You are on page 1of 84

Mekelle University

College of Business and Economics


Department of Management

Assessment of Urban Built-Up Area Expansion on the Livelihood of Farm


Households on the Peri-Urban Area. (The Case of Shire-Endaselassie Town:
Tigray Region)

By: Tekeste Tesfay Gebrehiwot

Thesis Submitted to the Department of Management in Partial Fulfillment of


Requirement for the Degree of Master of Arts (MA) in Development Studies
(Specialized in Regional and Local Development Studies (RLDS)
Principal Advisor: Efrem Gebru (Assistant Professor)
Co-Advisor: Tesfay Aregawi (Assistant Professor)
OCTOBER, 2016
Mekelle, Tigray, Ethiopia

Assessment of Urban Built-Up Area Expansion on the Livelihood of Farm Households,


on the Peri-Urban Area. (The Case of Shire-Endasilassie Town: Tigray Region)
A Thesis Submitted To
Mekelle University
College of Business and Economics Department of Management
Post Graduate Program
A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Management In Partial Fulfillment of
Requirement for the Degree of Master of Arts (MA) in Development Studies
(Specialized in Regional and Local Development Studies (RLDS)

By: Tekeste Tesfay Gebrehiwot

October 2016

[ii]

DECLARATION

The thesis entitled Assessment of Urban Built-Up Area Expansion on the Livelihood of

Farm Households, on the Peri-Urban Area. (The Case of Shire-Endasilassie Town:


Tigray Region)" is my own original work and has not been presented in any other university. All
sources of materials used for the thesis, I have been fully acknowledged.

Name: Tekeste Tesfay Gebrehiwot

Signature: ________

Date:September 2016

[iii]

Thesis Approval Sheet


The undersigned certify that they have read and hereby recommend to the Mekelle University College
of Business and Economics Department of Management to accept the Thesis submitted by Tekeste
Tesfay, and entitled,
Assessment of Urban Built-Up Area Expansion on the Livelihood of Farm Households, on the
Peri-Urban Area. (The Case of Shire-Endasilassie Town: Tigray Region)" in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the award of a Masters Degree in Developmental study.

Approved by the Board of Examiners:

Name of Advisor _________________ Signature__________ Date__________

Name of co-advisor______________ Signature_______ Date__________

Name of External Examiner____________ Signature_________ Date__________

Name of Internal Examiner ____________ Signature________ Date_________

[iv]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and for most I am grateful to God, the creator, savor and the guardian his mother St.Mary to see
the completion of my Thesis.
Next, I would like to thank all those who helped me in the due course. First, I would like to express
my heart-felt thanks to my advisor, Efrem Gebru (Asst.pro.), for his unreserved, critical and
constructive comments during this research.
In addition, I would like to thank my beloved wife Selam Welekidan and my family support and
encouragement has been source of inspiration throughout my graduate study.

Moreover, I would like to express my appreciation to all my friends for their moral support and
assistance.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to all of my instructors who have been supporting and
helping me to come to success and Mekelle University as an institution for its financial support and
overall services.
.

[i]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................. i
List of tables ...................................................................................................................................................... iv
List of figure ................................................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF AGRONOMYS AND ABBREVIATION .................................................................................... vi
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER ONE ..................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1

Background of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 1

1.2

Statement of the Problem........................................................................................................................ 3

1.3

Objective of the Study ............................................................................................................................ 5

1.3.1

General Objective ........................................................................................................................... 5

1.4.2 Specific Objectives of the Study ............................................................................................................ 5


1.5 Significant of the Study ............................................................................................................................ 6
1.6 Scope of the Study ........................................................................................................................................ 6
1.7 Limitation of the Study ................................................................................................................................. 6
1.8 Organization of the study.............................................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER TWO .................................................................................................................................................... 8
2.

Related Literature Reviews............................................................................................................................. 8


2.1

Conceptual Framework of the Problem .................................................................................................. 8

2.2

Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................................ 9

2.3

Livelihood and change of livelihood .................................................................................................... 10

2.4

Cause of urban expansion to its peri-urban areas ................................................................................. 12

2.4.1

Population growth ......................................................................................................................... 12

2.4.2

Income growth .............................................................................................................................. 13

2.4.3

Investment and transformation of infrastructures ......................................................................... 14

2.4.4

Uneconomic use of urban land ..................................................................................................... 14

2.5

Impacts of urban expansion on the farmers in the peri-urban area ....................................................... 14

2.5.1.1

Center of market area .................................................................................................................... 15

2.5.1.2

Center for production & distribution of goods & services............................................................ 15

2.5.1.3

Access to employment .................................................................................................................. 15

2.5.2

Negative impacts or effects of urban expansion ........................................................................... 15

2.5.2.1

Socio Economic Impacts .............................................................................................................. 16


[ii]

3.

2.5.2.2

Loss of farmland ........................................................................................................................... 16

2.5.2.3

Unjust Compensation.................................................................................................................... 17

2.5.2.4

Enclosed surrounding villages to urban territory .......................................................................... 17

2.5.2.5

Over-exploitation of natural resources.......................................................................................... 17

2.5.2.6

Urban expansion causes conflict ................................................................................................... 17

Methodology of the Study ............................................................................................................................ 20


3.1

Description of the Study area................................................................................................................ 20

3.1.1. Location and Shape............................................................................................................................ 21


3.1.2. Topography and Drainage .................................................................................................................. 22
3.2

Research Design ................................................................................................................................... 23

3.3

Source of Data and Data collection Techniques ................................................................................... 23

3.3.2

Data Collection Techniques .......................................................................................................... 23

3.3.2.1

Questionnaires .............................................................................................................................. 24

3.3.2.2

Key Informant Interviews ............................................................................................................. 24

3.3.2.3

Focus Group Discussions (FGD) .................................................................................................. 24

3.4

Sample Size and Sampling Techniques ................................................................................................ 24

4.5 Data Analysis and Interpretation ................................................................................................................ 26


CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................................................................ 27
4.

