In food production.
addition, these climate disasters contribute to increased
incidence of injuries and the spread of infectious diseases, and In particular, the study attempts to find out the following:
as a result, population migration is observed. Population
1) the preferences of smallholder farmers in climate change
displacement is particularly prevalent among rural
adaptation strategies in the study area;
communities dependent on agriculture.
2) The main factors influencing the choice of climate change
Current climate change adaptation strategies
adaptation strategies by smallholder farmers in the study area.
Ethiopia has already adopted several climate change
Since the current study was conducted at the micro level and
adaptation and mitigation measures; however, the importance
therefore seeks to investigate specific adaptation strategies for
of these measures differs at the national level, and the search
smallholder farmers, it is assumed that the approach chosen
for better adaptation practices is still ongoing (Hirpha et al.,
(applied) by smallholder farmers at the regional level may differ
2020). The main adaptation strategies implemented include
from those developed at the national level.
mixed farming (use of improved and drought-tolerant crop
varieties, early and late planting, improved livestock breeds) MATERIALS AND METHODS
(Megersa et al., 2014); natural resource management (soil and
water conservation, soil fertility management practices, drip Research area
irrigation, etc.) (Gebru et al., 2020); and the use of two or more Abala Abaya is a district in the Wolaita Zone of South Ethiopia
practices (Asfaw et al., 2021; Gemeda et al., 2023). Regional State. Its geographical location is defined by the
Activity in adapting to global warming varies within coordinates: 6º32'30" – 6º40'0" N and 37º45'0" – 37º5'0" E. The
communities and among individual families. Personal and district's total area is 45,522.2 hectares and is bordered by
socio-psychological factors can significantly influence Humbo woreda to the north, Hobicha woreda to the east, Lake
individual and societal behaviour and decisions on climate Abaya to the south, and Mirab Abaya to the west. According to
change adaptation (Amare & Simane, 2017). Individual Abela Abaya Woreda Agricultural Office (AAWAO, 2020/21),
recognition, understanding and attitudes towards climate the total forest area is 369.39 hectares.
change largely determine the willingness of each individual to The district's total population is about 56,812. The total number
participate in adaptation efforts (Getahun et al., 2021; of households in the district is 27,627, of which 16,981 are male
Ackerl et al., 2023). People's understanding of the risks and 10,646 are female (Yesuph et al., 2023). The district consists
threatening food security due to global warming in the region of 16 kebele administrations, 13 rural and three urban. Crop
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/ 27
production is the main economic activity in the study area, and expertise to conduct in-depth interviews on the issues raised in
mixed crop-livestock production is also widely practised the focus group discussions.
(Yesuph et al., 2023).
The average annual rainfall and temperature distribution in the
area is 760 – 1200 mm and 15 – 20 °C, according to Wolaita
Zone Finance and Economic Development (WZFED, 2021).
In Abala Abaya, the soil type is mainly black loam. Traditional
irrigation is widely used in agricultural production.
Due to the region's climate, there is a division into two
agricultural seasons: the long rainy season (June – mid-
September) and the short rainy season (March-May). The
largest share of the annual harvest is achieved in the short rainy
season when more than 90% of farmers work. At the same
time, the increase in plant diseases and pests, as a consequence
of climate change, contributes to the annual decline in the
productivity of crops and livestock of small farmers.
Study design
The current study used qualitative and quantitative data in a
descriptive research approach to assess potential adaptation
strategies of smallholder farmers to climate change. Data on
demographic, socio-economic, institutional, physical and
psychological factors for smallholder adaptation strategies were
collected through specially designed and pre-tested a
questionnaires, interviews and Focus Group Discussions (FGD).
Sample definition and data collection
Purposive sampling was used to select the study area from
16 rural districts of Wolaita Zone. There are 16 kebele
administrations in the area, of which 3 kebele administrations
were selected using simple random sampling due to the same
agroecology, namely Abela Maraka, Abela Faracho, and
Abela Gafata. The sample size at 92% confidence level and
8% precision level were calculated by expression (1)
(Yamane, 1967):
N b
n = , (1)
1+N(e2 )
Figure 1. The sample size for a particular kebele
where n is the sample size, N is the population size, and e is administration: a – population and households' number in each
the level of precision and corresponds to a value of 0.08. of the kebele studied; b – sample size in pcs (%)
The study population size is the number of populations in This was revealed through the focus group discussions. Primary
