The Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers' Livelihoods: A Case Study ofDugda District, Oromia, Ethiopia

The Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers' Livelihoods: A Case Study ofDugda District, Oromia, Ethiopia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers' Livelihoods: A Case Study ofDugda District, Oromia, Ethiopia Lemi Chala Tamire, Selamawit Fantahun Sertse, Zhang Keyun This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7422787/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Irrigation is a crucial tool for reducing risks related to rainfall variability in smallholder subsistence farming systems. This study examined how practicing small-scale irrigation (SSI) influences the key livelihood assets- human, physical, natural, financial, and social capitals- of farm households in Ethiopia’s upper Awash sub-basin. The analysis used household-level survey data from 396 sample households. A Propensity Score Matching (PSM) model was employed to pair SSI user and non-user groups. Differences in the five livelihood capitals were estimated using PSM’s Nearest Neighbor, Radius, Kernel Mahalanobis, and Stratification matching methods. Results showed that participation in SSI has improved the capital assets of farm households. Compared to non-users, irrigation users had better outcomes in the variety of food consumed (0.28 ± 0.13 SE), crop types produced (0.60 ± 0.17 SE), expenditures on land rent and agricultural inputs (3118 ± 877 SE Ethiopian Birr [ETB]), and on-farm (9024 ± 2267 SE ETB) and non-farm (3766 ± 1466 SE ETB) incomes. Challenges such as the involvement of local brokers in the market value chain and the lack of farmers’ marketing cooperatives have limited the benefits of irrigated agriculture. Therefore, expanding SSI schemes for non-user farmers should focus on improving water management and productivity, establishing fair water allocation institutions between upstream and downstream areas, and reducing the influence of brokers in marketing irrigation products as future policy directions. small-scale irrigation livelihood diversification agricultural production food security smallholder farmer Ethiopia Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 1. Introduction The agricultural sector remains the backbone of many developing countries' economies, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, where most rural populations rely on subsistence farming for their livelihood (Stewart, 2014). Smallholder farmers provide up to 80 percent of the food supply in these regions, highlighting their vital role in continent-wide food security. However, the sector heavily depends on rain-fed systems, making it highly vulnerable to the increasing frequency and severity of climate variability and change, particularly drought (Asfaw, 2021). Agriculture drives the economy in Ethiopia, but its strong dependence on unpredictable rainfall threatens food security and economic stability (Tofu, 2022). Recurrent droughts have resulted in chronic food insecurity, especially in semi-arid areas, calling for a fundamental shift to more resilient farming methods. In this context, the development of small-scale irrigation (SSI) has become a key government and development strategy to reduce risks associated with rainfall variability, boost agricultural productivity, and ultimately alleviate poverty (Bojago, 2023 ). SSI schemes are especially suitable for smallholder farmers because they can be managed at the community level, require less capital investment than large-scale projects, and can be adapted to local conditions (Maru, 2023). By providing a dependable water source, SSI allows farmers to increase cropping intensity, diversify into high-value crops, and stabilize yields, thereby enhancing household food security and income (Jambo, 2021; Jatana, 2024 ). Ethiopia has significant water resources, but only a small part of its irrigation potential has been tapped. To close this gap, the government has focused on expanding SSI schemes to boost cropping intensity, diversify production, and help smallholders withstand climate-related shocks (Dawid, 2023). An increasing amount of research supports the positive effects of these efforts. Studies across Ethiopia and other parts of Africa consistently show that access to irrigation greatly improves household food security (Ebrahim, 2024 ; Oni, 2011), increases income (Gessesse, 2025; Zone, 2020), promotes asset building, and enhances overall livelihood resilience (Kalidou, 2024). The Dugda district in Ethiopia's Oromia region, with its access to Lake Ziway, the Meki River, and groundwater, has great potential for irrigation-based farming. Following national policy, the district actively promotes irrigation to stabilize food production and improve rural lives. However, the full effects of irrigation on smallholder livelihoods at the local level are not yet fully understood. Most existing research depends on quantitative impact assessments, which, while useful for measuring average effects, often miss the detailed qualitative changes in livelihood strategies, social dynamics, gender roles, and environmental conditions (Baker, 2000 ). These "black box" assessments can overlook the underlying processes of change and the risk of unintended negative effects, such as resource depletion and social inequality, which can weaken the long-term success of these projects (Yami, 2015 ). This study contributes to irrigation science by investigating the multifaceted impacts of small-scale irrigation on smallholder livelihoods in the Dugda district. It moves beyond conventional economic metrics to examine how irrigation reshapes livelihood systems, including cropping patterns, labor dynamics, food security, asset accumulation, and social relations. Critically, it also assesses the unintended negative consequences on the environment and other dimensions of the traditional farming system, such as livestock production. By offering a rich, context-specific change narrative, this research aims to provide a more holistic understanding that can inform the design of more sustainable and equitable irrigation development policies in Ethiopia and beyond. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Study Area Description This study was conducted in Dugda District, located in the East Shewa Zone of the Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. The district is in the Central Rift Valley, characterized by a semi-arid climate with high rainfall variability and frequent droughts. The average annual rainfall ranges from 700 to 900 mm, occurring in a bimodal pattern with a short rainy season (Belg) from March to May and a primary rainy season (Kiremt) from June to September. The district's economy is mainly based on agriculture, with most households practicing a mixed crop-livestock system. Key rain-fed crops include maize, teff, and haricot beans. Livestock, mainly cattle, goats, and sheep, are a vital source of income, food, and draught power, and are closely linked to crop production. Due to unreliable rainfall, agricultural productivity is often low, and households frequently face chronic food insecurity. In recent years, several small-scale irrigation schemes, primarily using water from the Awash River and local lakes, have been established by the government and NGOs to supplement rain-fed farming and improve rural livelihoods. 2.2. Sampling and Data Collection A multi-stage sampling procedure was employed to select respondent households. In the first stage, Dugda District was purposively selected due to its representation of a drought-prone area with active SSI schemes. In the second stage, four kebeles (Ethiopia's lowest administrative unit) with irrigation users and non-users were randomly selected. In the third stage, a sampling frame of all households in the selected kebeles was developed with the help of local administrators and development agents. Households were stratified into irrigation users (treatment group) and non-users (control group). Finally, 380 household heads (190 from each group) were selected using a systematic random sampling technique. Primary data were collected through a structured household survey between October 2022 and January 2023. The questionnaire was designed to capture comprehensive information on various variables, including household demographics, asset ownership, agricultural production (irrigated and rain-fed), income sources, expenditure patterns, food consumption, and social participation. The survey was pre-tested and administered by trained enumerators fluent in the local language, Afan Oromo. To supplement the quantitative data, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) were conducted with community elders, development agents, and leaders of Water Users' Associations to gain deeper insights into the functioning of the irrigation schemes and their perceived impacts on the community. 2.3. Analytical Framework The study adopted the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) to assess the multi-dimensional impacts of SSI. The SLF provides a holistic lens for understanding how people make a living by analyzing their access to and use of different types of assets or "capitals". Livelihood impacts were measured by examining the changes in five capital assets: human, physical, natural, financial, and social. A set of indicators was selected to represent each capital asset, based on a review of relevant literature and the local context. For instance, the measurement of social capital drew upon established empirical tools designed to generate quantitative data on its various dimensions (Shuhui Wang, 2024 ). These indicators are detailed in Table 1 . Table 1 Livelihood Capitals and Their Indicators Livelihood Capital Indicators Variable Label Source Human Variety of food consumed in 24 hours VFC (Passarelli, 2018) Annual household education expenditure (ETB) EDUCEXP (Zeweld, 2015) Annual household health expenditure (ETB) HLEXP (Zeweld, 2015) Physical Number of crop types produced CTYP (Maru, 2023) Monetary value of household assets (ETB) HHASSET (Maru, 2023) Livestock ownership (Tropical Livestock Unit) LVST (Randolph, 2007) Natural Total landholding size (hectares) LANDSIZE (Eshetu, 2024) Financial Annual on-farm income (ETB) ONFINC (Bacha, 2009) Annual off-farm/non-farm income (ETB) OFFNFINC (Amare, 2023) Annual savings (ETB) SAVE (Maru, 2023) Annual agricultural input expenditure (ETB) INPEXP (Dorward, 2014) Social Membership in formal/informal groups GRPMEM (Grootaert, 2004) Annual expenditure on 'idir' (local association) (ETB) IDIREXP (Maru, 2023) 2.4. Econometric Model To estimate the causal impact of SSI on livelihood outcomes, this study addresses the issue of selection bias. Participation in irrigation is not random; it is a result of household self-selection or purposive program placement, meaning that households who choose to irrigate may systematically differ from those who do not in ways that also affect the outcome variables (e.g., they may be more motivated or have better resources). We employed the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method to control for this. PSM is a widely used non-experimental method for evaluating program impacts by matching treated individuals with comparable control individuals based on observable characteristics (Choi & Kim, 2024 ) The PSM procedure involves two stages. In the first stage, a logit regression model was used to estimate the propensity score, which is the conditional probability of a household participating in SSI given a vector of pre-treatment characteristics. The model is specified as: P (D i = 1|X i ) = f(X i ), where P (D i = 1|X i ) is the probability of household i participating in SSI, and X i is a vector of covariates including age, sex, and education of the household head, family size, landholding size, and distance to the nearest market. In the second stage, each irrigation user was matched with one or more non-users with similar propensity scores. This process creates a balanced comparison group, allowing for a more reliable treatment effect estimation. The Average Treatment effect on the Treated (ATT), which is the impact of SSI on the livelihood outcomes of the participating households, was then calculated as the mean difference in outcomes between the matched treatment and control groups: ATT = E(Y₁ i | D i = 1, P(X i )) - E(Y₀ i | D i = 0, P(X i )) where Y₁ i and Y₀ i are the outcomes for household i with and without irrigation, respectively. Several matching algorithms were used to ensure the robustness of the results, including Nearest Neighbor, Radius, and Kernel matching. The analysis was performed using Stata 16 software. 