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA .................................................... 27


4- Demographic Characteristics of respondents ............................................................................................... 27
4.1

Data in relation to eviction from land due to urban expansion ............................................................. 28

4.3 Economical assessment of displaced household ..................................................................................... 35


4.4 Social impacts of displaced household ................................................................................................... 36
4.5 Regarding the Local Government intervention support made after eviction .......................................... 40
4.6 Exacerbation of conflicts ........................................................................................................................ 41
CHAPTER FIVE .................................................................................................................................................. 43
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................................................................ 43
5.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 43
Appendix 1........................................................................................................................................................ 53
Appendix 2........................................................................................................................................................ 60
Appendix 3........................................................................................................................................................ 62

[iii]

List of tables
Table 3-1: The total population of Shire Endaslassie town from 1999 E.C- 2008 E.C ......................... 20
Table 4-1: Respondents by sex, age and family size ............................................................................. 27
Table 4-2: Respondents Marital status and Educational level ............................................................... 28
Table 4-3: Data regarding respondents evicted from land due to urban expansion............................... 28
Table 4-4: Economical impact on the lively hood of displaced ............................................................. 35
Table 4-5: social impacts of the displaced farming households ............................................................ 36
Table 4-6: Regarding compensation the displaced farmers ................................................................... 37
Table 4-7: concerning the intervention and support given by the local government............................. 40
Table 4-8: Frequency of farmers complains or conflicts on practical implementations of rules and
regulations .............................................................................................................................................. 41

[iv]

List of figure
Figure 1 Location of the study area ....................................................................................................... 22
Figure 2 Annually number of displaced farmers ................................................................................... 30
Figure 3 Annually amount of production............................................................................................... 32
Figure 4 Rate t of compassion ............................................................................................................... 38

[v]

LIST OF AGRONOMYS AND ABBREVIATION


CSA: Central Statistics Authority
FGD: Focus Group Discussion
FHHs: Farmhouse holds
SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Sciences
MOFED: Minstery of Finance and Economic Development
UN-HABITAT: United Nation Habit
UNCHs : United Nation Center of for human settelement
ADIL : Agricultural Development Lead Industrey
SNNPRs : South National Nationality of people Region
PCC : Population center
DFID:

Department for International Development

GDP:

Gross Domestic product

WB:

World Bank

[vi]

ABSTRACT
The Objectives of this study were to assess the impacts of urban built-up area expansion on
livelihoods of displaced farmers. Problems associated with asset losses, land loss as well as the
measures taken to address are investigated. Urbanization is one of the most important demographic
trends of the twenty first century where cities are rapidly expanding through a continuous process of
urban growth towards the peri-urban agricultural farmlands. Shire is one of the Tigray regional state
towns, which have recorded high urban expansion since, recognized and selected as investment and
residential development centre. The peri-urban areas of the surrounding rural area have rapidly
integrated into the urban setting due to urban expansion the town. Studies were not conducted for the
present study area (Shire- Endaslassei). In assessing the impacts of urbanization on farmers, a
sample 140 (30%), sample size out of the 460 displaced farmers through systematic and purposive
sampling methods and 10 officials for interview and FGD. Data was collected through questionnaires;
interviews and FGDs. primarily data collected from sampled households were processed and analyzed
by using the Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 20.
Although, proximity to urban center benefits peri-urban farmers in terms of accessibility to
infrastructures, markets finance and off farm employment opportunities, farmers in peri-urban areas
of Shire town did not fully take opportunities that were come up with the town expansion and
development. In addition, rehabilitation mechanisms used by the town municipality mainly an
arrangement of cash compensation and other skill and vocational training for evicted people is
completely forgotten.
As a result, most of the families exposed to further economic, social and cultural impoverishment. In
addition, pursuing appropriate compensation packages, and implementing even those available to
rehabilitate

the

livelihood

of

evicted

households.

Moreover,

enforce

the

implement the intended rules and regulations accordingly. Farmers should train and co
operate in order to create alternative sources of livelihood.

Key words: built-up area expansion, displacement, livelihood, farming households,


Compensation, peri -urban and Shire Endasselassie.
[vii]

municipality;

CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Urbanization refers to a growth in the proportion of a population living in urban areas and the further
physical expansion of already existing urban centers (Samson, 2009; Alaci, 2010). The level of
urbanization in Africa is low (37.1%) when compared with developed countries like Europe (72.7%)
and North America (79.1%). However, urbanization in the developing world in general is progressing
much faster than in developed countries, which may reach 3% or even 4 % a year (Soubbotina, 2004).
The fast rate of urbanization in developing world is attributed to ruralurban migration, economic
growth and development, and rapid population growth (Marshall et al., 2009).
According to Redman and Jones, 2004, basically urban growth is a combination of three basic
processes. First is rural-urban migration: it is a key source of urban growth since the origin of cities.
Rural-Urban migration is driven from perceived economic opportunities, insecurity in rural areas,
climate or economic problems, etc. Second is natural increase: this is a combination of increased
fertility and decreased mortality rate. Third is re-classification of land from rural to urban categories:
Many cities are rapidly growing into their fringe, engulfing former villages and farmlands and
transforming them into urban development. The rate of natural increase is generally slightly lower in
urban than in rural areas. However, the principal reasons for raising the level of urbanization and city
growth are rural-urban migration, geographical expansion of urban areas through annexation and
transformation and re-classification of rural village into small urban settlements (Cohen, 2006).
The nature and consequences of urbanization has significant impact on lives (economy) of both in the
more developed and less developed countries. Since, urbanization is a natural process that, it grows
and expands from time to time parallel with the humankinds settlement preferences it adversely
affects the mass of worlds agrarian community in general and farm community in the peri-urban areas
in particular. This is because farmland resources are scarce by nature but human needs and preferences
for settlement as well as agricultural use is unlimited and increases from time to time as global
population grows rapidly. Thus, urbanization process is usually expanding and growing to its
surrounding areas at the expense of nearby agricultural farmlands. The process of urban expansion
involves both the internal reorganization and outward expansion of the physical structure of urban
[1]