3 kebele administrations, which is 15,346 people (Abela data on socio-economic, demographic, physical, psychological
Abaya Agricultural and NRM office, 2019/20 G.C.). and institutional factors were collected from smallholder farmers
in the study area through a semi-structured questionnaire, and
To proportionally distribute the sample size among the three three focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted in each
kebele administrations, the formula was used: group with 8 – 10 purposively selected participants. Pre-testing
Nka of the questionnaire was done through a pilot study, after which
nka = ∑ n , (2)
N the questionnaire was revised, considering the findings.
where nka is the sample size for a particular kebele Secondary data were collected from documents and reports
administration; Nka is several households surveyed in the available at district, zonal and other management centres.
particular kebele administration. Data analysis technique
Based on the information on the study population, taking into The Multivariate Probit (MVP) model was used because it is a
account formulas (1) and (2), the sample size was type of correlated binary response regression model that allows
155 households. Figure 1 presents the number of households for the simultaneous identification and evaluation of the impact
surveyed in each of the selected kebele administrations, where of a set of independent factors on each possible approach
the population and number of households data are based on (Belderbos et al., 2004). The multivariate normal distribution
data from the Abela Abaya agricultural and NRM office, underlies this model, which makes this model recommended in
2019/20 G.C. situations of interdependence between irrelevant options
Primary qualitative and quantitative household data were (Greene, 2003).
collected through questionnaires, focus group discussions with To analyse smallholder farmers' perceptions of climate change,
selected farmers and interviews; secondary data were collected five-level Likert scale measures were used on several climate
from various other sources. The interviews discussed the change attributes, and a household head survey was conducted
determinants of farmers’ climate change adaptation choices. about their opinions on the direction of global warming in 10
Fifteen key informants were selected based on their farming years. The survey participants' results at each level were
experience, indigenous knowledge and climate change evaluated in percentage terms. It was assumed that if farmers
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
28 journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/
strongly agree and agree, they accept climate change, while in focuses exclusively on smallholder farmers, i.e. farmers
other cases, they do not. Preferences for implementing specific managing approximately 2 ha and primarily managed by family
adaptation strategies were also assessed as percentages. labour. In addition, off-farm activities, livestock size and
socioeconomic variables (such as access to credit, etc.) were not
Working hypothesis and dependent variables taken into account based on previous research experience by
Five adaptation methods are identified as dependent variables other authors (Deressa, 2009; Nhemachena & Hassan, 2007).
for the Multivariate Probit. These include Soil and Water Also, the family size was not taken into account because this
Conservation (SWC) practices, the use of drought-tolerant factor has many variations,, such as the number of family
varieties, the adjustment of planting dates, the use of members, their age, gender, current economic wealth, etc.,
agroforestry, and the implementation of water harvesting. The which can be presented as a separate study.
following were selected as independent variables for the
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
current study.
Choosing a strategy depending on the household's head
1. Gender of the household head. Since being male positively
influences the implementation of SWC practices, tree planting, Gender
and the use of different crop varieties, male-headed households
are more likely to seek and implement adaptation strategies Figure 2 shows the study's results on the dependence of
(Deressa et al., 2009). This variable is expected to affect the smallholder farmers' strategy choice on the gender of the
choice of adaptation strategy positively. household head. Of all respondents, 76.2% were men, and 23.3%
were women.
2. Household head's age (in years). According to some studies,
this variable positively influences the introduction of various The chi-square test's p-value clearly shows a significant
varieties of crops, irrigation and SWC methods, and planting difference between male-headed and female-headed households
date adjustment for farming crops and trees (Hadgu et al., in terms of soil and water conservation, drought-resistant
2015; Deressa et al., 2009). Thus, with experience in varieties, and agroforestry. This confirms that male household
agriculture, the farmer will choose or develop the best heads are more likely to adopt agricultural adaptation strategies
alternative adaptation strategies. than females.

