Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies & Management 13(2): 176 – 188, 2020.

ISSN:1998-0507 doi: https://ejesm.org/doi/v13i2.5

Submitted: February 11, 2020 Accepted: April 14, 2020

CLIMATE VARIABILITY AND AGRO-PASTORALS’ ADAPTATION STRATEGIES TO

CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOMALI REGION OF ETHIOPIA, THE CASE OF KEBRIBAYAH
DISTRICT

*ABEBAW SHIMELES1, MOHAMED BADEL ALI2 AND KEDER KEMAL1

1
Ethiopian Environment and Forest Research Institute, Dire Dawa Environment and Forest
Research Center, P.O. Box 1708, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia
2
Vice Director at Institute of Pastoral and Agro-pastoral Development Studies, Jigjiga
University
*Corresponding author email: shabebaw2070@gmail.com

Abstract
The study examined climate variability; identified types of adjustments agro-pastoral
households are making in their crop and livestock production practices in response to
climate changes; and assessed factors influencing agro-pastoral households’ decision to
practice adaptation mechanism. Thirty years of meteorological station data beginning from
the year 1987 to 2016 and primary data collected from randomly selected 156 agro-
pastoral households were used in this study. The data were analyzed using descriptive
statistics and multinomial econometric model. The result revealed that the temporal
variation of total amount of annual rainfall was recognized as moderate and there was an
increase of maximum temperature throughout the study period. There were also five
highest drought and four highest flood years. Agro-pastorals practice multiple strategies to
adapt to the changing climate. The empirical model also confirmed multiple factors
including formal education, access to extension service, and market access influenced
households’ decision to adopt climate change adaptation options. Therefore, policies and
intervention programs aimed at promoting household level climate change adaptation
need to invest more on providing reliable meteorological information, formal education,
extension services, and better infrastructure.

Key Words: Agro-pastoral, Climate variability, Climate change, Adaptation strategies,

Somali Region, MNL model

Introduction the most important stressors (Misselhorn,

People in developing world face 2005). Climate change has become
multiple stressors such as droughts, plant priority concern of mankind and is
diseases, policy changes and market considered as one of the main
fluctuations (Misselhorn, 2005; O’Brien environmental problems of the 21st
et al., 2004). In East Africa, droughts and century. Climate impacts are being felt
climate variability in general are among today and greater impacts are expected in
This work is licensed to the publisher under the Creative Commons Attributions License 4.0
176
 Climate Variability and Agro-pastorals’ Adaptation Strategies...............Abebaw et al.

the future. In Ethiopia, the temperature has assets due to drought induced emergencies
been increasing annually at the rate of in the region during the past 15 years
0.2°C over the past five decades. This has (DPPB, 2008). The effect of climate
already led to a decline in agricultural variability coupled with the increase in
production. Needless to mention that the human population exacerbated the
consequences of climate change and the impacts of climate changes on crop and
emphasis to be placed on it depends, livestock production which further
among others, upon the significance of the complicates the problem of rural
agricultural sector in the national households’ food insecurity and poverty
economy. The economy of many in the region. These calamities also have
developing countries, including Ethiopia, political consequences and serious
is heavily dependent on agriculture. The development implications that no one in
livelihoods of the vast majority of their region and beyond could ignore.
populations depend directly and indirectly The fact that climate has been
on this sector. This dependence on changing and will continue to change in
agriculture increases the vulnerability of foreseeable future implies the need to
the economy of these countries and the understand how farmers practice different
rural smallholders’ to problems related to strategies for adaptation to climate change
climate change. in the future. Adaptation to climate
Concerns over population growth, change is an essential strategy to reduce
climate change, conflict and declining the harshness and cost of climate change
productivity of the natural resource base impacts. Adaptation measures help
also present very real challenges for farmers guard against losses due to
pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in the increasing temperatures and decreasing
Horn of Africa. Without significant precipitation (IPCC, 2007). Adaptation to
support, levels of poverty, vulnerability current or expected climate variability and
and destitution will rise due to the effects changing climate conditions involves
of marginalization, recurrent drought and adjustment in natural or human systems in
floods, conflict and livestock epidemics response to actual or expected climate
(Magda, et al., 2009). The frequency of stimuli or their effects, which moderates
drought, flood, outbreaks of livestock and harm or exploits beneficial opportunities
human diseases, crop pests and other (IPCC 2001).
associated emergencies have dramatically Hence, developing a better
intensified in the pastoral and agro- understanding of the adaptation strategies
pastoral areas of Ethiopian Somali and factors influencing the agro-pastorals’
Region. Further, the economic and social choice of the strategies provide the ground
impacts of these calamities are very vast for wiser agricultural and environmental
as reflected by the past and recent policies, and identify entry points to
experiences in the Region. According to mitigate the impacts of climate change. In
the regional Disaster Prevention and the face of this different studies regarding
Preparedness Bureau (DPPB) estimates, farmers’ choices of adaptation options and
there were about 200,000 - 300,000 their determinants were carried out in
pastoralists and agro-pastoralists that had different countries including Ethiopia
dropped off their livelihoods and (Deressa et al., 2008; Hassan and
substantially reduced and depleted their Nhemachena, 2008; Deressa et al., 2009;