areas. Such process of urban expansion is a worldwide phenomenon, which could see in the history of
all urban centers. Thus, horizontal outward expansion of urban centers can result in loss of prime
agricultural farmlands and natural beauties (Minwuyelet, 2004).
Recently, African urbanization is characterized by rapid and uncontrolled urban growth. This has
brought various socio-economic and environmental problems. In addition, the mass exodus to cities
has already worsened the problems of urban poverty, food insecurity, shortage of housing and basic
services, unemployment, ethnic tensions and violence, substance abuse, crime and social
disintegrations. This leaves it with an under-developed continent (J. Pater Jaglo, 2000). Thus,
urbanization in Africa has brought many negative impacts both on the urban as well as on the periurban farm communities throughout the continent.
Ethiopia is characterized by low level of urbanization even by African standard, where only 16%
of populations live in urban area. Despite this, it has recorded a relatively high growth rate of
Urban population (4% annually), double that of rural areas. However, such high growth rate is
not often accompanied by development in socio-economic services and infrastructure, and
economic and employment capacity of the urban centers to support the growing population
(Teller and Assefa, 2010).
Ethiopia is one of the least urbanized countries in the world. It has only 16% of its population living in
urban centers (PCC, 2008). However, given the 2.73% total annual population growth rate, high rate
of in-migration to towns, and increase in the number of urban centers, the rate of urbanization is
increasing at a rate of 4.4% (MoFED, 2006). Furthermore, the country urban population is expected to
grow on average by 3.98% and by 2050, about 42.1% of the total population is expected to be
inhabited in urban centers (UN-HABITAT, 2007). Even though there are more than 900 urban centers
in Ethiopia, Addis Abeba, its capital city, consisted of about 23% of the total urban population in the
country (PCC, 2008).
Ethiopia has a long history of urbanization that developed next to the ancient Egyptian civilization in
East Africa like Axum, Gonder and Harar and then finally Addis Ababa become the capital city of the
country (Jaglo, 2005). The Ethiopian urban centers are expanding at an alarming rate (4.3 per cent)
that resulting in losing of many very productive agricultural farmlands and agricultural production.
This rapid urban expansion is changing the means of livelihood of the farming community nearby
urban. This situation is worst currently in the study area, Shire Endasselassie Town and its surrounding
[2]

rural urban fringe areas. This is due to fast population growth, rural to urban migration, high housing
built- up, income growth and investment demands that in turn affect the local farmers livelihood and
many farming community land security is risking. Since, the built- up area expansion process resulted
to the loss of agricultural farmlands and reduction of crops/food productivity.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Recently, African urbanization is characterized by rapid and uncontrolled urban growth. This has
brought various socio economic and environmental problems. The mass migration to cities has already
worsened the problems of urban poverty, food insecurity and shortage of housing and basic services,
unemployment and social disintegrations. This leaves it with an underdeveloped continent (Jaglo,
2006). Thus, urbanization in Africa has brought many negative impacts both on the urban as well as on
the per urban farm communities throughout the continent.
The basic problem is that urban growth causes not only loss of agricultural farmlands but also changes
and challenges their livelihood sources as well as food security as result of urban expansion to its periurban territories. Therefore, as the global population growth increases and the expansion of human
settlement, particularly the trends towards urbanization are contributing to the conversation of
agricultural farmland to urban land uses (UNCHS, 2008).
Now urban expansion is increasing at an alarming rate in developing countries. This is due to fastest
growth rate of worlds population and change in human settlement preferences. This urbanization
process was manifested through the urban physical/horizontal expansion to their peripheral
agricultural farmlands. Such urban expansion affects more of the farmers in the Peru- urban territory,
especially in developing countries and more of the agrarian economy countries; like, Ethiopia
(Shishay, etal, 2011).
On the other hand, there are legal rights/issues concerning the farmland holding expropriation and
compensation. The federal constitution of Ethiopia under article 40(4 and 8) states that, the farmers
who hold farmland have the right not to be expropriated without just compensation for their farmlands.
In addition to this, Article 44(2) states that; All persons who have been displaced or whose
livelihoods have been adversely affected as a result of state programs have the right to commensurate
monetary or other alternative means of compensation, including relocation with enough state
assistance.
[3]

The Ethiopian civil code under its articles (Art 1463-1473) and proclamation No. 455/2005 also
provide the mandatory legal procedures of expropriation stating from declaration of public interest to
the payment of just compensation. However, many cities, including

Mekelle; did not seem to

implement the law of farmland expropriation and the subordinate laws properly due to weak
institutional governance, lack of financial capacity and standard of land tenure system for investments.
As a result, there are many farm households were displaced from their farmlands with little or no
means of compensation and which are presently suffering from food insecurity and vulnerability
(Shishay, etal, 2011).
Farmland expropriation without just compensation seems to be cause for a several problems such as
unemployment, poverty, rural-urban migration and conflict between government and farmers
communities as well as among farmers in the peri-urban area and the town. As a result, the livelihoods
of the farmers in the peri-urban areas have adversely affected.
The Ethiopian-urban centers are expanding at an alarming rate (4.3%) that resulting in loss of
agricultural farmland, loss of agricultural production, and changes/challenges of their livelihood (CSA,
2010).
This situation is worst in Ethiopian-urban center in general and in Shire- Endaslassei town in
particular, and it is surrounding rural-urban fringe areas. Studies were not conducted for the present
study area (Shire- Endaslassei). However, there are a few related studies on the impact of urban
expansion in different parts of Ethiopia. For instance, study by Fayera, 2005 on impacts of Addis
Ababa expansion on farming community on peripheral area, indicated that the citys expansion
programmes implemented in different period of time were not participatory and negatively influence
the livelihood of farmers on peri-urban area. Study by Feleke, 1999 entitled Impact of urban
development on peasant community in Ethiopia; a community dispossessed by Ayat real estate on the
other hand found that displacement of peasant community with appropriation of cash compensation
exacerbated their dominant livelihood and expose them for further economic, social and cultural
impoverishment. Moreover, study by Ermias, 2009 on prospect and challenges of real estate
development on livelihood of rural communities: the case of Leag Tefo Lega Dadi further found that
an establishment of the real estate on the area affected the livelihood of farmers by reduction of farm
size holding and the community participation in planning and implementation in the programme was
also negligible.
[4]