3. The household head's education level is measured in years The current study found a negative and significant effect of the
of schooling completed. Research shows that educated gender of the household head on SWC practices. In contrast, the
individuals have a better understanding of global warming impact of using drought-tolerant varieties was positive and
adaptation, which increases their preference for growing significant. Male household heads were 0.562 times more likely
drought-resistant varieties, using water harvesting, and to use drought-tolerant varieties (p = 0.001) as adaptation
adjusting planting dates (Addisu et al., 2016; Deressa et al., strategies than female household heads. This could be explained
2009; Adeoti et al., 2016). It is assumed that the influence on by women's heavier household responsibilities and less access to
the choice of adaptation strategy can be positive or negative. financial resources, contributing to a lower likelihood of
investing in new technologies. Similar observations were made
4. The hectares' cultivated land area measures landholding by Deressa et al. (2009), who found that men were more likely
size. This variable is also continuous, like the previous one. It to adopt SWC practices and use drought-tolerant varieties.
was found that with increasing landholding area, the likelihood
of using water harvesting, SWC practices, adjustment of Age
planting dates and use of drought-resistant varieties will increase Figure 3 shows the results of the age characteristics of the heads
(Nhemachena & Hassan, 2007). Also, farmers with more of the studied households. Of all the heads, the oldest was
extensive landholdings tend to use more appropriate strategies. 75 years old, the youngest was 25 years old. The average age
Presumably, the effect of this variable will be positive. was 49.0 years, with a standard deviation of 9.87.
5. Land slope (%). The slope of a land plot, namely plain (1), Using one-way ANOVA, a significant mean difference was
moderate slope (2) and steep slope (3), can be subject to found – F = 2.824 – among adaptation strategies, which suggests
varying degrees of erosion. This erosion is more pronounced a significant relationship between age and adaptation strategies.
on steeper slopes. This variable is discrete. It is hypothesised
to positively affect the choice of climate change adaptation The current study demonstrated a negative and significant effect
strategies, as researchers found that land slope was positively (p = 0.001) of the household head's age on the implementation
and significantly associated with the decision to implement of SWC practices. Older household heads were 0.183 times less
SWC measures (Asrat et al., 2004). likely to implement SWC practices than younger ones. This
result contradicts the study conducted by a group of researchers
6. Access to climate information. This is a dummy variable. It (Hadgu et al., 2015), which found a positive influence of age on
is expected that this factor will have a positive impact on the the implementation of different crop varieties and irrigation and
choice of strategy since awareness of climate change and access the implementation of SWC practices.
to information on climate forecasts increases the likelihood of
implementation of progressive methods based on adaptation to Education
global warming (Hadgu et al., 2015; Deressa et al., 2009).
The household head's educational status is one factor influencing
The choice of the variables indicated is based on the the adaptation strategies in each society. Figure 4 shows that soil
experience of most reviews of empirical studies. and water conservation methods, the use of drought-resistant
varieties, adjustment of planting dates, and agroforestry were
Study limitations applied by household heads who had a higher level of education
The current study is limited to a geographical area, namely than those without it. Therefore, in order to implement strategies
Abela Abaya district of Wolaita Zone (South Ethiopia) and in agricultural adaptation, the state should give great attention to
increasing the education of heads.