177
 Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 13 no.2 2020

Aemro and Jemma, 2012; Regmi et al., households in Kebribayah district of

2017). However, most of the studies were Ethiopia Somali Region.
undertaken at a macro level; and those Study Area
studies conducted at micro-level also gave The study was conducted in
significant emphasis to the people residing Kebribayah district which is found in
in the highlands and pursuing sedentary Faafan Zone of the Ethiopia Somali
way of life, which might make the results Regional State (ESRS). The Region which
unclear to generalize about specific forms part of the Federal Democratic
households located in other agro- Republic of Ethiopia is situated in the
ecological areas. The main objectives of eastern part of the country. Kebribayah
the study therefore, were to examine the district is one of the six districts of Faafan
climate variability in the district, to Zone of ESRS. It is located 50km east
identify the adaptation options practiced from regional capital, Jigjiga, and it is an
and the factors influencing the choice of agro-pastoral livelihood district. The
adaptation strategies by agro-pastoral district has 29 kebeles and its total area is
162,474km2.

Fig. 1: Map of Ethiopia showing the location of the study region, zone and district

Research Methods respectively where agro-pastoral

The study followed multistage population is dominating. In the second
sampling procedures with the rural stage simple random sampling was used to
households as the ultimate sampling unit select three agro-pastoral kebeles from the
to acquire primary data. Purposive 29. Then the complete list of households
sampling procedure was applied in the of each sampled kebeles was secured from
first stage to identify the study zone and the kebeles. Finally, using simple random
district, Faafan and Kebribayah and probability proportionate to size

178
 Climate Variability and Agro-pastorals’ Adaptation Strategies...............Abebaw et al.

sampling procedures the ultimate sample socioeconomic data were summarized and
households were selected from the three presented using descriptive statistics.
sampled kebeles. Co-efficient of Variability (CV) and
Both primary and secondary data were Anomalies were the methods used to
collected for this study. The household know the long-term variability and
survey was conducted in the production anomalies in rainfall and temperature
year of 2018/19. Primary data at the for the study district. Rainfall variability
household level were collected through a is determined by the statistical test
household survey using structured coefficient of variation. A higher value
questionnaire. Five enumerators who of Co-efficient of Variation is the
know the local language and the culture of indicator of larger variability and is
the community were trained and calculated with the following equation
undertook the survey. The questionnaire (1).
helped to capture data on demographic,
= × 100 1
µ
social, economic and institutional factors,
and information on climate variability and
trends of such variations in the district, Where,
adaptation strategies practiced, etc. CV - co-efficient of variation; σ -
Monthly temperature and precipitation standard deviation and -µ mean
data from 1987 to 2016 were also obtained precipitation. Based on the results,
from the Ethiopian Ministry of Metrology degree of variability of the rainfall events
to the study area. will be classified as, less (CV<20),
The sample size for the households’ moderate (20<CV<30) and high (CV>30)
survey was determined using Yamane (Asfaw et al., 2018).

sample size, = ⁄ +
(1967) simplified formula to calculate Similarly, anomalies in rainfall have
, where n been done to determine the dry and wet
= sample size, N is the population size, e years to severity of droughts and to
is the level of precision. Consequently, a identify the nature of trends (Asfaw et al.,
total of 156 sample households were 2018). as eq. (2):

−
selected (Table 1).

