Impact of small-scale irrigation schemes on farmers livelihood, the case of Mekdela Woreda, North-East Ethiopia

Figures & data

Figure 1. Location map of the study area.

Table 1. List of target population of the study

Kebele	Target population
	User	Non-user	Total population
Qebtia	507	1393	1900
Tebi	887	966	1853
Total	1394	2359	3753

Source: Own survey data (2018)

Table 2. Sampled household of the study

Kebele	Sampled household
	Irrigation user			Non-user			Total
	Male	Female	Total	Male	Female	Total
Qebtia	32	2	34	79	17	96	130
Tebi	58	4	62	54	12	66	128
Total	90	6	96	133	29	162	258

Source: Own computations (2018).

Table 3. Conditional expectations, treatment, and heterogeneity effects

Subsamples	Decision stage		Treatment effect
	To use	Not to use
Households use irrigation	$\left(\mathrm{a}\right)\mathrm{E}\left({\mathrm{L}}_{1\mathrm{i}}|{\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{i}}=1\right)$	$\left(\mathrm{c}\right)\mathrm{E}\left({\mathrm{L}}_{2\mathrm{i}}|{\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{i}}=1\right)$	$\mathrm{A}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{T}$
Households not use irrigation	$\left(\mathrm{d}\right)\mathrm{E}\left({\mathrm{L}}_{1\mathrm{i}}|{\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{i}}=0\right)$	$\left(\mathrm{b}\right)\mathrm{E}\left({\mathrm{L}}_{2\mathrm{i}}|{\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{i}}=0\right)$	$\mathrm{A}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{U}$
Heterogeneity effects	$\mathrm{B}{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{u}}$	$\mathrm{B}{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{N}}$	$\mathrm{T}\mathrm{H}$

Note:(a) and (b) represents observed expected income of irrigation user and non-user;(c) and (d) represents counterfactual of irrigation user.

Source: Authors’ illustration, 2019

Table 4. The description of variables and their measurements used in ESR

Variable code	Type	definition of variables	Measurement	Expected sign in the selection equation	Expected sign in income equation
Agehh	Continuous	age of household head	In years	-	-
Agesqhh	Continuous	age of household head	In years	-	-
SexHH	Dummy	Sex of household heads	1 if male, 0 otherwise	+	+
HHSize	Continuous	Household size	Number	+	+
HHedu	Dummy	level of Education	1 literate, 0 otherwise	+	+
Adultlab	Continuous	Adult lab our	Adult equivalent	+	+
Owncultland	Continuous	cultivated land	Hectare	+	+
Discheme	Continuous	Distance from home to scheme	Kilometers	-	No effect
Accredit	Dummy	Credit user	1 if user, 0 otherwise	+	+
Farmexp	Continuous	Farm experience (Age as proxy)	In years	+	+
Livestock	Continuous	livestock owned	TLU	+	+
Offpart	Dummy	off-farm job participation	1 if yes, 0 otherwise	-	+
Distmkt	Continuous	distance from respondents’ home to the local market	Kilometers	-	-
Extncont	Continuous	Number of visits by extension agent	Number	+	+
IUserNgb	Dummy	If the household had irrigation user neighbor’s	1 if yes, 0 otherwise	+	No effect

Source: Authors’ illustration, 2019

Table 5. Respondents socioeconomics characteristics

Variable	Variable definition	Measurement	Irrigation user	Irrigation non-user	t-test
			Mean	Mean
Agehh	age of household head	In years	39.5	45.7	6.0821***
SexHH	Sex of household heads	1 if male, 0 otherwise	0.93	0.82	−2.6678**
HHSize	Household size	Number	4.2	4.7	3.0782***
HHedu	level of Education	1 literate, 0 otherwise	0.43	0.24	−3.3499***
Adultlab	Adult lab our	Adult equivalent	4.3	4.1	−1.8584*
Owncultland	cultivated land	Hectare	1.4	1.04	−9.8233***
Dischme	Distance home to water source	Kilometers	1.67	3.32	23.4010***
Credtur	Credit user	1 if use, 0 otherwise	0.58	0.30	−4.4844***
Farmexp	Farm experience	In years	22.06	22.14	0.0767
Livestock	livestock owned	TLU	5.37	4.84	−2.3998*
Offpart	off farm job participation	1 if yes, 0 otherwise	0.37	0.75	6.4745***
Distmkt	Distance from respondents’ farm to the local market	Kilometers	4.76	4.77	0.0608
IUserNgb	If a household had an irrigation user neighbor’s	1 if yes, 0 otherwise	0.81	0.26	−9.9970***
Extncont	Number of extension visits	Number	7.10	7.08	−0.0961