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/ 29
 Figure 2. Choice of strategies by smallholder farmers depending on the gender of the household head
(own survey, 2021; *** – significant at less than 1%; ** – significant at less than 5%; N.S. – not substantial)

Figure 3. Choice of strategies by smallholder farmers depending on the gender of the head of the household
(own survey, 2021; the results are significant at a probability level of less than 1%)

Figure 4. Smallholder farmers' choice of strategies depends on the education of the household head
(own survey, 2021; *** – significant at less than 1%; ** – significant at less than 5%; N.S. – not significant)

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

30 journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/
The current test revealed that the chi-square criterion for the Physical characteristics of the land plot
level of education of the applied adaptation strategies has a Land size
statistically significant difference at the 1% probability level.
This indicates that the educational status of household heads Figure 5 demonstrates a positive relationship between adaptation
positively affects the adoption of physical soil and water strategies and the land size owned by the household. The
conservation practices, drought-resistant varieties, adjustment significance was found at less than 1% – F = 2.107. Therefore, this
of planting dates, and agroforestry practices. result confirms the hypothesis that adaptation strategies are more
likely to be used in the case of large land holdings. Conversely,
The higher education level of the household head was found to in the case of small land holdings, farmers have difficulties
have a significant impact on SWC practices (p = 0.001) with adjusting planting dates, introducing water harvesting structures,
the use of drought-resistant variety (p = 0.001), adjustment of and using drought-resistant plants. Therefore, farmers with small
planting date (p = 0.001), and agroforestry (p = 0.01) as land holdings will need support from the state.
adaptation strategies compared to heads with low education.
This is justified by a better understanding of the impacts of Land slope
climate change and a better interpretation and understanding
The slope of the land plot greatly affects farming technologies
of the benefits of innovative approaches in agriculture. Similar
due to various natural processes such as soil erosion and
findings have been made in another study in other regions
difficulties with irrigation, which lead to the washing out of the
(Gadédjisso-Tossou, 2015; Adeoti et al., 2016), where the
fertile layer. In this regard, it is assumed that the heads of
authors reported that increasing the education degree of a
households with sloping plots will be more inclined to adaptation
farmer-head of a small farm increases the understanding
strategies, unlike the owners of flat plots. The current study has
degree of the need to adapt to new conditions associated with
revealed such a dependence, and the chi-square test demonstrates
global warming.
the significance of this dependence at levels Figure 6).

Figure 5. Smallholder farmers' choice of strategies depends on the land size owned by the household
(own survey, 2021; the results are significant at a probability level of less than 1%)

Figure 6. Smallholder farmers' choice of strategies depends on the slope of the land plot
(own survey, 2021; *** – significant at less than 1%; ** – significant at less than 5%; N.S. – not substantial)

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/ 31
A negative and significant effect of land slope on SWC practices dependence of specific adaptation strategies on the frequency of
and a positive impact on planting date adjustment and meetings. The current study found a positive impact on farmers'
agroforestry were found. The current study shows that agricultural performance in the context of climate warming. It
households with gentle slopes are 0.061 less likely to implement demonstrated statistical significance at a level of less than 1%
SWC, 0.051 more likely to implement planting date adjustment, of information work for the use of adaptation practices by small
and 0.627 more likely to implement agroforestry practices than farmers.
households with steep slopes. This finding is consistent with the
This study's result is a consequence of timely receipt of up-to-
conclusions presented in (Paulos et al., 2004), where the authors
date information on climate change and forecasts, as well as on
found a positive and significant effect of site slope on the
new agricultural technologies. These results are consistent with
decision to use SWC measurement practices.
the findings of similar studies (Deressa et al., 2009; Abid et al.,
Awareness of the climate situation and forecasts 2015; Hadgu et al., 2015).
Access to climate information, in this case through meetings with The result of the factor influencing the respondents' choice
an information agent, significantly increases the likelihood of of adaptation strategies
using adaptation strategies such as water harvesting, drought-
Table 1 demonstrates the factors influencing the choice of
resistant varieties, and SWC methods. Figure 7 clearly shows the
adaptation strategies.

Figure 7. Smallholder farmers' choice of strategies depends on the frequency of contact with a climate change information agent
(own survey, 2021; *** – significant at less than 1%; ** – significant at less than 5%; N.S. – not substantial)
Table 1. MVP – the result of factor affecting respondents' choice of updated agricultural approaches
Updated agricultural approaches
Independent Soil and water Use of drought- Adjusting planting Agroforestry Adopting water
variables conservation tolerant varieties date harvesting
Coef.(S.E.) Sig. Coef.(S.E.) Sig. Coef.(S.E.) Sig. Coef.(S.E.) Sig. Coef.(S.E.) Sig.
Head -0.256(0.088) .004 0.562(0.081) .00 0.144(0.091) .115 0.053(0.091) .5 0.007(0.061) .915
gender
Farmer' 0.397(0.075) .000 0.561(0.066) .000 0.746(0.068) .000 0.214(0.060) .001 0.033(0.055) .545
education
Awareness -0.245(0.080) .002 0.347(0.074) .000 0.201(0.072) .006 0.218(0.074) .004 0.093(0.054) .086
of the
climate
situation &
forecasts
Land slope -0.061(0.464) .023 0.120(0.137) .070 0.051(0.142) .029 0.627(0.128) 0.000 0.337(0.192) .141
Land size 0.530(0.231) .021 0.011(0.340) .158 -0.148(0.260) .569 0.049(0.246) .842 0.45(0.39) .792