Table 1: Distribution of sampled = 2

households by kebeles Where, ‘Z’- rainfall anomaly; ‘bi’- annual
Name of Total number Sampled rainfall of particular year; ‘ b̅ i ’ – long
Kebeles of households term annual mean rainfall over a period
households of observation and ‘s’ – is a standard
Guyow 1450 66 deviation of annual rainfall over the
Danaba 801 37 period of observation. Drought severity
Garbi 1155 53
classes are extreme drought (Z < -1.65),
Total 3406 156
severe drought (-1.28 > Z > -1.65),
moderate drought (-0.84 > Z > -1.28) and
In this study both descriptive and no drought (Z > -0.84).
econometric data analysis methods were The determinants of agro-pastorals’
employed. Demographic and adaptation decisions to climate change
were analyzed using a multinomial logit

179
 Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 13 no.2 2020

(MNL) model. The MNL model was used that the ratio of the probabilities of
based on the previous literature on choosing any of the two alternatives is
determinants of farmers’ adaptation to independent of the attributes of any other
climate change (Sanga et al., 2013). The alternative in the choice set (Long, 1997;
model is appropriate for this type of study Tse, 1987).
because it allows the analysis of decisions The model is specified as follows:
involving more than two categories Let Ai be a random variable representing
(Greene, 2003). Nevertheless, the model the adaptation measure chosen by any
requires that households are associated agro-pastoral household. It is assumed that
with only their most preferred option from each agro-pastoral faces a set of discrete,
a given set of adaptation strategies. In mutually exclusive choices of adaptation
other words, it requires that the probability measures. These measures are assumed to
of using a certain adaptation method by a depend on a number of socioeconomic
given household is independent from the characteristics and other factors X. The
probability of choosing another adaptation MNL model for adaptation choice
method. Meaning the parameter estimates specifies the following relationship
of this model have to satisfy the between the probability of choosing
assumption of independence of irrelevant option Ai and the set of explanatory
alternatives (IIA). Specifically, IIA states variables X as (Greene, 2003):
# %
=! =
" $ &
$
∑()* " #( %&
, j=0,1,…,J (3)

Where βj is a vector of coefficients on each of the independent variables X. Equation (3)

can be normalized to remove indeterminacy in the model by assuming that β0 = 0 and the
probabilities can be estimated as:
# %
=! =
" $ &
$
+,∑()- " #( %&
, j=0,1,…,J, β0 = 0 (4)

0
./ 0 &$ = 1 2 34 − 35 = 1 2 34 , 78 9 = 0
Estimating equation (4) yields the J log-odds ratios
(5)
&(

The dependent variable is therefore the log of one alternative relative to the base
alternative. The MNL coefficients are difficult to interpret, and associating the βj with the
jth outcome is tempting and misleading. To interpret the effects of explanatory variables on
the probabilities, marginal effects are usually derived as (Greene, 2008):

?
;<4
:4 = = <4 =34 − > <5 35 B = <4 34 − 3̅
;1
5@A

180
 Climate Variability and Agro-pastorals’ Adaptation Strategies...............Abebaw et al.

D=31 +E4
Therefore, the full model is specified as follows:
(6)
Where:

βi's are parameters to be estimated; yi are adaptation options (or alternatives); xi is a set of
independent variables; and εi are the error terms.

Results where as 1996, 1997, 2007 and 2010 were

Climate Variability Analysis flood years. These patterns of climate
The annual rainfall ranges from 286.0 change affected the agricultural and
mm (in 2015) to 617.0 mm (in 2010) for pastoral productivities of the district.
the study period of 1987 to 2016. The The temporal variations for maximum
trends of rainfall was neither increasing and minimum temperature on kebribayah
nor decreasing but for the period of 1990 were low with coefficient of variation 2.36
to 1997 there was an increase of the % and 1.98 % respectively. But there was
amount of rainfall from year to year. The an increase of maximum temperature
temporal variation of total amount of throughout the study period with (R2 =
annual rainfall was recognized as 0.4374). With this trend it is likely that the
moderate on Kebribayah with the maximum temperature for the next years
coefficient of variation (CV= 17.99 %) will increase. Climatological mean of
based on the data. The variation was high temperature were 27.38oC and 14.76oC for
after 2007 relative to the previous period. maximum and minimum temperature
Similarly, anomalies in rainfall have respectively. The trends of minimum
been done, and from figure 3, we can temperature was neither increasing nor
understand that 1990, 2004, 2008, 2009 decreasing within the study period.
and 2015 were the highest drought years