Generally, all these studies conclude that urbanization process in Ethiopia has not been participatory
in addition, negatively influenced the livelihood of farming community living on the peripheral area.
Therefore, the researcher triggered to conduct a research on the assessment of urban built-up area
expansion on the livelihood of farm households, on the peri-urban area, of Shire- Endaslassei town.
Moreover, it concentrate mainly on determining the cope-up mechanism pursued by evicted household
and assess appropriateness of compensation packages provided to mitigate the problem.
Hence, urban expansion is inevitable, due to induced development or socio-economic factors of the
society, it must be considered in a manner that protects the welfare of the peripheral farming
communities that are affected.
Hence, it is believed that there is gap to explained and clarifies on the assessment of urban built-up
area expansion on the livelihood of farm households, on the peri-urban area. This study is therefore
hoped to fill this gap.
Research Questions
The basic questions that answered while conducting this research study is:
What are the socio- economic impacts of the urban expansion in the study areas?
Does the displaced farmers compensated properly according to the legal rights of property,
and compensation?
What are the current alternative survival strategies of the farm households?
1.3 Objective of the Study
1.3.1 General Objective
The general objective of the study is; to assess the of urban built-up area expansion on the livelihood
of the farm households in the peri-urban areas of Shire town the case of Northwestern zone, Tigrai.
1.4.2 Specific Objectives of the Study
The specific research objectives of the study are;
To assess the socio-economic impact of the displaced farmers of livelihood in the study area,
To assess the perception of evicted community on appropriateness of compensation packages
and other legal rights pursued by government in order to rehabilitate their livelihood,
To identify the current alternative survival strategies of the displaced farm households.

[5]

1.5 Significant of the Study


Urban expansion is natural process and it consumes many hectares of prime agricultural lands from
their surrounding every years. This results to the change and loss of livelihood sources for the farm
communities there. Therefore, investigation of research conduct on the assessment of urban built-up
area expansion would contribute some important points
Firstly, the study would contribute as a feedback to the Municipality and other concerned body unit as
what they do in the peri-urban areas of expansion.
Secondly, would be use as reference material for other similar or related studies concerning the
political, social and economic problems of the farm communities in the fringe areas of urban centers.
Therefore, this study will be expected to play important role in filling the knowledge gap and on this
area motivate future researcher as well as input for urban planner for sustainable development that do
not threaten peri-urban agricultural communities.
Furthermore, the study expansion can give examine the current life condition can give examine the
current life condition of the displaced peri-urban agricultural communities at house hold level will
provide genuine and constructive information (inputs) for policy makers, urban planning experts,
urban managers and other to evaluate their development programs.

1.6 Scope of the Study


The scope of this study was conducted at peri-urban areas of Shire- Endaslassei town. The town has
been expanding horizontally over the peripheral areas to include lands that were previously under the
rural village. With the towns expansion, land use pattern was also changed from agricultural land use
to urban residential and other purposes. Therefore, the study concentrates the assessment of urban
built-up area expansion on the livelihood of farm households, on the peri-urban area, of ShireEndaslassei town. It also focused mainly on displaced farmers whose livelihoods could be affected.
1.7 Limitation of the Study
From the very beginning, especially during field survey for data gathering the study has faced some
limitations, which actually could not hinder this study from succeeding its final objectives. The
absence of well organized data, particularly regarding the amount of land that have been incorporated
from rural to urban use as well as the number of peri-urban farmers who have been displaced from
their farmland not properly documented and organized by the municipality as well as the surrounding
[6]

Woreda Tahtay koraro. However, I solved that by asking the x-leaders, previous land management
committee and displaced farmers.
1.8 Organization of the study
This study contains five chapters. Chapter one deals about the background of the study, problem
statement, Objectives, Significant of the study, scope of the study, and organization of the study. The
second chapter discuses about review of related literature on the definition of key terms, Livelihood
and change of livelihood, Cause of urban expansion to it is peri-urban areas, and Impact of urban
expansion on the farmers in the peri-urban areas. The third chapter deal about the methodology part of
the study, it includes the description of the study area, research design, source of data, data collection
methods, and sample size and sampling techniques, and method of data presentation and analysis.
The fourth Chapter deals with data interpretations and its analysis; finally the last chapter five deals
with the conclusion and recommendation part.

[7]

CHAPTER TWO
2. Related Literature Reviews
This chapter is a comprehensive presentation of the relevant literature that was reviewed. It touches on
the concepts of urbanization expansion and its impact assessment on the livelihood of the Peru urban
area of the displaced farmers in their causes and effects.
2.1 Conceptual Framework of the Problem
The impact of urbanization on peri-urban environment and livelihoods can be seen in two ways:
positive and negative. According to Alaci (2010) well planned and managed urban growth and
development can serve as a positive development factor. The benefits could be seen in terms of high
demand on agricultural produces, access to developed extension services, and opportunities to non
farm employment (Satterthwaite and Tacoli, 2003).
However, unguided urbanization, like in most developing countries, negatively affects the natural
environment and livelihoods in peri-urban areas (UN-HABITAT, 2010). This could be attributed to
changes occurring in land use, water resources management, waste dumping, and increasing
competition between agricultural and residential use of natural resources (Bah et al., 2003). As a
result, urbanization could bring a dramatic increase in the concentration of poverty and environmental
degradation in peri-urban zones (Marshall et al., 2009). Given the experiences of its high correlation
with economic development, particularly in developed countries (Henderson, 2003), urbanization is
still prescribed to least urbanized countries like Ethiopia (Woldehanna, 2008). In addition to multifactors driven it, governments policies are considered as key development interventions in promoting
urbanization. In this regard, the impact of urbanization on peri-urban environment and livelihoods can
be evaluated as like any development intervention effects. Impact evaluation is the systematic
identification of these positive or negative effects, which are intended or not, brought by a given
development activity on households and environment (WB, 2004). With this concept in mind,
evaluation literatures can be seen in to two broad categories: environmental impact assessment,
particularly land use and land cover dynamics analysis as a driver of change to peri-urban livelihoods,
and impact of urbanization-induced displacement on peri-urban livelihoods.
Concerning peri-urban livelihoods, Mandere et al. (2010) have conducted a study in peri-urban
Nyahururu, Kenya with the objective of assessing the impact of the peri-urban development dynamics
to household income. Their finding showed a decline in economic significance of agriculture in these
[8]