Head age -0.183(0.040) .000 0.018(0.047) .702 -0.006(0.046) .898 -0.008(0.041) .849 0.002(0.003) .481
Number of observations – 155 Log likelihood = -305.406; χ2 = 161.08; P-value = 0.0000
Source: own survey, 2021
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
32 journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/
To sum up, most farmers (96.7%) acknowledge the ongoing Thus, decision-makers can develop and adopt appropriate
climate change and are concerned that their farming will not programs based on current results to preserve small farms and
suffer in the new conditions. This is justified by the fact that maintain food security at the national level.
farmers confirm their observations regarding the increase in air
temperature, the increase in the frequency of plant diseases and Author's statements
the decrease in precipitation. At the same time, only 36.2% of Contributions
the surveyed farmers reported that society is aware of the
possible risks associated with global warming and is trying to All authors contributed to the study's conception and design.
adapt agricultural activities to new climatic conditions Conceptualization: M.M., M.T.; Data curation: M.M.; Formal
(Figure 8). analysis: M.M., M.T., A.B.; Investigation: M.T., D.D.;
Methodology: M.T., A.B., B.L.; Project administration: M.T.,
D.D., B.L.; Supervision: M.T., B.L.; Validation: M.M., M.T.;
Visualization: A.B.; Writing – original draft: M.M., A.B.;
Writing – review & editing: M.T., A.B., B.L.
Declaration of conflicting interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Financial interests

Figure 8. Frequency of implementation of updated The authors declare they have no financial interests.
agricultural approaches (own survey, 2021) Funding
CONCLUSION Not applicable.
The current study provides a comprehensive picture of Data availability statement
smallholder farms' vulnerability and adaptive capacity in one No data were used for the current study.
specific region to changing climate conditions associated with
global warming. Namely, the current study made it possible to AI Disclosure
reveal for the first time that smallholder farmer Abela Abaya The authors declare that generative AI was not used to assist in
primarily prefers such approaches as soil and water writing this manuscript.
conservation (71.6%), adjusting planting date (59.4%), and
agroforestry (44.5%). This is justified by their natural Ethical approval declarations
reasoning and the best understanding of these approaches.
All survey participants were over 18 years of age; before the
Unfortunately, water collection structures are practically not
survey, all were informed about the purpose of the survey and
used (18.7%), probably due to the high labour intensity of the
the purpose of the study; all gave oral consent for the processing
process and its cost.
of data and their responses; all gave consent for the publication
Multi-Variate Probit analysis allowed us to identify the most of the research results based on their data without indicating
influential factors on the use of adapted agricultural techniques their names and personal contact information.
in a specific region of Abala Abaya (Wolaita Zone, South
Additional information
Ethiopia) and confirm the results of previous studies. The
significant variables were household heads' access to Publisher's note
education, frequency of extension visits, access to climate
Publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
information, and slope of the land plot.
published maps and institutional affiliations.
REFERENCES
Ackerl, T., Weldemariam, L. F., Nyasimi, M., & Ayanlade, A. (2023). Climate change risk, resilience, and adaptation among rural farmers in East
Africa: A literature review. Regional Sustainability, 4(2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsus.2023.05.004.
Addisu, S., Fissha, G., Gediff, B., & Asmelash, Y. (2016). Perception and adaptation models of climate change by the rural people of lake Tana
Sub-Basin, Ethiopia. Environmental Systems Research, 5, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-016-0059-0.
Adema, A. (2023). Farmers Choice and Factors Influencing Adoption of Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in the Case of Abala Abaya
Woreda, Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Advances in Physics Theories and Applications, 87, 7–34. https://doi.org/10.7176/APTA/87-02.
Adeoti, A. I., Coster, A. S., & Akanni, T. A. (2016). Analysis of farmers’ vulnerability, perception and adaptation to climate change in Kwara State,
Nigeria. International Journal of Climate Research, 1(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.112/2016.1.1/112.1.1.16.
Amare, A., & Simane, B. (2017). Determinants of smallholder farmers’ decision to adopt adaptation options to climate change and variability in
the Muger Sub basin of the Upper Blue Nile basin of Ethiopia. Agriculture & Food Security, 6, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0144-2.
Asfaw, A., Bantider, A., Simane, B., & Hassen, A. (2021). Smallholder farmers’ livelihood vulnerability to climate change-induced hazards:
agroecology-based comparative analysis in Northcentral Ethiopia (Woleka Sub-basin). Heliyon, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06761.
Asrat, P., Belay, K., & Hamito, D. (2004). Determinants of farmers' willingness to pay for soil conservation practices in the southeastern highlands
of Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, 15(4), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.623.
Atiah, W. A., Muthoni, F. K., Kotu, B., Kizito, F., & Amekudzi, L. K. (2021). Trends of rainfall onset, cessation, and length of growing season in
northern Ghana: comparing the rain gauge, satellite, and farmer’s perceptions. Atmosphere, 12(12), 1674. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12121674.
Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Diederen, B., Lokshin, B., & Veugelers, R. (2004). Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies. International Journal
of Industrial Organization, 22(8–9), 1237–1263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2004.08.001.
Deng, X., Huang, Y., Yuan, W., Zhang, W., Ciais, P., Dong, W., ... & Qin, Z. (2023). Building soil to reduce climate change impacts on global
crop yield. Science of the Total Environment, 903, 166711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166711.
Deressa, T. T., & Hassan, R. M. (2009). Economic impact of climate change on crop production in Ethiopia: evidence from cross-section measures.
Journal of African economies, 18(4), 529–554. https://doi.org/10.1093/jae/ejp002.