Total rainfall for Kebribayah

800.0
Total Rainfall in mm

600.0
400.0
200.0
y = -0.3115x + 450.16
0.0 R² = 0.0012
1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

Year
Fig. 2: Total amount of Annual rainfall for Kebribayah district from 1987 to 2016

181
 Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 13 no.2 2020

Standerdized rainfall Rainfall Anomaly for Kebribayah

4.00 y = -0.0039x + 0.0603
Anomaly

2.00 R² = 0.0012

0.00
-2.00
-4.00
Year

Fig. 3: Standardized rainfalls Anomaly for Kebribayah from 1987 to 2016

Mean Maximum Temperature for Kebribayah

Temperature in oC
Mean Maximum

29.00
28.00
27.00
26.00
25.00 y = 0.0485x + 26.626
24.00 R² = 0.4374
23.00
1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

Year
Fig. 4: Annual Average Maximum Temperature for Kebribayah district from 1987 to 2016

Mean Minimum Temperaturefor Kebribayah

Temperature in oC
Mean Minimum

15.50
15.00
14.50
14.00 y = 0.0019x + 14.735
13.50 R² = 0.0034
1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Year

Fig. 5: Annual Average Minimum Temperature for Kebribayah district from 1987 to 2016

Climate Change Adaptation Options result also shows that 20% and 14% of the
Table 2 shows the adaptation respondents adopted herd diversification
strategies employed by the sampled agro- and herd mobility strategies, respectively.
pastorals. It reveals that most agro- However, about 41% of the sampled agro-
pastorals practiced adjusting planting date pastorals did not pursue any adaptation
and adopting early maturing drought measure to cope with climate change.
tolerant crop varieties strategy (25%). The

182
 Climate Variability and Agro-pastorals’ Adaptation Strategies...............Abebaw et al.

Table 2: Sampled agro-pastorals’ adaptation strategies to climate change

Adaptation Strategy Sampled agro-pastorals Number of sampled agro-
(%) pastorals (156)
Herd mobility 0.14 22
Herd diversification 0.20 31
Adjusting planting date and adopting 0.25 39
early maturing drought tolerant crop
varieties
No adaptation 0.41 64

Factors Affecting Agro-pastorals’ Table 3 presents the parameter

Adaptation Choices estimates of the MNL model and the
To capture the effect of various factors marginal effects along with the levels of
on the probability of adopting various statistical significance. The likelihood
climate change adaptation strategies at the ratio statistics from the MNL model
agro-pastorals’ disposal “no adaptation” indicated that Chi-square statistics
option was used as the base category or (159.72) was highly significant (P<0.001),
reference strategy and other choices were suggesting the model has a strong
evaluated as alternatives to this option. explanatory power. The result showed that
The parameter estimates of the MNL educational status of household head, land
model provide only the direction of the holding, access to extension service,
effect of the independent variables on the marital status, livestock holding, and
dependent variable; they do not represent household size positively and
the actual magnitude of change of significantly influenced using one or a
probability. Thus, the marginal effects of combination of climate change adaptation
the MNL, which measure the expected strategies identified by sampled agro-
change in the probability of a particular pastorals. In contrast income from crop
choice being made with respect to a unit production negatively and significantly
change in an independent variable, were influenced herd mobility adaptation
calculated. Consequently, the estimated strategy. The under mentioned section
coefficients were compared with the base discuss on variables that significantly
category of no adaptation option. influenced climate change adaptation
options.

