Impacts and adaptation extents of climate smart agricultural practices among smallholder farmers of Ethiopia: Implication to food and nutrition security

Figures & data

Table 1. The sample districts and total sample households form the target kebeles

Districts	Population	Sample kebeles	Total households	Sample households
Haramaya	352,031	Kerensa	1513	65
		I/Oromia	1216	52
		Tuji gebisa	1468	63
		Kuro	1875	81
Meta	318,458	B/Oromia	1384	60
		Halleyo	940	40
Girawa	300,661	Rasa Jenta	1515	65
		Birbirsa	803	35
Total			10714	461

Source: Own survey, 2022

Table 2. Definitions and measurements of the variables used in the study

Variables	Measurements	Expected effect on Adoption
Dependent variables
Climate change adaptation practices	Indices of the number of adopted practices (0 to 4)
Outcome variables
Food and nutrition security status	Takes 1 if secured 0 otherwise and nutrition measured in dietary diversity (0 to 12)
Independent variables
Age	Age of head in years	±
Gender	1 male headed, 0 female headed	+
Family size	Family size in numbers	+
Land area	Cultivated land area in hectors	+
Education	Education of head grade completed	+
Training	1 if trained 0 otherwise	+
Extension	Number of contact with extension	+
Main road distance	Distance to main road in kms	-
Climate information	1 if accessed 0 if not	+
Perception climate chan	1 if perceived 0 otherwise	+
Training on land mgt	1 if participated 0 otherwise	+
Livestock holding	Total livestock holding in TLU	+
Cooperative member	1 if member 0 if not	+
Market information	1 if accessed 0 if not	+
Soil fertility status	1 if fertile 0 otherwise	-
Non/off- farm income	1 if accessed 0 if not	+
Access to credit	1 if accessed 0 if not	+
Slope of farm land	1 if plan and 0 otherwise	+
Own mobile phone	1 if owned 0 if not	+

Table 3. Descriptive statistical results for sample households continuous variables

Variables	Low level	Medium practices	High practices	Higher practices	All sample	F- Value
	Mean	Mean	Mean	Mean	Mean
Age	40	40	40	40.4	40.7	0.73
Family size	6.4	6.07	6.13	6.4	6.2	.38
Cultivated	0.614	0.451	.464	.521	0.4903	1.68
Livestock	1.74	2.611	2.60	3.15	2.57	6.31**
Labor	206.4	212.46	205.95	225.53	211.71	1.25
N/O income	1157.3	1083.38	723.45	534.27	953.09	0.44
Extension	3.2	3.3	3.8	4.3	3.6	3.45**
Education	1.8	2.8	4.2	4.8	3.4	13.96***
Crop income	18666.2	18569.4	26975.45	50572.4	26448.93	31.12***
Lincome	2236.08	4211.87	4638.06	4972.46	4117	5.19**
Fincome	20902.3	22781.263	31613.52	55544.84	30626.04	33.01***
Weather road	37.7	32.5	29.3	29.1	31.7	5.95***

Source: Own computation results,** and *** means significant at 5% and 1% respectively,

Note 1USD = 52 Ethiopian Birr

Table 4. Descriptive statistical results for sample households’ categorical variables

Adoption of climate smart agricultural practices
Variables		Low level		Medium practices		High practices		Higher practices		Total		X^2 value
		Num	%	Num	%	Num	%	Num	%	Num	%
Membership status	No	41	8.9	109	23.6	59	12.8	28	6.1	237	51.4	22.49***
	Yes	27	5.9	66	14.3	83	18	48	10.4	224	48.6
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100
Training on land mgt	No	45	9.8	95	20.6	66	14.3	28	6.1	234	50.8	14.263***
	Yes	23	5	80	17.4	76	16.5	48	10.4	227	49.2
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100
Training on irrigation	No	46	10	86	18.7	44	9.5	32	6.9	208	45.1
	Yes	22	4.8	89	19.3	98	21.3	44	9.5	253	54.9
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100	22.7***
Access to training	No	41	8.9	68	14.8	47	10.2	12	2.6	168	36.4
	Yes	27	5.9	107	23.2	95	20.6	64	13.9	293	63.6
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100	31.8***
Access to n/of income	No	53	11.5	147	31.5	128	27.8	69	15	397	86.1
	Yes	15	3.3	28	6.1	14	3	7	1.5	64	13.9
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100	7.769*
Access to market info	No	33	7.2	60	13	41	8.9	21	4.6	155	33.6
	Yes	35	7.6	115	24.9	101	21.9	55	11.9	306	66.4
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100	9.463**
Access to climate change info	No	40	8.7	70	15.2	28	6.1	14	3	152	33
	Yes	28	6.1	105	22.8	114	24.7	62	13.4	309	67
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100	43.042***
	No	44	9.5	106	23	79	17.1	29	5.6	255	53.3
Credit	Yes	23	5	70	15.2	63	13.7	50	10.8	206	44.7	18.326***
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100
Perception land degr	No	36	7.8	72	15.6	24	5.2	11	2.4	143	31
	Yes	31	6.7	104	22.6	118	25.6	65	14.1	318	69	47.143***
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100
	Other	32	6.9	84	18.2	51	11.1	25	5.4	192	41.6
Slope	Flat	35	7.6	92	20	91	19.7	51	11.1	269	58.4	8.8**
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100
	No	45	9.8	82	17.8	51	11.1	20	4.5	198	43
Phone	Yes	22	4.8	94	20.4	91	19.7	56	12.1	263	57	28.434***
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100
Climate change perception	No	31	6.7	70	15.2	33	7.2	18	3.9	152	33
	Yes	37	8	105	22.8	109	23.6	58	12.6	309	67
	Total	68	14.8	175	38	142	30.8	76	16.5	461	100	17.861***