3. Results 3.1. Socio-demographic Characteristics of Sample Households Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics of the socio-demographic characteristics of the sample households, broken down by irrigation participation. Before matching, some observable differences existed between the two groups. On average, the heads of irrigating households were slightly younger (42.1 years) compared to non-irrigators (44.5 years). Irrigating households also had a slightly larger family size (5.8 members) than non-irrigating households (5.3 members), which may reflect the higher labor demands of irrigated agriculture. A higher proportion of household heads in the irrigator group were literate (65.3%) compared to the non-irrigator group (58.4%). Furthermore, irrigators owned, on average, a larger land size (1.8 ha) than non-irrigators (1.5 ha). These initial differences highlight the importance of using a matching technique like PSM to control for selection bias caused by these observable characteristics. After matching, the covariates were balanced between the treated and control groups, indicating that the PSM method successfully created a comparable sample. Table 2 Socio-demographic Characteristics of Sample Households (before matching) Variable Category Irrigators (N = 190) Non-irrigators (N = 190) t-test/χ² Age of HH head (years) Mean (SD) 42.1 (9.8) 44.5 (10.5) 2.15* Sex of HH head (% Male) Percent 89.5 86.3 1.02 Family size (members) Mean (SD) 5.8 (2.1) 5.3 (1.9) 2.28** Education of HH head (% Literate) Percent 65.3 58.4 2.11* Landholding size (ha) Mean (SD) 1.8 (0.7) 1.5 (0.6) 4.12*** Livestock ownership (TLU) Mean (SD) 4.5 (2.8) 3.9 (2.5) 2.01* *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01. 3.2. Impact of Small-Scale Irrigation on Livelihood Capitals The estimated Average Treatment effects on the Treated (ATT) from the PSM analysis are presented in Table 3 . The results show the impact of SSI participation on the selected livelihood indicators. Table 3 Average Treatment Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Livelihood Capitals Livelihood Capital Indicator ATT Std. Error t-value Human Capital Food variety score 0.35 0.15 2.33** Education expenditure (ETB) 650.4 280.1 2.32** Health expenditure (ETB) 210.8 155.3 1.36 Physical Capital Number of crop types 0.82 0.25 3.28*** Value of household assets (ETB) 4850.6 1980.5 2.45** Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) 0.41 0.28 1.46 Natural Capital Landholding size (ha) 0.28 0.10 2.80*** Land rental expenditure (ETB) 1540.2 550.7 2.80*** Financial Capital On-farm income (ETB) 12540.2 3100.8 4.04*** Off/non-farm income (ETB) 4100.5 1850.2 2.22** Annual savings (ETB) 3200.7 1100.4 2.91*** Agricultural input expenditure (ETB) 4215.7 1200.9 3.51*** Social Capital Membership in groups (dummy) 0.18 0.08 2.25** Expenditure on 'idir' (ETB) 55.6 40.2 1.38 ***Significant at p < 0.01; **significant at p < 0.05; *significant at p < 0.1. SAVE = amount of money saved by the household in a year (ETB); CREDIT = amount of annual credit accessed by the household for production purposes (ETB). 3.2.1. Human Capital Participation in SSI had a positive and significant effect on human capital. Irrigating households consumed a greater variety of foods, with the ATT for the food variety score being 0.35 (p < 0.05). This suggests that irrigation enables households to produce or purchase a more diverse range of foods, improving nutrition and food security (Jambo, 2021). Furthermore, irrigators spent significantly more on education (ATT = 650.4 ETB, p < 0.05), indicating that the increased income from irrigation is being invested in the next generation's human capital. The impact on health expenditure was positive but not statistically significant, possibly due to the availability of subsidized public health services in rural areas. 3.2.2. Physical Capital The impact on physical capital was substantial. Irrigating households cultivated a significantly greater number of crop types (ATT = 0.82, p < 0.01), diversifying their production base and reducing risks associated with the failure of a single crop. This diversification is a key strategy for building resilience (Amare, 2017 ). The monetary value of household assets was also significantly higher for irrigators by an average of 4850.6 ETB (p < 0.05), reflecting wealth accumulation. The effect on livestock ownership was positive but insignificant, possibly because both groups utilize communal grazing lands and livestock management practices are similar. Additionally, the increased agricultural productivity associated with irrigation has enhanced market participation, allowing households to engage more actively in local and regional markets (Lesala, 2025). This engagement provides opportunities for income generation and fosters community ties and access to resources. 3.2.3. Natural Capital As expected, irrigating households had significantly larger landholdings (ATT = 0.28 ha, p < 0.01). This result reflects the selection criteria for many irrigation schemes, which often target farmers with sufficient land to make irrigation viable. However, it also indicates that income from irrigation may enable households to rent or purchase additional land, thereby expanding their primary natural asset base. Moreover, the increased landholdings contribute to improved soil management practices, as farmers are more likely to invest in sustainable techniques that enhance soil fertility and structure. Investing in natural capital boosts crop yields and promotes biodiversity, as a wider variety of crops can support different species and ecological functions. 3.2.4. Financial Capital The most notable effect of SSI was on financial capital. Participation in irrigation increased annual on-farm income by an average of 12,540.2 ETB (p < 0.01). This significant boost is the main driver of many other livelihood improvements, a finding consistent across numerous studies in Ethiopia (Jatana, 2024 ; Sisay, 2023 ). Irrigators also earned considerably more from off-farm and non-farm activities (ATT = 4100.5 ETB, p < 0.05), indicating that the capital and stability provided by irrigation allow households to diversify their income sources (Li, 2020). As a result, irrigators had higher annual savings. They spent significantly more on agricultural inputs like improved seeds and fertilizers (ATT = 4215.7 ETB, p < 0.01), reflecting a shift toward more intensive and productive farming systems. 3.2.5. Social Capital The impact on social capital was positive. Irrigating households were more likely to be members of formal or informal groups, such as cooperatives or Water Users' Associations (ATT = 0.18, p < 0.05). This increased social participation can improve access to information, resources, and collective action, which are essential for sustainable resource management (Grootaert, 2004). However, some studies warn that social capital may help stabilize livelihoods at low levels without necessarily encouraging upward mobility for the poorest households (Adato, 2006). The impact on 'idir' expenditure was not significant because such contributions are often standardized within a community. 3.3. Impact on Poverty To evaluate the impact on poverty, household daily income per capita was calculated and compared to the international poverty line of $ 1.90/day (2011 PPP). As shown in Fig. 1, poverty remains a major challenge for both groups in the study area. However, participation in SSI is linked to a lower rate of poverty. About 68% of non-irrigating households fell below the poverty line, compared to 52%. This 16-percentage-point difference is statistically significant and emphasizes the role of irrigation in reducing poverty, a key goal of development projects (Baker, 2000 ). The study results indicate that participation in small-scale irrigation enhances most of the indicators across the five capital assets. However, the extent of the impact and its level of significance vary. For instance, in human capital indicators, only the variety of food consumed by households was statistically significant, which has implications for improving the quality of life of irrigation participants. Concerning physical capital assets, a significant difference was observed between irrigators and non-irrigators in the number of crop types produced during the production year, increasing farmers’ income stability during fluctuating market prices. Regarding natural capital assets, using all five matching propensity scores, farmland rental expenditures between the two groups were significantly different at 99%. Participation in SSI also enhances farmers’ social capital assets. The most notable impact of SSI participation was observed in financial capital assets; for example, under all five PSM estimates, the annual farm income and expenditures on agricultural inputs showed a significant difference at the 99% level between irrigation participants and non-participants. 4. Discussion The findings of this study provide strong evidence that small-scale irrigation (SSI) is an effective intervention for enhancing the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in Dugda District, Ethiopia. Our results offer a detailed understanding of how SSI supports household well-being and resilience by examining the impacts across five different capital assets: financial, physical, human, social, and natural. This multi-capital approach goes beyond simple income measures to reflect the comprehensive nature of poverty and development. The results largely agree with earlier research conducted in other parts of Ethiopia and sub-Saharan Africa, consistently showing positive relationships between irrigation and important livelihood outcomes like income, food security, and poverty reduction (Bojago, 2023 ; Jambo, 2021). The most important finding is the strong effect of SSI on financial capital. The significant rise in on-farm income acts as a driver, helping households to invest in and improve their other capital assets. Changing different types of capital is key to creating resilient livelihoods (Li, 2020). For example, higher income enables more investment in education (human capital), buying more productive assets like water pumps (physical capital), and gaining or renting more land (natural capital). The increased spending on agricultural inputs also shows a shift from low-input, subsistence farming to a more market-focused and intensified production system. This change is vital for long-term agricultural growth and commercialization, a pathway empirically linked to accessing stable irrigation (Rajkhowa, 2024 ). This intensification, often involving more fertilizer use, is a core part of increasing African agricultural productivity (Morris, 2007). Another key outcome is the positive impact on human capital, primarily through better dietary diversity. SSI directly tackles nutritional deficiencies by allowing the year-round production of fruits and vegetables, an aspect of poverty often ignored in purely income-based measures. These findings highlight SSI's role as a nutrition-focused agricultural intervention (Amare, 2018 ). The rise in social capital, shown by increased membership in local groups, is also an important, though less visible, benefit. These social networks are crucial for collective action, sharing knowledge, and managing common resources like water,(Jambo, 2021. Empowering women through technology adoption is a complex process, and understanding the distribution of benefits and control within households is essential to ensure these interventions reach their full potential (Theis, 2018). Additionally, incorporating sustainable practices within these systems creates an environment where innovation can grow, encouraging farmers to adopt new techniques and technologies that boost productivity and sustainability. This dynamic improves agricultural results and enhances community resilience against climate change and economic shocks. As households diversify their income sources, they become less vulnerable to market swings, building a more stable economy. Furthermore, promoting cooperative efforts within communities fosters a sense of solidarity and shared responsibility, which is vital for tackling broader issues like resource management and environmental conservation. Ultimately, the wide-ranging benefits of SSI emphasize its potential as a transformative approach to rural development, bridging different types of capital and helping create a fairer and sustainable future. An increasing amount of research strongly supports our study’s conclusions. They agree with findings from across Ethiopia that SSI participation improves multiple livelihood assets, including income, food consumption, and crop production (Maru, 2023), and strengthens household resilience against climate-related shocks (Dawid, 2023). They also match broader evidence from sub-Saharan Africa, where irrigation is key in enhancing food security and household income (Mdemu, 2020; Oni, 2011). Furthermore, policymakers widely agree that securing reliable water access is transformative, as shown by the consistent positive and significant impacts on agricultural output and income across different regions (Zone, 2020). This consistency with existing research emphasizes the essential role of water management in increasing agricultural productivity and highlights the need for targeted efforts that ensure fair access to resources. By encouraging collaboration among stakeholders—including local governments, NGOs, and community members—projects can be tailored to address regional challenges while utilizing local knowledge and practices. Such collaborative approaches improve the effectiveness of agricultural strategies and empower communities to take control of their development paths. Consequently, the potential for expanding successful models grows, paving the way for broader adoption of sustainable practices that can lead to lasting improvements in food security and economic stability. In