***, ** & *. Show significance at 1, 5 and 10% levels, respectively.

Source: Computed from own survey data

Table 6. Marginal effects from logit estimation for determinants of participation in irrigation

Variable	Marginal effects (dy/dx)
Agehh	−0.0192(0.0070) **
Agehh2	0.0001 (0.0007) **
Sexhh	−0.0008 (0.0253)
Adaltlab	0.0158(0.0120)
Foredu	0.0055(0.0242)
Owncultland	0.0986(0.0336) ***
Farmexpe	0.0014(0.0027)
Tlu	0.0063(0.0064)
Credtur	0.0039(0.2742)
Offpart	−0.0449(0.0238) *
Extencontact	0.0329(0.0132) **
Distmkt	−0.0093(0.0087) ***
Dischme	−0.1324(0.0295) **
IuserNgb	0.0627(0.0230) *
Constant	15.9445(9.3764)
Observations	258
LR chi2(14)	301.54
Prob > chi2	0.0000
Pseudo R2	0.8853
link test P-value	0.353
Log likelihood	−19.52707

***p <0.01, ** p <0.05, * p <0.1 represents levels of significance.

Source; own survey result (2019).

Table 7. Full-information maximum-likelihood estimate of the switching regression

Dependent	Selection	Total income (Y)
		Irrigation	Irrigation
Variables	Irrigation	User	Non-user
Agehh	−0.3855**	0.0088**	0.0003
	(0.1893)	(0.0038)	(0.0029)
AgeHH2	0.0039**	−0.0001**	−0.0001***
	(0.0019)	(0.0000)	(0.0000)
SexHH	0.3177	−0.0099	0.0485
	(0.6448)	(0.0217)	(0.0480)
Adaltlab	0.3953	0.0222***	−0.0057
	(0.2816)	(0.0057)	(0.0214)
Foredu	0.2570	−0.0051	0.0054
	(0.5895)	(0.0089)	(0.0414)
Owncultland	2.3065***	−0.0009	0.1577**
	(0.7574)	(0.0183)	(0.0638)
Farmexpe	0.0065	0.0017	0.0119***
	(0.0645)	(0.0011)	(0.0035)
Tlu	0.1382	−0.0024	0.0253**
	(0.1560)	(0.0028)	(0.0125)
Credtur	0.5028	0.0088	0.0512
	(0.6113)	(0.0087)	(0.0410)
Acoffinc	−1.0357**	0.0072	−0.0059
	(0.5279)	(0.0110)	(0.0407)
Distmkt	−0.2286	−0.0068*	−0.0058
	(0.1834)	(0.0039)	(0.0153)
Extencontact	0.6491*	0.0088	0.0308**
	(0.3322)	(0.0062)	(0.0143)
Dischme	−2.7142***
	(0.9747)
IUserNgb	1.2733**
	(0.6416)
Constant	6.4696	11.1799***	9.7262***
	(5.2598)	(0.1000)	(0.1968)
R1	−.9608
	(1.0486)
R2	(0.7766
	(0.8307)
Log likelihood = 175.07138 Wald chi2(12) = 28.09 Prob > chi2 = 0.0054
LR test of indep. eqns. chi2(1) = 3.24 Prob > chi2 = 0.0719

***p <0.01, ** p <0.05, * p <0.1 represents levels of significance. Standard errors in parentheses

Source: Own calculations

Table 8. Test of the predicted total income of irrigation user and non-user households

Subsample	Decision stage		Treatment effects
	user	Non-user
Irrigation user	(a) 99,852.03	(c) 92,023.4	$\mathrm{A}\mathrm{T}{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{y}}$= 7828.627***
Irrigation Non-user	(d) 36,304.4	(b) 29,433.32	$\mathrm{A}\mathrm{T}{\mathrm{U}}_{\mathrm{y}}$= 6871.079***
Heterogeneity effects	$\mathrm{B}{\mathrm{H}}_{1\mathrm{y}}$= 63,547.63	$\mathrm{B}{\mathrm{H}}_{2\mathrm{y}=}$ 62590.08	$\mathrm{T}{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{y}}$= 957.55

***p <0.01, ** p <0.05, * p <0.1. Represents levels of significance.

Source: Own survey calculation