183
Table 3: Parameter estimates of multinomial logistic regression model
Variable Adjusting planting date and adopt early Herd diversification Herd Mobility
maturing drought tolerant crop varieties
Co-eff. Marginal effect Co-eff. Marginal effect Co-eff. Marginal effect

Age .019 .009 -.015 .985 -.024 .976

Sex -.139 .870 .061 .063 .456 .577
Education .953** .595 .425* .530 -.094 .910
Marital status 1.311** .709 .396*** .485 -.637 .529
Access to credit -.013 .987 .213 .434 -.734 .480
Access to extension .090*** .094 .360** .434 .737 .089
Remittance -.632 .531 -35.315 3.4e-15 -.720 .487
Market distance -.192** .825 .021 .022 .027 .027
Household size -.111 .895 .062** .063 .177*** .194
Livestock holding .060* .062 .119 .126 .072*** .075
Income from crop production .008 .992 -.023 .977 -.075** .928
Land holding in hectare .113** .120 .079** .083 .029 .029
Access to a. of climate .404 .498 .258 .295 .107 .113
Dependent variable Adaptation strategy
Reference category No adaptation strategy
Number of observation 156
LR chi2 159.72
Log likelihood -174.415
Prob > chi2 0.0012
Note:*, ** and *** significant at 10%, 5% and 1% probability level of significance, respectively

184
 Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 13 no.2 2020

Discussion strategies to climate change. That is, as the

Education of the household head size of land holding increases by a unit the
increases the probability of adapting to probability of adjusting planting date and
climate change. It significantly increases adopting early maturing drought tolerant
the use of adjusting planting date and crop varieties as well as diversifying
adopting early maturing drought tolerant livestock production increase by 12 and
crop varieties as well as herd 8.3%, respectively (Table 3). Large land
diversification as climate change holding provide opportunities for
adaptation methods. One year increase in adoption of different crop varieties and
the number of years of schooling was diversification of livestock enterprises,
associated with a 59.5% and 53% increase and it can also help to distribute risks
in adjusting planting date and adopting associated with unpredictable weather.
early maturing drought tolerant crop According to Sanga et al. (2013) better
varieties, and herd diversification, access to crop and livestock extension
respectively. Moreover, all adaptation services has a strong and positive impact
methods have a positive relationship with on climate adaptation strategies. The
education. Agro-pastorals’ with better present study result also indicates that
education are likely to have more access to extension is positively and
information on climate change, which in significantly related with adjusting
turn might promote the probability of planting date and adopting early maturing
adopting climate change adaptation drought tolerant crop varieties as well as
strategies. This result was similar to that herd diversification adaptation options at
of Deressa et al. (2009). 1 and 5% respectively. Having access to
Household size has a significant and extension service increased the likelihood
positive effect on climate change of the stated adaptation strategies by 9.4%
adaptation. It significantly increases the and 5% respectively (Table 3). Extension
use of herd diversification and herd services improve awareness of potential
mobility as climate adaptation strategies at benefits and willingness to adopt climate
5 and 1 % level of significance, change adaptation options and enables
respectively (Table 3). The marginal effect agro-pastorals to make use the
result also shows that a unit increase in information to change their management
household size increases the likelihood of practices in response to changing climatic
adopting the aforementioned adaptation and other conditions. This result is in
strategies by 6.3 and 19.4%, respectively. conformity with Dolisca et al. (2006).
According to Anbes (2003), the larger In agro-pastoral households of
household size is associated with Kebribayah district livestock and crop
increased labor availability. Livestock production are the main economic
production in pastoral and agro-pastoral activities. The result in Table 3 indicated
system is highly labor intensive. Thus, that livestock production has a positive
household size has a significant association with the adoption of climate
association with herd diversification and change adaptation strategies such as
herd mobility. adjusting planting date and adopting early
In line with Abreham et al. (2017) the maturing drought tolerant crop varieties,
size of land holding has a positive and as well as herd mobility. A unit increase in
significant association with adaptation livestock holding increases the likelihood