summary, combining technology, sustainable methods, and community engagement provides a strong foundation for advancing rural development and helping achieve global sustainability goals. Despite these overwhelmingly positive impacts, the study also highlights ongoing challenges and negative externalities that can threaten the sustainability of these gains. The high poverty rate, even among irrigators, indicates that while SSI is helpful, it is not a cure-all. Various factors often limit the full potential of irrigation. As shown in our qualitative findings and other studies, these include poor market access, the exploitative role of intermediaries, and inadequate infrastructure (Maru, 2023). The success of irrigation projects, therefore, depends not only on the technology itself but also on the broader governance and social context in which they are implemented (Yami, 2015 ). Additionally, solving these challenges requires a multifaceted approach that goes beyond just technological fixes. Developing supportive policies that improve market access and empower farmers to negotiate fair prices is crucial, reducing their reliance on intermediaries. Improving infrastructure, such as roads and storage facilities, can help distribute agricultural products more effectively, making it easier for farmers to access markets. Furthermore, promoting financial literacy and expanding access to credit can help smallholder farmers invest in their farms and increase productivity. Including local communities in decision-making processes is essential, as it ensures interventions are culturally appropriate and address the specific needs of the people. Combining these elements into a comprehensive strategy can unlock the potential for sustainable agricultural development, leading to better livelihoods and greater resilience against economic and environmental shocks. Furthermore, the environmental concerns related to water-intensive vegetable production and agrochemical overuse and water-related conflicts highlight weaknesses in governance and technical support. Ensuring sustainable productivity gains is essential, which requires improving technical efficiency and resilience (Benjamin, 2025). The trade-off between expanding irrigated crop production and the decline of livestock systems is another critical issue that needs integrated land and water use planning to balance different livelihood strategies within the community, as both are often vital for smallholder systems (Nzima, 2024). This study has some limitations. Besides the use of small-scale irrigation, biophysical and environmental factors such as agroecology, land access, climate variation, crop choice, investment capacity, and soil conditions in each sample district can influence the livelihood assets of smallholder farmers. Therefore, these characteristics were not directly considered in the current study. Future assessments in the upper Awash sub-basin can address this gap by employing appropriate research designs to account for these factors. Based on these findings, several policy implications arise. To maximize the poverty-reducing impact of SSI, interventions should be combined with complementary support measures. This includes investing in rural infrastructure such as roads and storage facilities, enhancing market information systems to diminish the influence of intermediaries, and strengthening agricultural extension services to foster sustainable water management and improved farming practices. Supporting the formation and strengthening of farmer cooperatives or water user associations could boost collective bargaining power and improve resource management (Zhang, 2021). For future research, longitudinal studies are crucial to monitor the livelihood paths of irrigator and non-irrigator households over time. Additional research might also compare the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of various SSI technologies (Hussein, 2024), evaluate impacts across different scales of irrigation projects (Dillon, 2010 ), and investigate how indigenous knowledge can be integrated with modern techniques to develop more resilient and locally adapted irrigation systems (Kalidou, 2024). 5. Conclusion and Policy Implications This study confirms that small-scale irrigation is a highly effective strategy for improving the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in the drought-prone Dugda District, Ethiopia. By strengthening all five livelihood capitals—human, physical, natural, financial, and social—SSI significantly contributes to household resilience against climatic and economic shocks. The most important impact occurs through increasing financial capital, especially on-farm income, which enables households to invest in areas such as nutrition, education, asset accumulation, and farm intensification. However, to maximize these benefits, addressing the underlying challenges preventing irrigation from reaching its full potential is crucial. Policymakers should work on improving market access and establishing fair trade practices to ensure farmers receive fair prices for their produce. Additionally, improving access to credit and financial services will allow farmers to invest in necessary inputs and technologies. Strengthening agricultural extension services also plays a key role in providing farmers with the knowledge and skills to improve productivity and sustainability. Furthermore, fostering partnerships between local farmers and government or non-governmental organizations can facilitate knowledge sharing and resource transfer, leading to stronger agricultural practices. Investing in infrastructure, like roads and storage facilities, is essential to reducing post-harvest losses and improving market access. Promoting community-based initiatives for collective resource management can also enhance social cohesion and resilience. Addressing gender inequality in agriculture is vital, as empowering women farmers can lead to better household food security and economic stability. Finally, incorporating climate-smart agriculture techniques will help reduce the negative impacts of climate change, allowing smallholder farmers to succeed in an increasingly unpredictable environment. Furthermore, promoting community involvement and participatory governance in managing irrigation schemes will improve their effectiveness and sustainability. By adopting a comprehensive approach that combines these elements, stakeholders can create an environment that helps smallholder farmers achieve long-term resilience and prosperity. This broad strategy addresses immediate agricultural needs and lays the foundation for sustainable development, ensuring that farmers are prepared to adapt to changing environmental conditions and market trends. By emphasizing education and training, communities can build a skilled workforce capable of innovating and applying the best irrigation and crop management practices. Investing in infrastructure such as roads and storage facilities will improve market access, reduce post-harvest losses, and boost profits. Collaborative efforts among government agencies, NGOs, and local organizations are essential to efficiently mobilize resources and share knowledge. Ultimately, the success of small-scale irrigation programs depends on a unified effort to empower farmers, ensure fair resource distribution, and strengthen resilience against future challenges. Declarations Conflict of Interests The authors have not disclosed any potential conflicts of interest. Clinical Trial Number Clinical Trial Number: not applicable Human Ethics and Consent to Participate Declaration This research complied with international ethical guidelines for social and environmental research involving human participants. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the College of Humanities and Development Studies, China Agricultural University, before data collection. All participants provided informed consent: verbal consent was secured from community elders and household members with limited literacy, while written consent was documented for literate participants. This approach was approved by the aforementioned ethics committee to address varying literacy levels in the study area. Consent forms and study-related information were translated into Oromo to ensure participants fully understood the research purpose, data usage, and their rights. Consent to Publish Declaration All participants were fully informed, before enrollment, about the potential use of their anonymized research data (including non-identifiable demographic information, interview excerpts, and survey responses) in academic publications or conference presentations. No participant declined consent for the publication of their anonymized data. Funding This research received no external funding. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors. Data Availability The data supporting this study's findings are available from the corresponding author, Lemi Chala Tamire, upon reasonable request. Author Contribution L.C.T. and S.F.S. contributed equally to this work as a joint first author; Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing –original draft, Writing – review & editing. Z.K: Formal analysis, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. All authors reviewed the manuscript. References Amare, A, & Simane, B (2018). Does adaptation to climate change and variability provide household food security? Evidence from Muger sub-basin of the upper Blue-Nile, Ethiopia. Ecological Processes, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-018-0124-x 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). 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), e06761-e06761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06761 Baker, J (2000). Evaluating the impact of development projects on poverty. Washington, DC: World Bank eBooks, . https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-4697-0 Benjamin, E, Lotz, A, Ola, O, & Buchenrieder, G (2025). Assessing the Technical Efficiency and Resilience of Rwandan Smallholder Farmers Participating in Small-Scale Irrigation Schemes. Sustainability, 17(5), 1925-1925. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17051925 Bojago, E, & Abrham, Y (2023). Small-scale irrigation (SSI) farming as a climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practice and its influence on livelihood improvement in Offa District, Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 12, 100534-100534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100534 Choi, K., & Kim, P. (2024). Analyzing regional technological innovation disparities and impacts based on propensity score matching (PSM): Capital vs. non-capital. Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society , 27 (2), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.35978/jktis.2024.4.27.2.309 Dawid, I, Mohammed, J, & Ogeto, M (2023). Impact of small-scale irrigation on the livelihood and resilience of smallholder farmers against climate change stresses: Evidence from Kersa district, eastern Oromia, Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(8), e18976-e18976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18976 Dillon, A (2010). Do Differences in the Scale of Irrigation Projects Generate Different Impacts on Poverty and Production?. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 62(2), 474-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2010.00276.x Ebrahim, E, & Toy, A (2024). Impact of irrigation participation on households food security in a rural area of Ethiopia: application of propensity score matching (PSM) method for causal inference. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1403317 Gessesse, M, Zeru, G, Bitew, A, & Fentie, D (2025). Assessment of Constraints, Opportunities and Income Impacts Associated with Small‐Scale Irrigation in Zebit, Ethiopia. Irrigation and Drainage, . https://doi.org/10.1002/ird.3123 Grootaert, C, Narayan, D, Jones, V, & Woolcock, M (2004). Measuring Social Capital. World Bank working paper, . https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-5661-5 Hussein, M, Riga, F, Derseh, M, Assefa, T, Worqlul, A, Haileslassie, A, Adie, A, Jones, C, & Tilahun, S (2024). Application of Irrigation Management and Water-Lifting Technologies to Enhance Fodder Productivity in Smallholder Farming Communities: A Case Study in Robit Bata, Ethiopia. Agronomy, 14(5), 1064-1064. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14051064 Jambo, Y, Alemu, A, & Tasew, W (2021). Impact of small-scale irrigation on household food security: evidence from Ethiopia. Agriculture & Food Security, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-021-00294-w Jatana, D, & Tesfahun, A (2024). Impact of small-scale irrigation on the income of rural farm households: empirical evidence from Ethiopia. International Journal of Social Economics, . https://doi.org/10.1108/ijse-11-2023-0889 Kalidou, A, Qi, G, Ndimbo, G, & Wu, B (2024). The value of indigenous knowledge for enhancing smallholders’ resilience to climate change and food insecurity: a case study of small-scale irrigation system in Niger. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2024.2406062 Lesala, M, Mujuru, N, Mdoda, L, & Obi, A (2025). Evaluating the Economic Impact of Market Participation on the Well-Being of Smallholder Irrigators: Evidence from the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Sustainability, 17(8), 3390-3390. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17083390 Li, J, Ma, W, Renwick, A, & Zheng, H (2020). The impact of access to irrigation on rural incomes and diversification: evidence from China. China Agricultural Economic Review, 12(4), 705-725. https://doi.org/10.1108/caer-09-2019-0172 Maru, H, Haileslassie, A, & Zeleke, T (2023). Impacts of small-scale irrigation on farmers' livelihood: Evidence from the drought prone areas of upper Awash sub-basin, Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(5), e16354-e16354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16354 Mdemu, M, Kissoly, L, Bjørnlund, H, Kimaro, E, Christen, E, Rooyen, A, Stirzaker, R, & Ramshaw, P (2020). The role of soil water monitoring tools and agricultural innovation platforms in improving food security and income of farmers in smallholder irrigation schemes in Tanzania. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 36(sup1), S148-S170. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2020.1765746 Morris, M, Kelly, V, Kopicki, R, & Byerlee, D (2007). Fertilizer Use in African Agriculture. The World Bank eBooks, . https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6880-0 Nzima, W, Ip, R, Bhatti, M, Godfrey, S, Eik, L, Gondwe, S, & Divon, S (2024). Diversity and heterogeneity of smallholder vegetable farming systems and their impact on food security and income in Malawi. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1387912 Oni, O, Maliwichi, , & Obadire, O (2011). Assessing the contribution of smallholder irrigation to household food security, in comparison to dryland farming in Vhembe district of Limpopo province, South Africa. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(10), 2188-2197. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajar10.929 Rajkhowa, P (2024). From subsistence to market-oriented farming: The role of groundwater irrigation in smallholder agriculture in eastern India. Food Security, 16(2), 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-024-01437-0 Ravallion, M (2005). Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs. World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks, . https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3625 Sisay, K (2023). Impact of irrigated agriculture on households' income and food security: Evidence from the south‐west region of Ethiopia. Irrigation and Drainage, 73(2), 676-693. https://doi.org/10.1002/ird.2898 Stewart, R, Erasmus, Y, Zaranyika, H, Silva, N, Muchiri, E, Korth, M, Langer, L, Madinga, N, Randall, N, & Wet, T (2014). PROTOCOL: The Effects of Training, Innovation and New Technology on African Smallholder Farmers' Wealth and Food Security: A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 1-87. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.129. Shuhui Wang. (2024). Data asset information disclosure and capital market efficiency: Empirical research based on big data text mining. Membrane Technology , 327-342. https://doi.org/10.52710/mt.76 Theis, S, Lefore, N, Meinzen‐Dick, R, & Bryan, E (2018). What happens after technology adoption? Gendered aspects of small-scale irrigation technologies in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Tanzania. Agriculture and Human Values, 35(3), 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-9862-8 Tofu, D, Woldeamanuel, T, & Haile, F (2022). Smallholder farmers’ vulnerability and adaptation to climate change induced shocks: The case of Northern Ethiopia highlands. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 8, 100312-100312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100312 Yami, M (2015). Irrigation projects in Ethiopia: what can be done to enhance effectiveness under ‘challenging contexts’?. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 23(2), 132-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2015.1057628 Zhang, C, BENJAMIN, W, & Wang, M (2021). The contribution of cooperative irrigation scheme to poverty reduction in Tanzania. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 20(4), 953-963. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2095-3119(21)63634-1 Zone, W, Abel, S, & Abamagal, W (2020). Impact of Small Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers’ Livelihood Improvement: In Case of Damota Gale district, Wolaita zone, SNNPR. Deleted Journal, . https://doi.org/10.7176/jesd/11-5-04 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementaryDataIRR.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7422787","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":511888492,"identity":"666f1eaa-f1c9-43db-889e-d72d2ad68e84","order_by":0,"name":"Lemi Chala Tamire","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"China Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lemi","middleName":"Chala","lastName":"Tamire","suffix":""},{"id":511888493,"identity":"29d57dcd-2bc4-4869-99a2-459175b99eaa","order_by":1,"name":"Selamawit Fantahun Sertse","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mekelle University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Selamawit","middleName":"Fantahun","lastName":"Sertse","suffix":""},{"id":511888494,"identity":"21a0d3ee-bbfb-466b-b4dc-0eb0329a3567","order_by":2,"name":"Zhang Keyun","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"China Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zhang","middleName":"","lastName":"Keyun","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-21 06:23:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7422787/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7422787/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":90910318,"identity":"2de96716-2b2a-4b94-b9b2-69e63441ffac","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:37:09","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":38395,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProportion of Households Below the International Poverty Line ($1.90/day)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7422787/v1/12414a7b39fb8ae337f2375b.png"},{"id":90910316,"identity":"6d95685c-7643-48fa-b480-5215d63f2478","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:37:09","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":63421,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eUnnumbered image in the Materials and Methods\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003esection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMap of the Dugda district showing the study areas.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e Source: Google Maps and Dugda District Rural Development and Agriculture 2018\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7422787/v1/88476d73d2bddc1d200a4245.jpg"},{"id":103316638,"identity":"3fe0b6c1-159a-4f5c-900b-1b86a073d1f3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 10:58:04","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":958721,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7422787/v1/641ddab1-d18e-4166-982c-0fb142d843c0.pdf"},{"id":90909120,"identity":"257dfab8-8f11-4c2a-bb26-5768099724ca","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:29:09","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":17540,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryDataIRR.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7422787/v1/4281eed2ac2a4eb835357596.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers' Livelihoods: A Case Study ofDugda District, Oromia, Ethiopia","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe agricultural sector remains the backbone of many developing countries' economies, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, where most rural populations rely on subsistence farming for their livelihood (Stewart, 2014). Smallholder farmers provide up to 80 percent of the food supply in these regions, highlighting their vital role in continent-wide food security. However, the sector heavily depends on rain-fed systems, making it highly vulnerable to the increasing frequency and severity of climate variability and change, particularly drought (Asfaw, 2021). Agriculture drives the economy in Ethiopia, but its strong dependence on unpredictable rainfall threatens food security and economic stability (Tofu, 2022). Recurrent droughts have resulted in chronic food insecurity, especially in semi-arid areas, calling for a fundamental shift to more resilient farming methods.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this context, the development of small-scale irrigation (SSI) has become a key government and development strategy to reduce risks associated with rainfall variability, boost agricultural productivity, and ultimately alleviate poverty (Bojago, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). SSI schemes are especially suitable for smallholder farmers because they can be managed at the community level, require less capital investment than large-scale projects, and can be adapted to local conditions (Maru, 2023). By providing a dependable water source, SSI allows farmers to increase cropping intensity, diversify into high-value crops, and stabilize yields, thereby enhancing household food security and income (Jambo, 2021; Jatana, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEthiopia has significant water resources, but only a small part of its irrigation potential has been tapped. To close this gap, the government has focused on expanding SSI schemes to boost cropping intensity, diversify production, and help smallholders withstand climate-related shocks (Dawid, 2023). An increasing amount of research supports the positive effects of these efforts. Studies across Ethiopia and other parts of Africa consistently show that access to irrigation greatly improves household food security (Ebrahim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Oni, 2011), increases income (Gessesse, 2025; Zone, 2020), promotes asset building, and enhances overall livelihood resilience (Kalidou, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Dugda district in Ethiopia's Oromia region, with its access to Lake Ziway, the Meki River, and groundwater, has great potential for irrigation-based farming. Following national policy, the district actively promotes irrigation to stabilize food production and improve rural lives. However, the full effects of irrigation on smallholder livelihoods at the local level are not yet fully understood. Most existing research depends on quantitative impact assessments, which, while useful for measuring average effects, often miss the detailed qualitative changes in livelihood strategies, social dynamics, gender roles, and environmental conditions (Baker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). These \"black box\" assessments can overlook the underlying processes of change and the risk of unintended negative effects, such as resource depletion and social inequality, which can weaken the long-term success of these projects (Yami, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study contributes to irrigation science by investigating the multifaceted impacts of small-scale irrigation on smallholder livelihoods in the Dugda district. It moves beyond conventional economic metrics to examine how irrigation reshapes livelihood systems, including cropping patterns, labor dynamics, food security, asset accumulation, and social relations. Critically, it also assesses the unintended negative consequences on the environment and other dimensions of the traditional farming system, such as livestock production. By offering a rich, context-specific change narrative, this research aims to provide a more holistic understanding that can inform the design of more sustainable and equitable irrigation development policies in Ethiopia and beyond.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1. Study Area Description\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted in Dugda District, located in the East Shewa Zone of the Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. The district is in the Central Rift Valley, characterized by a semi-arid climate with high rainfall variability and frequent droughts. The average annual rainfall ranges from 700 to 900 mm, occurring in a bimodal pattern with a short rainy season (Belg) from March to May and a primary rainy season (Kiremt) from June to September. The district's economy is mainly based on agriculture, with most households practicing a mixed crop-livestock system. Key rain-fed crops include maize, teff, and haricot beans. Livestock, mainly cattle, goats, and sheep, are a vital source of income, food, and draught power, and are closely linked to crop production. Due to unreliable rainfall, agricultural productivity is often low, and households frequently face chronic food insecurity. In recent years, several small-scale irrigation schemes, primarily using water from the Awash River and local lakes, have been established by the government and NGOs to supplement rain-fed farming and improve rural livelihoods.