areas due to rapidly shrinking of agricultural land because of the effect of urbanization. They have also
indicated households have adopted diverse non-farm activities whose earnings proved to be of varying
importance to the annual household income. The infrastructural developments coupled with emerging
business enterprises were found to be the main factors that enhanced the opportunities for household
engagement in non-farm activities. They then concluded peri-urban development is not only dependent
on the infrastructural developments but also on the socio-economic opportunities and government
policy. Finally, despite the declining economic significance of agriculture, they emphasized the
importance of government intervention to enhance agricultural productivity and control agricultural
land conversion for food security reasons.
Urbanization process is usually expanding and growing its territory to its surrounding areas at the
Expense of fertile/prime agricultural farmlands. The process of urban expansion involves both the
internal reorganization and outward expansion of the physical structure of urban areas. This urban
rapid growth results from fast population growth (natural increase, rural-urban migration), high
demand of urban land (lack of access) and other reason that cause to land speculation, weak
institutional capacity, inappropriate implementation of laws & regulations and irrational &
uneconomic use of land in the rural-urban fringe areas. Thus, the core problem is urban
physical/horizontal built-up area expansion to its peri-urban areas. This then results to these effects on
the farmers over all livelihood sources of incomes. Such as displacement of farmers, unfair farmland
compensation system and excessive use of natural resources (land). Moreover, these farm households
then adversely affected by loss their livelihood sources of incomes due to the urban expansion and
expropriation process to different socio-economic problems like; poverty and food insecurity,
unemployment and migration, land degradation and pollution and finally conflict and instability
relation with governmental administrative units of these localities.
2.2 Definition of Terms
Urban area: The definition of Urban have not internationally agreed conceptual meaning, rather
different countries define it based on their; social, economic and political organization of their country
or region. Nevertheless, as to the general talking, an urban area is characterized by higher population
density and vast human features in comparison to areas surrounding it. Urban areas are created and
further developed by the process of urbanization.

[9]

Urbanization: Urbanization can be defined as the rapid and massive growth of, and migration to,
large cities. Due to the nature of urbanization process results to the conceptual emergence of urban
expansion. Urbanization is the expansion of a city into its peri-urban lands, causing to rapid and
massive growth of, and migration to, large cities. Urban expansion is linked to increased pollution and
obesity, and has adverse effects on the environment of farm community in the rural-urban fringe.
Positive and negative consequences can result.
Livelihood: Refers to the sources of income, which are categorized into land for cultivation; assets
such as livestock; food security; health; skills; capabilities; and education. Thus, livelihood means that
the assets and access that together determine the living gained by an individual or household.
Displacement of framers: This refers to those farmers who were expropriated their farmlands in the
rural-urban fringe. Thus, results to the change/functional movement or displacement of farmers from
that specific area.
Farming community: - is the community dependent on farming and relabelled economic
activities.
Built-up area: - an area, which is constructs for urban residential and industry purpose.
Kebele: - is the lowest administration unit in the Ethiopian governments
administrational hierarchy.
Peripheral farming communities: - is agricultural community in rural settlement
pattern to which Urban set elements expands.
Urban expansion: -which is synonymous with urban sprawl is extension of the
attentiveness of people of urban settlement to the surrounding area whose function is nonagricultural.
Urban periphery: - is an open countryside including peripheral areas largely
occupied by agriculture communities in which urban settlement expands.
2.3 Livelihood and change of livelihood
The fact that, urbanization process brings about change in the way to human life. The change takes
place in the peri-urban farming communities and on their socio-economic as well as cultural lives of
the people (Argachew, 2008). The loss of agricultural farmland due to urban expansion pushed
peoples out of farm. This phenomenon is directly attributed to change in property rights and food
[10]

securities such phenomenon (landlessness, loss of farmland and grazing land ) made its impact on the
farm livelihoods in the peri-urban areas. This cause to loss of agricultural curatorial livelihood sources
(Roth, 2006).
As summary urban Expansion results in change of property, rights which brings land lessees.
Landlessness is accompanied by loss of agricultural livelihood sources and this result to vulnerable
food security status.
Livelihood: can be defined as the totality of means by which people get over time. Misfield, 2004 and
Leutze, 2006, defined livelihood as the activities, the assets and access that together determine the
living gained by an individual or household. The most frequently used definition of livelihood is
chambers and Conways definition; A livelihood comprises the capability, assets and activities
required for a means of living (chamber and Conway, 2006; cited in CHF, 2008).
All definitions indicate that livelihood is a means of living, which can be achieved through activities
using the available assets. Therefore, livelihood can also be defined as a means of survival, which can
be achieved through the combination of different asset and diversified sources of incomes with
different strategies to get livelihood outputs under certain environment.
Livelihood assets: there are five core assets or capitals which households build their livelihood (IDS,
2000; Corny, 2001; DFID, 2002& 2003). These are:
1. Human capital: represents the skill, knowledge, motivation and ability to work and good health
that to gather enables people to pursue different livelihood strategies.
2. Natural capital: represents the natural resource stock; such as land water forests and minerals, from
which resources flow and services useful for livelihood are derived.
3. Financials capital: denotes the financial resources that people used to achieve their livelihood
objectives/needs. It includes savings. and credits, remittance and other liquid assets.
4. Social capital: refers to the social resources up on which people draw in pursuit of their livelihood
objectives/needs. There are social networks, relationships, shared values, trust and other cultural
practices.
5. Physical capital: comprises the basic infrastructure and producer goods needed to support
livelihoods. These assets are divided in to two: household level assets and community level assets. The
[11]

