English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The main objective of this study was to analyze drought-induced agricultural livelihood vulnerability through a comprehensive assessment of agro-meteorological, biophysical, and socioeconomic variables in North Wollo. The study area has four main livelihood zones, namely, Abay Tekeze watershed (ATW), North Wollo east plain (NWEP), North Wollo highland  belg  (NWHB), and Northeast  woina-dega  mixed cereal (NEWMC). A total of 274 sample households were selected from all the livelihood zones by considering wealth rankings. A Survey questionnaire, supplemented with focus group discussions and key informant interviews, was used to collect the data. Principal component analysis was applied to determine the indicators and assign weights. Consequently, from 66 indicators 32 were prioritized to measure the exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of the system. Both the livelihood vulnerability framework (LVI) and vulnerability sourcebook approach (LVIVSBA) were applied to assess livelihood vulnerability. The results revealed that the entire study area was characterized by higher exposure (0.653) and higher sensitivity (0.632) scores to drought impacts, while it exhibited a lower adaptive capacity (0.37). In both approaches, NWHB obtained the highest vulnerability score (0.681/0.715) followed by NWEP (0.634/0.619), whilst ATW revealed the lowest (0.583/0.555) in LVI and LVIVSBA, respectively. Similarly, the poor (0.671/0.670), medium (0.589/0.593), and better-off (0.554/0.537) were relatively ordered from the highest to the lowest. In conclusion, differential livelihood vulnerability does exist across the livelihood zones and wealth groups. The major sub-components which worsen household’s vulnerability were access to irrigation, food self-sufficiency problem, scarcity of livestock fodder, poor access to basic infrastructure, lower livelihood diversification, inadequate economic resources, low educational status, lack of training and support. Hence, the study calls for decision-makers and development partners to develop context-specific planning and interventions that strengthen the farmers’ adaptive capacity and minimize their exposure and sensitivity to the issue.

Drought-induced agricultural livelihood vulnerability: Livelihood-based comparative analysis in Northeast highlands of Ethiopia