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2. Sampling and Data Collection\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA multi-stage sampling procedure was employed to select respondent households. In the first stage, Dugda District was purposively selected due to its representation of a drought-prone area with active SSI schemes. In the second stage, four kebeles (Ethiopia's lowest administrative unit) with irrigation users and non-users were randomly selected. In the third stage, a sampling frame of all households in the selected kebeles was developed with the help of local administrators and development agents. Households were stratified into irrigation users (treatment group) and non-users (control group). Finally, 380 household heads (190 from each group) were selected using a systematic random sampling technique.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrimary data were collected through a structured household survey between October 2022 and January 2023. The questionnaire was designed to capture comprehensive information on various variables, including household demographics, asset ownership, agricultural production (irrigated and rain-fed), income sources, expenditure patterns, food consumption, and social participation. The survey was pre-tested and administered by trained enumerators fluent in the local language, Afan Oromo. To supplement the quantitative data, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) were conducted with community elders, development agents, and leaders of Water Users' Associations to gain deeper insights into the functioning of the irrigation schemes and their perceived impacts on the community.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3. Analytical Framework\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study adopted the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) to assess the multi-dimensional impacts of SSI. The SLF provides a holistic lens for understanding how people make a living by analyzing their access to and use of different types of assets or \"capitals\". Livelihood impacts were measured by examining the changes in five capital assets: human, physical, natural, financial, and social. A set of indicators was selected to represent each capital asset, based on a review of relevant literature and the local context. For instance, the measurement of social capital drew upon established empirical tools designed to generate quantitative data on its various dimensions (Shuhui Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These indicators are detailed in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLivelihood Capitals and Their Indicators\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLivelihood Capital\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndicators\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable Label\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHuman\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariety of food consumed in 24 hours\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVFC\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Passarelli, 2018)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual household education expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEDUCEXP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Zeweld, 2015)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual household health expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHLEXP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Zeweld, 2015)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysical\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNumber of crop types produced\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCTYP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Maru, 2023)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMonetary value of household assets (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHHASSET\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Maru, 2023)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLivestock ownership (Tropical Livestock Unit)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLVST\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Randolph, 2007)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNatural\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal landholding size (hectares)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLANDSIZE\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Eshetu, 2024)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinancial\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual on-farm income (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eONFINC\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Bacha, 2009)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual off-farm/non-farm income (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOFFNFINC\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Amare, 2023)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual savings (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSAVE\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Maru, 2023)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual agricultural input expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eINPEXP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Dorward, 2014)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMembership in formal/informal groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGRPMEM\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Grootaert, 2004)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual expenditure on 'idir' (local association) (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIDIREXP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(Maru, 2023)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4. Econometric Model\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo estimate the causal impact of SSI on livelihood outcomes, this study addresses the issue of selection bias. Participation in irrigation is not random; it is a result of household self-selection or purposive program placement, meaning that households who choose to irrigate may systematically differ from those who do not in ways that also affect the outcome variables (e.g., they may be more motivated or have better resources). We employed the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method to control for this. PSM is a widely used non-experimental method for evaluating program impacts by matching treated individuals with comparable control individuals based on observable characteristics (Choi \u0026amp; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe PSM procedure involves two stages. In the first stage, a logit regression model was used to estimate the propensity score, which is the conditional probability of a household participating in SSI given a vector of pre-treatment characteristics. The model is specified as: P (D\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e = 1|X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;f(X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e), where P (D\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e = 1|X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e) is the probability of household \u003cem\u003ei\u003c/em\u003e participating in SSI, and X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e is a vector of covariates including age, sex, and education of the household head, family size, landholding size, and distance to the nearest market. In the second stage, each irrigation user was matched with one or more non-users with similar propensity scores. This process creates a balanced comparison group, allowing for a more reliable treatment effect estimation. The Average Treatment effect on the Treated (ATT), which is the impact of SSI on the livelihood outcomes of the participating households, was then calculated as the mean difference in outcomes between the matched treatment and control groups: ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;E(Y₁\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e | D\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e = 1, P(X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e)) - E(Y₀\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e | D\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e = 0, P(X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e)) where Y₁\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e and Y₀\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e are the outcomes for household \u003cem\u003ei\u003c/em\u003e with and without irrigation, respectively. Several matching algorithms were used to ensure the robustness of the results, including Nearest Neighbor, Radius, and Kernel matching. The analysis was performed using Stata 16 software.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1. Socio-demographic Characteristics of Sample Households\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents the descriptive statistics of the socio-demographic characteristics of the sample households, broken down by irrigation participation. Before matching, some observable differences existed between the two groups. On average, the heads of irrigating households were slightly younger (42.1 years) compared to non-irrigators (44.5 years). Irrigating households also had a slightly larger family size (5.8 members) than non-irrigating households (5.3 members), which may reflect the higher labor demands of irrigated agriculture. A higher proportion of household heads in the irrigator group were literate (65.3%) compared to the non-irrigator group (58.4%). Furthermore, irrigators owned, on average, a larger land size (1.8 ha) than non-irrigators (1.5 ha). These initial differences highlight the importance of using a matching technique like PSM to control for selection bias caused by these observable characteristics. After matching, the covariates were balanced between the treated and control groups, indicating that the PSM method successfully created a comparable sample.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocio-demographic Characteristics of Sample Households (before matching)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIrrigators (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;190)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNon-irrigators (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;190)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003et-test/χ\u0026sup2;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAge of HH head (years)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e42.1 (9.8)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e44.5 (10.5)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.15*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSex of HH head (% Male)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e89.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e86.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.02\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily size (members)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.8 (2.1)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.3 (1.9)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.28**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducation of HH head (% Literate)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e65.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e58.4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.11*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLandholding size (ha)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.8 (0.7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.5 (0.6)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.12***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLivestock ownership (TLU)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.5 (2.8)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.9 (2.5)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.01*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e*p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.1, **p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, ***p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2. Impact of Small-Scale Irrigation on Livelihood Capitals\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe estimated Average Treatment effects on the Treated (ATT) from the PSM analysis are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. The results show the impact of SSI participation on the selected livelihood indicators.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAverage Treatment Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Livelihood Capitals\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLivelihood Capital Indicator\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eATT\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStd. Error\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003et-value\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHuman Capital\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFood variety score\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.33**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducation expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e650.4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e280.1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.32**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHealth expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e210.