185
 Climate Variability and Agro-pastorals’ Adaptation Strategies...............Abebaw et al.

of adjusting planting date and adopting drought tolerant crop varieties as climate
early maturing drought tolerant crop change adaptation strategy at 5%
varieties and herd mobility by 6.2% and significance level. The likelihood of
7.5% respectively (Table 3). Increases in practicing the mentioned adaptation
livestock holding builds confidence and strategy decreases by 82.5% for a km
widen the chance to test better increase in market distance. This finding
opportunities and crop technologies is in agreement with many studies
available at the agro-pastorals disposal. (Solomon et al., 2014).
The income derived from livestock Crop income negatively and
production hence could help the significantly decreases practicing herd
household to cope and adapt to the mobility as adaptation option at 5% level
changing climate if the adjusted planting of significance (Table 3). This implies
date did not work. Further, increases in when the dominant source of income is
livestock production in agro-pastoral areas crop production, increase in crop income
directly related with availability of feed encourage agro-pastoral households to
and moisture which implies households lead sedentary life. On the contrary
respond to climate variability and decreases in the level of crop income
changing climatic situations through herd could be regarded as an incentive to
mobility. increase their herd size which could urge
Being married significantly increases the holder to be mobile in response to the
the use of adjusting planting date and changing climate.
adopting early maturing drought tolerant
crop varieties and herd diversification as Conclusions and Recommendations
climate adaptation options at 5 and 1 % There is noticeable climate variability
level of significance (Table 3). Being that has influenced crop and livestock
married increases the probabilities of the productivity in the district. Agro-pastoral
mentioned adaptation strategies by 70.9% households heavily depend on primary
and 48.5% respectively (Table 3). The economic activities. These activities are
likely reason is that crop and livestock highly vulnerable to variations in
production is labor intensive. On top of temperature and precipitation and climate
this men and women in agro-pastoral change impacts. Hence this study based on
households take different responsibilities the analysis of household level identified
in crop and livestock production in a way types of adjustments agro-pastorals are
to favor integration of crop production making in their crop and livestock
with herd diversification. production practices in response to the
As expected on average a kilometer climate changes, and factors influencing
increase in the market distance required to the probability of choosing adaptation
arrive at input and output market mechanism.
decreases the probability of adapting to The study has revealed a number of
climate change. The study result adaptation options being used by agro-
confirmed the prior expectation that a km pastoral households. Agro-pastorals
increase to the market distance from the practice adjusting planting date and
households’ residence negatively and adopting early maturing drought tolerant
significantly related to practice adjusting crop varieties, herd diversification and
planting date and adopting early maturing herd mobility. Empirical results from

186
 Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 13 no.2 2020

multinomial discrete choice model and temperature in north central

confirmed the role of knowledge acquired Ethiopia. A case study in Woleka
through formal education and extension Sub-basin, weather and climate
services, in improving agro-pastorals’ extremes, 19, 29-41.
awareness and adopting climate change Asseng, S., Foster, I. and Turner, N.C.
adaptation measures. Moreover, increased (2011). The impact of temperature
market distance became a disincentive for variability on wheat yields. Glob
the agro-pastorals to adopt adjusting Change Biol. 17(2):997–1012.
planting date and early maturing crop doi:10.1111/j.1365-
varieties. This is obviously associated 2486.2010.02262.x
with costly transportation service. Deressa Temesgen, R.M. Hassan, Tekie
Therefore, intervention programs aimed at Alemu, Mahmud Yesuf and Ringler,
promoting household level climate change C. (2008). Analyzing the
adaptation need to invest more on determinants of farmers’ choice of
providing reliable meteorological adaptation methods and perceptions
information, formal education, extension of climate change in the Nile Basin
services and better infrastructure. of Ethiopia. IFPRI Discussion
Paper, September, 2008.
References Deressa Temesgen, R.M., Hassan, C.,
Abrham Belay, John W. Recha, Teshale Ringler, Tekie Alemu and Mahmud
Woldeamanuel and John F. Morton Yesuf, (2009). Determinants of
(2017). Smallholder farmers’ farmers’ choice of adaptation
adaptation to climate change and methods to climate change in the
determinants of their adaptation Nile Basin of Ethiopia. Global
decisions in the Central Rift Valley Environmental Change, 19: 248-
of Ethiopia. Agriculture & Food 255.
Security. DOI 10.1186/s40066-017- Dolisca, F., Carter, R.D., McDaniel, J.M.,
0100-1 Shannon, D.A., and Jolly, C.M.
Aemro Tazeze, Jemma Haji and Mengistu (2006). Factors influencing farmers’
Ketema (2012). Climate Change participation in forestry
Adaptation Strategies of management programs: A case study
Smallholder Farmers: The Case of from Haiti. Forest Ecology and
Babilie District, East Harerghe Zone Management, 236: 324-31
of Oromia Regional State of Greene, W.H. (2003). Econometric
Ethiopia. Journal of Economics and analysis. Fifth edition. Prentice Hall,
Sustainable Development, 3(14): New Jersey.
ISSN 2222-2855 (Online) Hassan, R. and Nhemachena, C. (2008).
Anbes Tenaye (2003). Pattern of Credit Determinants of African Farmers'
Use and its Impact on Small Strategies for Adapting to Climate
farmers’ Income: A Study in Dire Changes: Multinomial Choice
Dawa Area, Eastern Ethiopia. M.Sc. Analysis. AFJARE, 2(1): 85-104.
Thesis HU, Haromaya, Ethiopia. Lobell, D.B., Schlenker, W. and Costa-
Asfaw,A., Simane, B., Hassen, A., and Roberts, J. (2011). Climate trends
Bantider, A. (2018). Variability and and global crop production since
time series trend analysis of rainfall