Sources: Own survey result, 2022. ** and *** means significant at 5% and 1% percent respectively

Table 5. Determinants of extents of adopted climate smart practices

Variables	Low adopter		Medium adopter		High adopter		Higher adopter
	ME	S.E	ME	S.E	ME	S.E	ME	S.E
Family	0.0009	0.0093	−0.0116	0.0095	−0.0006	0.0094	0.0072	0.0063
Gender	0.0052	0.0572	−0.1046*	0.0625	0.0261	0.0564	0.0884***	0.0315
Age	0.0034	0.0021	0.0001	0.0022	−0.0025	0.0022	−0.0011	0.0015
Education	−0.0068	0.0069	0.0006	0.0070	−0.0023	0.0070	0.0158***	0.0046
Extension	−0.0134	0.0097	−0.0122	0.0096	0.0229**	0.0091	0.0145**	0.0060
Phone	−0.0028	0.0477	−0.0365	0.0495	0.0592	0.0482	0.0742**	0.0329
Land	0.0299	0.0517	−0.0932	0.0712	0.0077	0.0506	0.0011	0.0307
Labor	0.0000	0.0003	0.0006*	0.0003	−0.0004	0.0003	−0.0003	0.0002
Cooperative	−0.0968**	0.0470	0.0409	0.0470	0.0437	0.0469	0.0131	0.0324
Training	−0.1148**	0.0505	0.0523	0.0493	0.0736	0.0495	0.0524	0.0357
LM Train	−0.0845*	0.0481	0.0693	0.0483	0.0108	0.0475	0.0276	0.0325
Livestock	−0.0199	0.0121	−0.0046	0.0120	0.0186**	0.0117	0.0226***	0.0078
S. Fertility	0.0481	0.0477	−0.0816*	0.0490	0.0142	0.0478	−0.0096	0.0332
Slope	0.0391	0.0470	−0.097**	0.0488	0.1114**	0.0466	0.0507	0.0319
Mkt info	−0.0516	0.0488	0.0036	0.0488	0.1423***	0.0465	0.0596*	0.0320
Climate info	−0.144***	0.0533	0.1105**	0.0476	0.0096	0.0503	0.0460	0.0329
Perception	−0.1356**	0.0545	−0.0512	0.0537	0.1018**	0.0496	0.0917***	0.0327
Degradation	−0.154***	0.0546	0.0790	0.0497	0.0411	0.0517	0.0897***	0.0333
Credit	−0.143***	0.0467	0.0979**	0.0490	−0.0026	0.0482	0.0449	0.0339
Road dist	−0.0009	0.0016	0.0035**	0.0016	−0.0008	0.0017	−0.004***	0.0013
LR chi2(80) =292.08 Number of obs = 461
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
Log likelihood = −589.95698 Pseudo R2 = 0.1984

Sources: Own survey result, 2022. ***, **and * means significant at 1%, 5%, and 10% probability levels respectively.

Table 6. Impacts of different level of climate smart practices on households’ food security

Treatment level	Actual	Counterfactual	Treatment effect	Robust S.E
Low	2707.93	2590.5	.2836491**	.072365
Medium	3421.92	3005.04	.4317261**	.0714159
High	4234.26	3411.20	.5594946***	.0687724
Very high	4761.64	4514.24	.6109905***	.0722682

Sources: Own survey result, 2022. ** and *** means significant at 5 and 1 % probability levels

Table 7. Impacts of different level of climate smart practices on nutrition

Treatment level	Actual	Counterfactual	Treatment effect	Robust S.E
Low	4.447619	4.43	.0437519	.0822183
Medium	4.9207921	4.68	.1982458**	.0940788
High	4.8173077	4.31	.1943051***	.0960312
Very high	5.5783133	4.57	.4065833***	.1157087

Source: Own survey result, 2022. *** means significant at 1% probability level

Figure 1. Food security status by level of climate smart management practices.

Figure 2. Nutritional status by level of climate smart management practices.

Data availability statement

The author confirms that the data will be available based on the acceptance of the paper.