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e155.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePhysical Capital\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNumber of crop types\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.82\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.28***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eValue of household assets (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4850.6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1980.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.45**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTropical Livestock Unit (TLU)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.46\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eNatural Capital\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLandholding size (ha)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.80***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLand rental expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1540.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e550.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.80***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFinancial Capital\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOn-farm income (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12540.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3100.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.04***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOff/non-farm income (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4100.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1850.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.22**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnnual savings (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3200.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1100.4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.91***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAgricultural input expenditure (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4215.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1200.9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.51***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocial Capital\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMembership in groups (dummy)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.25**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eExpenditure on 'idir' (ETB)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e55.6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e40.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.38\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e***Significant at p\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.01; **significant at p\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.05; *significant at p\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.1. SAVE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;amount of money saved by the household in a year (ETB); CREDIT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;amount of annual credit accessed by the household for production purposes (ETB).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2.1. Human Capital\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipation in SSI had a positive and significant effect on human capital. Irrigating households consumed a greater variety of foods, with the ATT for the food variety score being 0.35 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). This suggests that irrigation enables households to produce or purchase a more diverse range of foods, improving nutrition and food security (Jambo, 2021). Furthermore, irrigators spent significantly more on education (ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;650.4 ETB, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), indicating that the increased income from irrigation is being invested in the next generation's human capital. The impact on health expenditure was positive but not statistically significant, possibly due to the availability of subsidized public health services in rural areas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2.2. Physical Capital\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe impact on physical capital was substantial. Irrigating households cultivated a significantly greater number of crop types (ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), diversifying their production base and reducing risks associated with the failure of a single crop. This diversification is a key strategy for building resilience (Amare, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The monetary value of household assets was also significantly higher for irrigators by an average of 4850.6 ETB (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), reflecting wealth accumulation. The effect on livestock ownership was positive but insignificant, possibly because both groups utilize communal grazing lands and livestock management practices are similar. Additionally, the increased agricultural productivity associated with irrigation has enhanced market participation, allowing households to engage more actively in local and regional markets (Lesala, 2025). This engagement provides opportunities for income generation and fosters community ties and access to resources.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2.3. Natural Capital\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs expected, irrigating households had significantly larger landholdings (ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.28 ha, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This result reflects the selection criteria for many irrigation schemes, which often target farmers with sufficient land to make irrigation viable. However, it also indicates that income from irrigation may enable households to rent or purchase additional land, thereby expanding their primary natural asset base. Moreover, the increased landholdings contribute to improved soil management practices, as farmers are more likely to invest in sustainable techniques that enhance soil fertility and structure. Investing in natural capital boosts crop yields and promotes biodiversity, as a wider variety of crops can support different species and ecological functions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2.4. Financial Capital\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most notable effect of SSI was on financial capital. Participation in irrigation increased annual on-farm income by an average of 12,540.2 ETB (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This significant boost is the main driver of many other livelihood improvements, a finding consistent across numerous studies in Ethiopia (Jatana, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Sisay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Irrigators also earned considerably more from off-farm and non-farm activities (ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4100.5 ETB, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), indicating that the capital and stability provided by irrigation allow households to diversify their income sources (Li, 2020). As a result, irrigators had higher annual savings. They spent significantly more on agricultural inputs like improved seeds and fertilizers (ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4215.7 ETB, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), reflecting a shift toward more intensive and productive farming systems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2.5. Social Capital\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe impact on social capital was positive. Irrigating households were more likely to be members of formal or informal groups, such as cooperatives or Water Users' Associations (ATT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.18, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). This increased social participation can improve access to information, resources, and collective action, which are essential for sustainable resource management (Grootaert, 2004). However, some studies warn that social capital may help stabilize livelihoods at low levels without necessarily encouraging upward mobility for the poorest households (Adato, 2006). The impact on 'idir' expenditure was not significant because such contributions are often standardized within a community.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3. Impact on Poverty\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo evaluate the impact on poverty, household daily income per capita was calculated and compared to the international poverty line of \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e1.90/day (2011 PPP). As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1, poverty remains a major challenge for both groups in the study area. However, participation in SSI is linked to a lower rate of poverty. About 68% of non-irrigating households fell below the poverty line, compared to 52%. This 16-percentage-point difference is statistically significant and emphasizes the role of irrigation in reducing poverty, a key goal of development projects (Baker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study results indicate that participation in small-scale irrigation enhances most of the indicators across the five capital assets. However, the extent of the impact and its level of significance vary. For instance, in human capital indicators, only the variety of food consumed by households was statistically significant, which has implications for improving the quality of life of irrigation participants. Concerning physical capital assets, a significant difference was observed between irrigators and non-irrigators in the number of crop types produced during the production year, increasing farmers\u0026rsquo; income stability during fluctuating market prices. Regarding natural capital assets, using all five matching propensity scores, farmland rental expenditures between the two groups were significantly different at 99%. Participation in SSI also enhances farmers\u0026rsquo; social capital assets. The most notable impact of SSI participation was observed in financial capital assets; for example, under all five PSM estimates, the annual farm income and expenditures on agricultural inputs showed a significant difference at the 99% level between irrigation participants and non-participants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study provide strong evidence that small-scale irrigation (SSI) is an effective intervention for enhancing the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in Dugda District, Ethiopia. Our results offer a detailed understanding of how SSI supports household well-being and resilience by examining the impacts across five different capital assets: financial, physical, human, social, and natural. This multi-capital approach goes beyond simple income measures to reflect the comprehensive nature of poverty and development. The results largely agree with earlier research conducted in other parts of Ethiopia and sub-Saharan Africa, consistently showing positive relationships between irrigation and important livelihood outcomes like income, food security, and poverty reduction (Bojago, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Jambo, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most important finding is the strong effect of SSI on financial capital. The significant rise in on-farm income acts as a driver, helping households to invest in and improve their other capital assets. Changing different types of capital is key to creating resilient livelihoods (Li, 2020). For example, higher income enables more investment in education (human capital), buying more productive assets like water pumps (physical capital), and gaining or renting more land (natural capital). The increased spending on agricultural inputs also shows a shift from low-input, subsistence farming to a more market-focused and intensified production system. This change is vital for long-term agricultural growth and commercialization, a pathway empirically linked to accessing stable irrigation (Rajkhowa, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This intensification, often involving more fertilizer use, is a core part of increasing African agricultural productivity (Morris, 2007).