household level assets include holding of livestock, machineries, farm and off farm equipments, seeds
and fertilizers, etc. the community level asset includes roads, buildings etc.
Livelihood strategies: The term livelihood strategy is used to indicate the range and combination of
activities and choice that people undertake in order to achieve their livelihood objectives (Carney,
2004).
There are different ways of categorizing households livelihood strategies and income sources. Income
sources can be also categorized as those activities that are natural resources based activates and nonnatural resource based activities (Ellis, 2002). Others categorize households income sources as farm
income, off farm incomes, non-farm income and remittance income from migratory labour (scones,
2002).
Livelihood analysis: there question to be asked in any analysis of sustainable livelihood is; in a given
particular context: policy setting, politics, history, agro- ecology and socioeconomic conditions; what
combination of livelihood assets result in the ability to follow and what combination of livelihood
strategy with what outcomes; (IDS, 2000). Livelihood analysis seeks to understand the fact that lie
behind peoples choice of livelihood strategy (DFID, 2002). Livelihood analysis also shows how the
different livelihood strategies of the household relate to each other, it recognizes that poor people
simultaneously undertake a range of different activities and seek to achieve range of livelihood
outcomes (Mass field, 2004).
2.4 Cause of urban expansion to its peri-urban areas
According to Adem Siraji and Mezgebe T/Micheal (2006), the urbanization rate of the Tigray region is
4.7% per year. Natural increase and rural-urban migrations are the main and major causes of rapid
urban growth and /or urban expansion in the region as well as in the country. Free access to
investment, transformation of infrastructure and social services combined with the high population
growth and in some case income growth accelerates the physical and horizontal expansion of urban
centers.
2.4.1 Population growth
a. Natural increase

[12]

In Ethiopia, the natural increase/growth rate is 3.2 % with the total rural population of 83% while 17%
of the populations were urban dwellers and the rate of urban growth was 4.3% (CSA, 2008). A high
population growth rate induces increased in demand for resources and the rate at which these resources
are exploited. In Ethiopia, where technology has not kept pace, the demands for greater productivity,
environmentally and economically friendship productive methods and exploitation of land and
associated resources (forests, animal resources, etc.) are resorted in order to meet immediate needs. As
population increased the demand for land, food, fuel and construction materials increased, resulting in
the practice of reckless tree felling. State ownership of forests and the exclusion of local communities
from the management and legitimate utilization of forest resources may have contributed to the lack of
any consistent effort to replace trees cut for various purposes.
b. Migration
Rural-urban migration: Cities are known to be places where money, services and wealth are
centralized. Capital cities are also, where fortunes are made and where social mobility is possible.
Businesses, which generate jobs and capital, are usually located in such urban areas.
Almost all over the World, ruralurban migration together with the globalization and technological
advancement becoming very dominant, especially in developing countries. Thus, it becomes one of the
major causes for the rapid urban population growth in many urban centers. For instance, in many
developing countries the reasons for this rural-urban migration of peoples are; lack of access to
farmlands, unemployment, degraded productivity, climate changes and needs to change in way of
livings (from rural life to urban).
2.4.2 Income growth
It is clear that as the income of the individuals and cooperative organizations becoming increased these
business owners will preferred to goes to urban centers and to expand their accessibility and to attract
many other additional customers. This is because urban centers are places where all business activities
becoming functional and profitable outcomes. Given that agriculture is a traditional skill and provides
Ethiopia with a more than half of its GDP and 80% of its employment, many city residents came from
a family or place where they participated in farming. In 2000, about 50% of the selected households
had an estimated monthly income greater than that of 70% of the employed population in Addis
Ababa, not including vegetables consumed by the households themselves or cooperative investment
allocations (Tefera, 2007).
[13]

2.4.3 Investment and transformation of infrastructures


In many developing countries urban planning experiences show that, urban planners usually ignores
the resources and lives in the peri-urban areas rather they planned to expand the urban land use pattern
for different public services provision and for capital investments by allowing for few investors by
displacing hundreds of farmer families in the peri-urban areas (Berhe, 2006). Land use regulations
today still follow that same valorization, despite prevailing evidence that producing food within cities
today would solve many looming problems. Governments and planners today tend to systematically
seek firms, residences, or commercial centers that will bring them the monetary return, using the
rationale that the income generated for the city from this sort of land use will provide the most money
for the social services the government provides. Urban centers are places where, there are better basic
services as well as other specialist services that are not found in rural areas. There are more job
opportunities and a greater variety of jobs. Health is another major factor. Other factors include a
greater variety of entertainment (restaurants, movie theaters, theme parks, etc) and a better quality of
education, namely universities. Due to their high populations, urban areas can also have much more
diverse social communities allowing others to find people like them when they might not be able to in
rural areas.
2.4.4 Uneconomic use of urban land
Many research findings reveal that the irrational and uneconomic use of land leads to the problem of
urban sprawl. The expansion of individual dwellings and the provision of extensive farmland to
someone investor is often criticized for its excessive land consumption. Moreover, providing land for
those poor people who do not have the capacity to build more than their own shelter, and similarly for
these who consider themselves as developer/investor would lead to speculation on land (Michelarnaud,
2000). To sum up, it is clear that the population growth, income growth, investment in free ways and
transportation of infrastructure combined with uneconomic use of land leads to spatial expansion of
urban centers to their peri-urban areas (Webster, 2002).
2.5 Impacts of urban expansion on the farmers in the peri-urban area
Long lists of evidences from Ethiopian and abroad scholars stated that, urban expansion has many
positive and negative effects on farmers in the peri-urban areas. Thus, center of market area, center for
production and distribution of goods and services, an opportunity for access to employment are among
the positive effects of urban expansion. The negative consequences of urban expansion are loss of
[14]