187
 Climate Variability and Agro-pastorals’ Adaptation Strategies...............Abebaw et al.

1980. Science 333(6042):616–620. Adaptation to Climate Change: A

doi:10.1126/science.1204531 Case From Syangja District of
Long, J.S. (1997). Regression models for Nepal. Journal of Agricultural
categorical and limited dependent Economics, Extension and Rural
variables: Advanced quantitative Development, 5(7): 658-663. ISSN-
techniques in the social science. 2360-798X,
Series 7. Sage, Thousand Oaks, Sanga, G.J., Moshi, A.B. and Hella, J.P.
California. (2013). Small Scale Farmers’
Magda, N., Simon, A. and Ced, H. (2009). Adaptation to Climate Change
Pastoralism and climate change: Effects in Pangani River Basin and
Enabling adaptive capacity. Pemba: Challenges and
Humanitarian Policy Group, Opportunities. International Journal
Overseas Development Institute of Modern Social Sciences, 2(3):
(ODI). 169-194.
Misselhorn, A.A. (2005). What drives SC-UK (Save the Children United
food security in Southern Africa? A Kingdom) and DPPB (Disaster
meta-analysis of household Prevention and Preparedness
economy studies. Global Bureau). (2001). Household
Environmental Change, 15, 33–43 Economic approach baseline study
Nhemachena, C. and Hassan, R. (2009). paper, Degahbur Agro-pastoral
Determinants of African farmers’ Livelihood Zone, Ethiopia, 14-30.
strategies for adapting to climate Schlenker, W. and Roberts, M.J. (2009).
change: Multinomial Choice Nonlinear temperature effects
Analysis, (2)1: 83-104. indicate severe damages to U.S. crop
Norris, P.E. and Batie, S.S. (1987). yields under climate change. Proc.
Virginia farmers’ soil conservation Nat. Acad. Sci., 106(37):15594–
decisions: an application of Tobit 15598. doi:10.1073/
analysis. Southern Journal of pnas.0906865106
Agricultural Economics, 19: 79–90. Serdeczny, O., Adams, S., Baarsch, F.,
O’Brien, K., Leichenko, R., Kelkar, U., Coumou, D., Robinson, A., Hare,
Venema, H., Aandahl, G., W., Schaeffer, M., Perrette, M. and
Tompkins, H., Javed, A., Bhadwal, Reinhardt, J. (2016). Climate change
S., Barg, A., Nygaard, L.P., West, J. impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa: from
(2004). Mapping vulnerability to physical changes to their social
multiple stressors: climate change repercussions. Reg Environ Change.
and globalization in India. Global DOI: 10.1007/s10113-015-0910-2
Environmental Change, 14, 303– Tse, Y.K. (1987). A diagnostic test for the
313 multinomial logit model. Journal of
Regmi, N., Dhakal, D. and Ghimire, B. Business and Economic Statistics,
(2017). Determinants of Farmers 5(2): 283-86.

188