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother key outcome is the positive impact on human capital, primarily through better dietary diversity. SSI directly tackles nutritional deficiencies by allowing the year-round production of fruits and vegetables, an aspect of poverty often ignored in purely income-based measures. These findings highlight SSI's role as a nutrition-focused agricultural intervention (Amare, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The rise in social capital, shown by increased membership in local groups, is also an important, though less visible, benefit. These social networks are crucial for collective action, sharing knowledge, and managing common resources like water,(Jambo, 2021. Empowering women through technology adoption is a complex process, and understanding the distribution of benefits and control within households is essential to ensure these interventions reach their full potential (Theis, 2018). Additionally, incorporating sustainable practices within these systems creates an environment where innovation can grow, encouraging farmers to adopt new techniques and technologies that boost productivity and sustainability. This dynamic improves agricultural results and enhances community resilience against climate change and economic shocks. As households diversify their income sources, they become less vulnerable to market swings, building a more stable economy. Furthermore, promoting cooperative efforts within communities fosters a sense of solidarity and shared responsibility, which is vital for tackling broader issues like resource management and environmental conservation. Ultimately, the wide-ranging benefits of SSI emphasize its potential as a transformative approach to rural development, bridging different types of capital and helping create a fairer and sustainable future.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAn increasing amount of research strongly supports our study\u0026rsquo;s conclusions. They agree with findings from across Ethiopia that SSI participation improves multiple livelihood assets, including income, food consumption, and crop production (Maru, 2023), and strengthens household resilience against climate-related shocks (Dawid, 2023). They also match broader evidence from sub-Saharan Africa, where irrigation is key in enhancing food security and household income (Mdemu, 2020; Oni, 2011). Furthermore, policymakers widely agree that securing reliable water access is transformative, as shown by the consistent positive and significant impacts on agricultural output and income across different regions (Zone, 2020). This consistency with existing research emphasizes the essential role of water management in increasing agricultural productivity and highlights the need for targeted efforts that ensure fair access to resources. By encouraging collaboration among stakeholders\u0026mdash;including local governments, NGOs, and community members\u0026mdash;projects can be tailored to address regional challenges while utilizing local knowledge and practices. Such collaborative approaches improve the effectiveness of agricultural strategies and empower communities to take control of their development paths. Consequently, the potential for expanding successful models grows, paving the way for broader adoption of sustainable practices that can lead to lasting improvements in food security and economic stability. In summary, combining technology, sustainable methods, and community engagement provides a strong foundation for advancing rural development and helping achieve global sustainability goals.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite these overwhelmingly positive impacts, the study also highlights ongoing challenges and negative externalities that can threaten the sustainability of these gains. The high poverty rate, even among irrigators, indicates that while SSI is helpful, it is not a cure-all. Various factors often limit the full potential of irrigation. As shown in our qualitative findings and other studies, these include poor market access, the exploitative role of intermediaries, and inadequate infrastructure (Maru, 2023). The success of irrigation projects, therefore, depends not only on the technology itself but also on the broader governance and social context in which they are implemented (Yami, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, solving these challenges requires a multifaceted approach that goes beyond just technological fixes. Developing supportive policies that improve market access and empower farmers to negotiate fair prices is crucial, reducing their reliance on intermediaries. Improving infrastructure, such as roads and storage facilities, can help distribute agricultural products more effectively, making it easier for farmers to access markets. Furthermore, promoting financial literacy and expanding access to credit can help smallholder farmers invest in their farms and increase productivity. Including local communities in decision-making processes is essential, as it ensures interventions are culturally appropriate and address the specific needs of the people. Combining these elements into a comprehensive strategy can unlock the potential for sustainable agricultural development, leading to better livelihoods and greater resilience against economic and environmental shocks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the environmental concerns related to water-intensive vegetable production and agrochemical overuse and water-related conflicts highlight weaknesses in governance and technical support. Ensuring sustainable productivity gains is essential, which requires improving technical efficiency and resilience (Benjamin, 2025). The trade-off between expanding irrigated crop production and the decline of livestock systems is another critical issue that needs integrated land and water use planning to balance different livelihood strategies within the community, as both are often vital for smallholder systems (Nzima, 2024). This study has some limitations. Besides the use of small-scale irrigation, biophysical and environmental factors such as agroecology, land access, climate variation, crop choice, investment capacity, and soil conditions in each sample district can influence the livelihood assets of smallholder farmers. Therefore, these characteristics were not directly considered in the current study. Future assessments in the upper Awash sub-basin can address this gap by employing appropriate research designs to account for these factors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on these findings, several policy implications arise. To maximize the poverty-reducing impact of SSI, interventions should be combined with complementary support measures. This includes investing in rural infrastructure such as roads and storage facilities, enhancing market information systems to diminish the influence of intermediaries, and strengthening agricultural extension services to foster sustainable water management and improved farming practices. Supporting the formation and strengthening of farmer cooperatives or water user associations could boost collective bargaining power and improve resource management (Zhang, 2021). For future research, longitudinal studies are crucial to monitor the livelihood paths of irrigator and non-irrigator households over time. Additional research might also compare the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of various SSI technologies (Hussein, 2024), evaluate impacts across different scales of irrigation projects (Dillon, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), and investigate how indigenous knowledge can be integrated with modern techniques to develop more resilient and locally adapted irrigation systems (Kalidou, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion and Policy Implications","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study confirms that small-scale irrigation is a highly effective strategy for improving the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in the drought-prone Dugda District, Ethiopia. By strengthening all five livelihood capitals\u0026mdash;human, physical, natural, financial, and social\u0026mdash;SSI significantly contributes to household resilience against climatic and economic shocks. The most important impact occurs through increasing financial capital, especially on-farm income, which enables households to invest in areas such as nutrition, education, asset accumulation, and farm intensification. However, to maximize these benefits, addressing the underlying challenges preventing irrigation from reaching its full potential is crucial. Policymakers should work on improving market access and establishing fair trade practices to ensure farmers receive fair prices for their produce. Additionally, improving access to credit and financial services will allow farmers to invest in necessary inputs and technologies. Strengthening agricultural extension services also plays a key role in providing farmers with the knowledge and skills to improve productivity and sustainability. Furthermore, fostering partnerships between local farmers and government or non-governmental organizations can facilitate knowledge sharing and resource transfer, leading to stronger agricultural practices. Investing in infrastructure, like roads and storage facilities, is essential to reducing post-harvest losses and improving market access. Promoting community-based initiatives for collective resource management can also enhance social cohesion and resilience. Addressing gender inequality in agriculture is vital, as empowering women farmers can lead to better household food security and economic stability. Finally, incorporating climate-smart agriculture techniques will help reduce the negative impacts of climate change, allowing smallholder farmers to succeed in an increasingly unpredictable environment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, promoting community involvement and participatory governance in managing irrigation schemes will improve their effectiveness and sustainability. By adopting a comprehensive approach that combines these elements, stakeholders can create an environment that helps smallholder farmers achieve long-term resilience and prosperity. This broad strategy addresses immediate agricultural needs and lays the foundation for sustainable development, ensuring that farmers are prepared to adapt to changing environmental conditions and market trends. By emphasizing education and training, communities can build a skilled workforce capable of innovating and applying the best irrigation and crop management practices. Investing in infrastructure such as roads and storage facilities will improve market access, reduce post-harvest losses, and boost profits. Collaborative efforts among government agencies, NGOs, and local organizations are essential to efficiently mobilize resources and share knowledge. Ultimately, the success of small-scale irrigation programs depends on a unified effort to empower farmers, ensure fair resource distribution, and strengthen resilience against future challenges.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of Interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors have not disclosed any potential conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical Trial Number\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClinical Trial Number: not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHuman Ethics and Consent to Participate Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research complied with international ethical guidelines for social and environmental research involving human participants. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the College of Humanities and Development Studies, China Agricultural University, before data collection. All participants provided informed consent: verbal consent was secured from community elders and household members with limited literacy, while written consent was documented for literate participants. This approach was approved by the aforementioned ethics committee to address varying literacy levels in the study area. Consent forms and study-related information were translated into Oromo to ensure participants fully understood the research purpose, data usage, and their rights.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll participants were fully informed, before enrollment, about the potential use of their anonymized research data (including non-identifiable demographic information, interview excerpts, and survey responses) in academic publications or conference presentations. No participant declined consent for the publication of their anonymized data.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research received no external funding. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data supporting this study\u0026apos;s findings are available from the corresponding author, Lemi Chala Tamire, upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eL.C.T. and S.F.S. contributed equally to this work as a joint first author; Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing \u0026ndash;original draft, Writing \u0026ndash; review \u0026amp; editing. Z.K: Formal analysis, Supervision, Visualization, Writing \u0026ndash; review \u0026amp; editing. All authors reviewed the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmare, A, \u0026amp; Simane, B (2018). Does adaptation to climate change and variability provide household food security? Evidence from Muger sub-basin of the upper Blue-Nile, Ethiopia. Ecological Processes, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-018-0124-x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmare, A, \u0026amp; Simane, B (2017). Determinants of smallholder farmers\u0026rsquo; decision to adopt adaptation options to climate change and variability in the Muger Sub basin of the Upper Blue Nile basin of Ethiopia. Agriculture \u0026amp; Food Security, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0144-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAsfaw, A, Bantider, A, Simane, B, \u0026amp; Hassen, A (2021). Smallholder farmers\u0026rsquo; livelihood vulnerability to climate change-induced hazards: agroecology-based comparative analysis in Northcentral Ethiopia (Woleka Sub-basin). Heliyon, 7(4), e06761-e06761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06761\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaker, J (2000). Evaluating the impact of development projects on poverty. Washington, DC: World Bank eBooks, . https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-4697-0\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBenjamin, E, Lotz, A, Ola, O, \u0026amp; Buchenrieder, G (2025). Assessing the Technical Efficiency and Resilience of Rwandan Smallholder Farmers Participating in Small-Scale Irrigation Schemes. Sustainability, 17(5), 1925-1925. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17051925\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBojago, E, \u0026amp; Abrham, Y (2023). Small-scale irrigation (SSI) farming as a climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practice and its influence on livelihood improvement in Offa District, Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 12, 100534-100534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100534\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChoi, K., \u0026amp; Kim, P. (2024). Analyzing regional technological innovation disparities and impacts based on propensity score matching (PSM): Capital vs. non-capital. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Korea Technology Innovation Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(2), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.35978/jktis.2024.4.27.2.309\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDawid, I, Mohammed, J, \u0026amp; Ogeto, M (2023). Impact of small-scale irrigation on the livelihood and resilience of smallholder farmers against climate change stresses: Evidence from Kersa district, eastern Oromia, Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(8), e18976-e18976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18976\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDillon, A (2010). Do Differences in the Scale of Irrigation Projects Generate Different Impacts on Poverty and Production?. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 62(2), 474-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2010.00276.x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEbrahim, E, \u0026amp; Toy, A (2024). Impact of irrigation participation on households food security in a rural area of Ethiopia: application of propensity score matching (PSM) method for causal inference. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1403317\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGessesse, M, Zeru, G, Bitew, A, \u0026amp; Fentie, D (2025). Assessment of Constraints, Opportunities and Income Impacts Associated with Small‐Scale Irrigation in Zebit, Ethiopia. Irrigation and Drainage, . https://doi.org/10.1002/ird.3123\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGrootaert, C, Narayan, D, Jones, V, \u0026amp; Woolcock, M (2004). Measuring Social Capital. World Bank working paper, . https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-5661-5\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHussein, M, Riga, F, Derseh, M, Assefa, T, Worqlul, A, Haileslassie, A, Adie, A, Jones, C, \u0026amp; Tilahun, S (2024). Application of Irrigation Management and Water-Lifting Technologies to Enhance Fodder Productivity in Smallholder Farming Communities: A Case Study in Robit Bata, Ethiopia. Agronomy, 14(5), 1064-1064. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14051064\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJambo, Y, Alemu, A, \u0026amp; Tasew, W (2021). Impact of small-scale irrigation on household food security: evidence from Ethiopia. Agriculture \u0026amp; Food Security, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-021-00294-w\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJatana, D, \u0026amp; Tesfahun, A (2024). Impact of small-scale irrigation on the income of rural farm households: empirical evidence from Ethiopia. International Journal of Social Economics, . https://doi.org/10.1108/ijse-11-2023-0889\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKalidou, A, Qi, G, Ndimbo, G, \u0026amp; Wu, B (2024). The value of indigenous knowledge for enhancing smallholders\u0026rsquo; resilience to climate change and food insecurity: a case study of small-scale irrigation system in Niger. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2024.2406062\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLesala, M, Mujuru, N, Mdoda, L, \u0026amp; Obi, A (2025). Evaluating the Economic Impact of Market Participation on the Well-Being of Smallholder Irrigators: Evidence from the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Sustainability, 17(8), 3390-3390. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17083390\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, J, Ma, W, Renwick, A, \u0026amp; Zheng, H (2020). The impact of access to irrigation on rural incomes and diversification: evidence from China. China Agricultural Economic Review, 12(4), 705-725. https://doi.org/10.1108/caer-09-2019-0172\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaru, H, Haileslassie, A, \u0026amp; Zeleke, T (2023). Impacts of small-scale irrigation on farmers\u0026apos; livelihood: Evidence from the drought prone areas of upper Awash sub-basin, Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(5), e16354-e16354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16354\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMdemu, M, Kissoly, L, Bj\u0026oslash;rnlund, H, Kimaro, E, Christen, E, Rooyen, A, Stirzaker, R, \u0026amp; Ramshaw, P (2020). The role of soil water monitoring tools and agricultural innovation platforms in improving food security and income of farmers in smallholder irrigation schemes in Tanzania. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 36(sup1), S148-S170. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2020.1765746\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMorris, M, Kelly, V, Kopicki, R, \u0026amp; Byerlee, D (2007). Fertilizer Use in African Agriculture. The World Bank eBooks, . https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6880-0\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNzima, W, Ip, R, Bhatti, M, Godfrey, S, Eik, L, Gondwe, S, \u0026amp; Divon, S (2024). Diversity and heterogeneity of smallholder vegetable farming systems and their impact on food security and income in Malawi. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1387912\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOni, O, Maliwichi, , \u0026amp; Obadire, O (2011). Assessing the contribution of smallholder irrigation to household food security, in comparison to dryland farming in Vhembe district of Limpopo province, South Africa. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(10), 2188-2197. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajar10.929\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRajkhowa, P (2024). From subsistence to market-oriented farming: The role of groundwater irrigation in smallholder agriculture in eastern India. Food Security, 16(2), 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-024-01437-0\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRavallion, M (2005). Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs. World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks, . https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3625\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSisay, K (2023). Impact of irrigated agriculture on households\u0026apos; income and food security: Evidence from the south‐west region of Ethiopia. Irrigation and Drainage, 73(2), 676-693. https://doi.org/10.1002/ird.2898\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStewart, R, Erasmus, Y, Zaranyika, H, Silva, N, Muchiri, E, Korth, M, Langer, L, Madinga, N, Randall, N, \u0026amp; Wet, T (2014). PROTOCOL: The Effects of Training, Innovation and New Technology on African Smallholder Farmers\u0026apos; Wealth and Food Security: A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 1-87. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.129.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShuhui Wang. (2024). Data asset information disclosure and capital market efficiency: Empirical research based on big data text mining. \u003cem\u003eMembrane Technology\u003c/em\u003e, 327-342. https://doi.org/10.52710/mt.76\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTheis, S, Lefore, N, Meinzen‐Dick, R, \u0026amp; Bryan, E (2018). What happens after technology adoption? Gendered aspects of small-scale irrigation technologies in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Tanzania. Agriculture and Human Values, 35(3), 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-9862-8\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTofu, D, Woldeamanuel, T, \u0026amp; Haile, F (2022). Smallholder farmers\u0026rsquo; vulnerability and adaptation to climate change induced shocks: The case of Northern Ethiopia highlands. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 8, 100312-100312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100312\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYami, M (2015). Irrigation projects in Ethiopia: what can be done to enhance effectiveness under \u0026lsquo;challenging contexts\u0026rsquo;?. International Journal of Sustainable Development \u0026amp; World Ecology, 23(2), 132-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2015.1057628\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, C, BENJAMIN, W, \u0026amp; Wang, M (2021). The contribution of cooperative irrigation scheme to poverty reduction in Tanzania. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 20(4), 953-963. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2095-3119(21)63634-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZone, W, Abel, S, \u0026amp; Abamagal, W (2020). Impact of Small Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers\u0026rsquo; Livelihood Improvement: In Case of Damota Gale district, Wolaita zone, SNNPR. Deleted Journal, . https://doi.org/10.7176/jesd/11-5-04\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"small-scale irrigation, livelihood diversification, agricultural production, food security, smallholder farmer, Ethiopia","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7422787/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7422787/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIrrigation is a crucial tool for reducing risks related to rainfall variability in smallholder subsistence farming systems. This study examined how practicing small-scale irrigation (SSI) influences the key livelihood assets- human, physical, natural, financial, and social capitals- of farm households in Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s upper Awash sub-basin. The analysis used household-level survey data from 396 sample households. A Propensity Score Matching (PSM) model was employed to pair SSI user and non-user groups. Differences in the five livelihood capitals were estimated using PSM\u0026rsquo;s Nearest Neighbor, Radius, Kernel Mahalanobis, and Stratification matching methods. Results showed that participation in SSI has improved the capital assets of farm households. Compared to non-users, irrigation users had better outcomes in the variety of food consumed (0.28\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.13 SE), crop types produced (0.60\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.17 SE), expenditures on land rent and agricultural inputs (3118\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;877 SE Ethiopian Birr [ETB]), and on-farm (9024\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2267 SE ETB) and non-farm (3766\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1466 SE ETB) incomes. Challenges such as the involvement of local brokers in the market value chain and the lack of farmers\u0026rsquo; marketing cooperatives have limited the benefits of irrigated agriculture. Therefore, expanding SSI schemes for non-user farmers should focus on improving water management and productivity, establishing fair water allocation institutions between upstream and downstream areas, and reducing the influence of brokers in marketing irrigation products as future policy directions.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Effect of Small-Scale Irrigation on Smallholder Farmers' Livelihoods: A Case Study ofDugda District, Oromia, Ethiopia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-09 13:29:04","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7422787/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"86374e82-7f95-4005-a230-f9b1073c7213","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 9th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-02-24T10:56:21+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-09 13:29:04","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7422787","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7422787","identity":"rs-7422787","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}