prime agricultural farmland, displacement of farm communities, solid waste disposal and land
degradation, enclosing surrounding rural land to urban territory, over exploitation of natural resources
and conflict.
Urban centers have positive role/impact on the development of their surrounding peri- urban areas
through different ways. The following are the major ones:
2.5.1.1 Center of market area
According to Satterthwiate and Tacoli (2004), the surrounding area of urban centers are mostly
engaged in agricultural production either for local consumers or as links to national and export
markets, urban centers act as access to market which is the pre-requisite to increasing rural agricultural
incomes. Proximity also contributes to minimize the risks of perishable products to produce timely to
market areas and to get affordable transportation.
2.5.1.2 Center for production & distribution of goods & services
Tegegn (1998) and other practical activities approved that people who live surrounding urban centers
can have possible access to both private and public services such as health, education, banking, postal
& telephone and services of different professionals (lawyers) and private services like wholesale and
retail, sales of manufactured goods.
2.5.1.3 Access to employment
As to the view of Kamete and Tvedten (2006) assure that people who live around urban centers,
because of their proximity, have a better access to employment and modern way of living than those
who far rural dwellers. Besides, urban centers create employment opportunities through the
development of small and micro enterprises and cooperatives.
2.5.2 Negative impacts or effects of urban expansion
Urbanization has also some negative effects to its surrounding peri-urban areas in different aspects
especially, in relation to displacement of farmers from their farmland and to degradation of valuable
agricultural land. This is because as the nations population increase, cities must grow spatially to their
peri-urban areas to accommodate more people and to serve different services for them. In Ethiopia, the
urbanization was increased from 5% in 1950 to 16% in 2000, on average 4.3% per year. Furthermore,
it is estimated that by 2025, the Worlds, Africans, and Ethiopians population rate will reach 58%,
52%, and 32% respectively (Wabster R.D, 2005).The reason for an optimistic prediction towards the
[15]

urbanization growth is that, it will have the following negative effects of urban expanding on their
peri-urban areas.

2.5.2.1Socio Economic Impacts


Kagnova, et al (2006) point out that land acquision through expropriation and the use of eminent
domain or other regulatory measures often leads to distortion of housing situation, income
community structures, and systems, social network and social services. The distortions are also known
as resettlement loss- a term implying that not only land can be lost in the process but also income
sources and livelihoods.
Other scholars like Dayong (2004) stated that the farmers in the peri- urban area have no other income
sources rather than the farmland. It is the base of their livelihood because farmland is their
unemployment insurance to relying. The farmers who lose their farmland will become totally
unemployed. This because their income stop there immediately at the time of farm land occupation
since land is the only sources of their income
2.5.2.2 Loss of farmland
As pointed out by Dayong (2004) uneven urban expansion will occupy considerable valuable farmland
around urban centers, which causes to sensitive contradiction and conflicts with the farmers who are
displaced from their farmland. Urbanization negatively affects the peri-urban areas in different ways.
As urban centers, expand by occupying fertile farmland, and displacing farmers cause to reduce the
amount of production and number of family farmers and move to the nearby urban centers. In
Ethiopia, land taking by regional governmental for expansion of cities and towns is raising rapidly
because urbanization leads to outward expansion of cities and results to change in land use and
landscape where by the federal and regional agencies and the municipality are expropriating of
agriculture land for public purposes. In addition, the federal law on rural land expropriation and
compensation, have been crafted by the agencies that are taking land seem to disfavour that are losing
the land (Solomon, 2006). As a result, the farmers with their large family size will be exposed to
unemployment and poverty (food insecure) for the reason that they are not well educated and skilled
rather depending on their agricultural production. It is understood that, people without basic
qualification or literally skilled are unable to compete and get job in the labour market.

[16]

2.5.2.3 Unjust Compensation


As mentioned above, in international law, expropriation is lawful based on justifiable ground and
subject to just compensation in advance, it defines just compensation in line with the Hull formula
initiated by Cordell Hull in 1938. This formula requires that compensation must be prompt, adequate
and effective. This means, it should reflect the full value of the expropriated property. Besides, it
must be handed over within a reasonable period after the expropriation. However, if the government or
the competent authority has failed to do so base on standards, interest should be paid (Treeger 2004).
2.5.2.4 Enclosed surrounding villages to urban territory
Tostenen and Tvedten (2002) stated that expansion is one of the causes/effect of population growth of
urban centers. According to them, about 10-15% percent of urban growth of the developing world
stems from boundary expansion or change while their livelihood style is based on agriculture which is
not the core issue of the urban centers administration unit.
2.5.2.5 Over-exploitation of natural resources
According to Mc Granahan, Satterthwaite and Tacoli (2004), rapid urbanization leads to over
exploitation of renewable and non-renewable resources of their peri-urban areas (especially,land).
Because people who live in urban areas have vary and different consumption pattern than these who
live in the peri-urban areas. The demands made by urban centers greatly exceed the carrying capacity
of their own territory. Urban centers, in view of; Kamete, Tostenen and Tvedten (2002), take up 2% of
the earths surface but consumes 75% of the worlds resources. They draw on the material resources of
vast and scattered peri-urban areas and are dependent on the skin capacity of the environment to
a degree, which greatly exceeds the immediate area. This results over exploitation of resources of the
peri-urban areas and finally degradation and environmental pollution.
As noted above, the worlds resource use is concentrated in urban centers. Urban consumers account
for most consumption of fire wood, charcoal, construction materials and land for urban expansion and
infrastructure provision which leads to the depletion of rural-based natural resources such as farmland,
forests, wildlife and quarry sites, hen often results irreversible damage to the human environment (Mc
Granahan, Satterthwaite and Tacoli, 2004)
2.5.2.6 Urban expansion causes conflict
According to Tegegn G/Egziabeher and Danial Solomon (2006), currently urbanization causes for
enormous conflicts associated with land acquisition. The most sources of conflict are found at the
[17]