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/ 33
 Deressa, T. T., Hassan, R. M., Ringler, C., Alemu, T., & Yesuf, M. (2009). Determinants of farmers’ choice of adaptation methods to climate
change in the Nile Basin of Ethiopia. Global Environmental Change, 19(2), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.01.002.
FAO, Ifad, UNICEF, WFP, & WHO. (2020). The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020. Transforming food systems for affordable
healthy diets. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2017). The future of food and agriculture: Trends and challenges. Fao.
Füssel, H. M. (2007). Adaptation planning for climate change: concepts, assessment approaches, and key lessons. Sustainability Science, 2, 265–
275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-007-0032-y.
Gadédjisso-Tossou, A. (2015). Understanding farmers’ perceptions of and adaptations to climate change and variability: The case of the Maritime,
Plateau and Savannah Regions of Togo. Agricultural Sciences, 6, 1441–1454. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.612140.
Gebru, G. W., Ichoku, H. E., & Phil-Eze, P. O. (2020). Determinants of smallholder farmers' adoption of adaptation strategies to climate change in
Eastern Tigray National Regional State of Ethiopia. Heliyon, 6(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04356.
Gemeda, D. O., Korecha, D., & Garedew, W. (2023). Determinants of climate change adaptation strategies and existing barriers in Southwestern
parts of Ethiopia. Climate Services, 30, 100376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2023.100376.
Getahun, A. B., Ayal, D. Y., Ture, K., & Zeleke, T. T. (2021). Determinants of climate variability adaptation strategies: A case of Itang Special
District, Gambella Region, Ethiopia. Climate Services, 23, 100245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2021.100245.
Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis. Pearson Education India. Available: https://www.ctanujit.org/uploads/2/5/3/9/25393293/_econometric
_analysis_by_greence.pdf.
Hadgu, G., Fantaye, K. T., Mamo, G., & Kassa, B. (2015). Farmers' climate change adaptation options and their determinants in Tigray Region,
Northern Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 10(9), 956–964. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2014.9146.
Hasegawa, T., Wakatsuki, H., Ju, H., Vyas, S., Nelson, G. C., Farrell, A., ... & Makowski, D. (2022). A global dataset for the projected impacts of
climate change on four major crops. Scientific Data, 9(1), 58. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01150-7.
Hirpha, H. H., Mpandeli, S., & Bantider, A. (2020). Determinants of adaptation strategies to climate change among the smallholder farmers in
Adama District, Ethiopia. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 12(4), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-01-
2019-0002.
Javan, K., & Darestani, M. (2024). Assessing environmental sustainability of a vital crop in a critical region: Investigating climate change impacts
on agriculture using the SWAT model and HWA method. Heliyon, 10(3), e25326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25326.
Jung, M., Kim, J., Kim, E. Y., Yoo, C., Ko, D., Lee, H., ... & Yi, G. (2024). Climate change impacts on Allium crop production: Insights from
long-term observations in South Korea. Heliyon, 10(14), e34749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34749.
Masih, I., Maskey, S., Mussá, F. E. F., & Trambauer, P. (2014). A review of droughts on the African continent: a geospatial and long-term
