Our research approach
The project has followed an interdisciplinary approach guided by a holistic framework and supported by a continuous interaction between the social and natural scientists of the project team.
We have adopted a multi-scale methodology by conducting our study simultaneously at the district, community and household level. Water productivity assessments at the district and community level have been combined with an in-depth analysis of farmers’ livelihood strategies at the community and household level. Finally, we have also located farmers’ strategies and policy decisions within the political-economic context at the district, state and national level.
Methods for data collection
Data collection has included:
- A census survey led among all villagers (1284 households in 8 villages);
- A detailed questionnaire conducted among a representative sample of households selected from the results of the census survey (196 households in 8 villages);
- Semi-structured interviews with a representative sample of households (145 households in 7 villages) and participatory exercises including focus groups and participatory village mapping;
- Secondary data on land-use change, water use and agriculture at district/village level;
- Semi-structured interviews with local authorities, district government agencies and non-governmental organisations.
Methods for data analysis
Data analysis has been guided by:
At the household and community level:
- the Capitals and Capabilities Framework (Bebbington, 1999) to analyse livelihoods in terms of their sustainability and implications for poverty
- the Gendered Sustainable Livelihood Framework (Van Hoeve and Van Koppen, 2006) to evaluate gender differences in capitals and
- the Livestock water Productivity framework (Peden et al. 2002, 2007) to identify the best options for improving water productivity
At the district, state and national level:
The Actors, Powers, and Accountability framework (Agrawal and Ribot, 2000) to evaluate the performance of decentralised institutional arrangements related to irrigation, crop production and animal husbandry as well as rural development in general.
References:
Agrawal, A. and Ribot, J. C. (2000) Analyzing Decentralization: A framework with South Asian and West African environmental cases, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.
Bebbington, A. (1999), Capitals and Capabilities: A framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty, World Development, 27,2021-2044.
Peden, D., Tadesse G. and Mammo M. (2002), Improving the Water Productivity of Livestock: An opportunity for poverty reduction, InConference Proceedings “Integrated water and land management research and capacity building priorities for Ethiopia”, (Eds, McCornick, P. G., Kamara, A. B. and Girma Tadesse) IWMI (International Water Management Institute), Colombo, Sri Lanka, and ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2–4 December 2002, pp. 57–65.
Peden, D., Tadesse, G. and Misra, A. K. (2007), Water and Livestock for Human Development, In Water for Food, Water for Life: A comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture, (Ed, Molden, D.) Earthscan and International Water Management Institute, London and Colombo, pp. 485-514.
van Hoeve, E. and van Koppen, B. (2006) Beyond Fetching Water for Livestock: A gendered sustainable livelihoods framework to assess livestock-water productivity, ILRI, Nairobi.