perspective. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18(9), 3635–3649. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3635-2014.
Megersa, B., Markemann, A., Angassa, A., Ogutu, J. O., Piepho, H. P., & Zaráte, A. V. (2014). Impacts of climate change and variability on cattle
production in southern Ethiopia: Perceptions and empirical evidence. Agricultural Systems, 130, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.06.002.
Nhemachena, C., & Hassan, R. (2007). Micro-level analysis of farmers adaption to climate change in Southern Africa. Intl Food Policy Res Inst.
Nigatu, G. T., Abebe, B. A., Grum, B., Kebedew, M. G., & Semane, E. M. (2023). Investigation of Flood incidence causes and mitigation: Case
study of Ribb river, northwestern Ethiopia. Natural Hazards Research, 3(3), 408–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nhres.2023.04.009.
Picard, C. J., Winter, J. M., Cockburn, C., Hanrahan, J., Teale, N. G., Clemins, P. J., & Beckage, B. (2023). Twenty-first century increases in total
and extreme precipitation across the Northeastern USA. Climatic Change, 176(6), 72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03545-w.
Pörtner, H. O., Roberts, D. C., Adams, H., Adler, C., Aldunce, P., Ali, E., ... & Ibrahim, Z. Z. (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation
and vulnerability. IPCC.
Rastegaripour, F., Tavassoli, A., Babaeian, M., Fernández-Gálvez, J., & Caballero-Calvo, A. (2024). Assessing the impacts of climate change on water
resource management and crop patterns in Eastern Iran. Agricultural Water Management, 295, 108774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108774.
Sinore, T., & Wang, F. (2024). Impact of climate change on agriculture and adaptation strategies in Ethiopia: a meta-analysis. Heliyon, 10(4),
e26103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26103.
Vogel, E., Donat, M. G., Alexander, L. V., Meinshausen, M., Ray, D. K., Karoly, D., ... & Frieler, K. (2019). The effects of climate extremes on
global agricultural yields. Environmental Research Letters, 14(5), 054010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab154b.
Wang, B., Li, L., Feng, P., Chen, C., Luo, J. J., Taschetto, A. S., ... & Guo, X. (2024). Probabilistic analysis of drought impact on wheat yield and
climate change implications. Weather and Climate Extremes, 45, 100708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2024.100708.
Yamane, Y. (1967). Mathematical formulae for sample size determination. Journal of Mathematics, 1, 1–29.
Yang, S., Zhao, B., Yang, D., Wang, T., Yang, Y., Ma, T., & Santisirisomboon, J. (2023). Future changes in water resources, floods and droughts
under the joint impact of climate and land-use changes in the Chao Phraya basin, Thailand. Journal of Hydrology, 620, 129454.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.129454.
Yang, Y. E., Son, K., Hung, F., & Tidwell, V. (2020). Impact of climate change on adaptive management decisions in the face of water scarcity.
Journal of Hydrology, 588, 125015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125015.
Yeleliere, E., Antwi-Agyei, P., & Baffour-Ata, F. (2023). Impacts of climate change on the yields of leguminous crops in the Guinea Savanna
agroecological zone of Ghana. Regional Sustainability, 4(2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsus.2023.04.002.
Yesuph, D. S., Bedeke, S. B., & Didana, H. L. (2023). Assessing climate change-induced poverty of mixed crop-livestock smallholders in Wolaita
Zone. Research in Globalization, 7, 100158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2023.100158.

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

34 journal homepage: https://www.teiee.net/