borders of the urban and rural, common and private, smallholder and investors land. In Ethiopia, the
peri-urban land use is changing rapidly from rural agricultural use to other urban activities such as
industry, commerce, housing, infrastructure and other services. Thus, transferring of the farmlands
from rural to urban land use is increasing from time to time through land acquisition. Such kind of
transfer has been the sources of an increasing numbers of land conflicts (Kanji, 2005). For example, in
Mekelle, the farmlands of the peri-urban area are rapidly converted to urban land use. Mekelle
municipality decided to include some rural areas in to urban formally while, still some rural farmlands
was transferred to individuals investors for different activities without just compensation to the
farmers though they have lost their livelihoods (Berhe, 2006).
Expropriation: means the action of government taking away a private property from its own with
legal authority (proclamation no 455/2005). The key element conditioning the acceptability of
expropriation is the purpose for taking over private property. The basic criteria justifying
adminstration of expropriation has been and still is the public purpose or public interest.
Eminent domain: the right/the inherent power for the government to take/seize of a citizens private
real or personal property expropriate property or rights in property without the owners consent, the
property is taken either for government use or by delegation to third parties who will devote it to
public use. The most common uses of property taken by eminent domain are public utilities, high
ways and railroad. Some states require that the government body offer to purchase the property before
restoring to the use of eminent domain (Wikipedia, 2008).
Public purpose/ public interest according to the definition made in expropriation of land holding for
public interest and payment of compensation proclamation no 415/ 2005, public interest is the use of
land defined as such by the decision of the appropriate body in conformity with urban structural plan
in order to ensure the interest of the people to acquire direct or indirect benefit from the use of
Particular land. Public purpose must serve execution of takes of the state or of local government and
not of a private entity. The authority conducting exportation is indebted to specify precisely the
purpose of expropriation on the ground of concrete legal provision.
Compensation: According to proclamation No 455/2005, compensation is a means of payment for the
property that is expropriated by the respective exiting body of the government both either in cash or in
kind. The process of compensation for the evicted households should include all forms of asset
[18]

ownership or use right among the affected population and provides a detailed strategy for partial or
complete loss of their assets (Kagnora, et al 2006).
There are two types of compensation methods in land acquisition theses are land to land and cash
compensation. In land to land compensation the new land should be equivalent or superior in
production than the former it should be provided free of any transaction cost as well as should be
prepared and made accessible for production (kagnova, et al 2006)
In situation where the affected households prefer cash compensation payment should be calculated
according the following principals
The rate should be calculated in consultation with representative from the affected population
to ensure its fairness
compensation for land crops tree and other improvements should be sufficient to enable
affected people to reform their livelihood
Compensation for structure should cover full replacement cost
Payment should be made before any requisition of assists or physical resettlement takes places
The compensation should not be subjected to local currency fluctuation and inflation
(kaganova, et al 2006)

[19]

CHAPTER THREE
3. Methodology of the Study
This section of the study shows details of the description of the study area, research design, source of
data and data collection techniques, sample size and sample techniques method, as well as how the
data collected, interpreted and analysed.

3.1 Description of the Study area


The researcher chose the study area, Shire Endaslassie, as the research site because it is one of the
urban built-area expansions in our region and the researcher had enough background of the area, and
was grown there. Moreover, the town is one of the rapidly urban growing towns in Tigray National
Regional State in economic, social development due to the increase in private sector investment,
increase government investment and expenditure in social service and infrastructure, its geographical
location for a central sit of zone administration, and increase the dwelling of business in trade
activities.
The population of the town is growing from time to time as result of the variables such as
birth, migration and emigration. The fast population growth has an implication in the socio economic
condition of the town. Rapid population growth is affected to the peri-urban areas in different ways.
As urban centers expand by occupying fertile farmland and displacing farmers, the amount of
production were reduced and number of household families moved to the nearby urban centers.
Table 3-1: The total population of Shire Endaslassie town from 1999 E.C- 2008 E.C
R.No. Year
Male
Female
1
1999
21,205
24,786
2
2000
23,051
26,793
3
2001
23,639
27,477
4
2002
24,243
28,179
5
2003
24,862
28,899
6
2004
25,497
29,637
7
2005
26,148
30,394
8
2006
32,406
34,765
9
2007
34,161
36,592
10
2008
35,970
38,533
Source: Adopted from Shire office of Plan and Finance, 2016
[20]

Total
48,603
49,844
51,116
52,422
53,761
55,134
56,542
67,171
70,753
74,503

3.1.1. Location and Shape


Shire-Endaslassie is a town and separate Woreda, and served as administrative center of the Northwestern Zone of Tigray region in northern Ethiopia. The town is located 304 km far from the regional
capital city of Mekelle, and 1084 km from Addis Ababa. It has a latitude 146N 3817E

and

14.100N 38.283E longitude with an altitude of 1953 meters above sea level. The majority of the
inhabitants follow Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity, with 85.11% reporting that as their religion, while
14.67% of the population are Muslim. Currently the town has five/5/ urban Kebeles administration and
19 sub-Kebeles. However, during its establishment since 1928 E.C it has one Kebele and a subKebele. Currently, the town has an area of 1,757.46 hectares, 60.7% of the area is built-up area.
The town is one of the rapidly growing towns in Tigray national regional state in economic and social
development. The main reasons are increase in private sector investment and increase of government
investment and expenditure in social service and infrastructure. In addition, the town is a central sit of
zone administration. Its geographical location is hub for road transportation in three direction
networked with Gondar, Humera, and Mekelle. Accordingly, in the town there is an increase in the
number of dwelling of doing business; among them people engaged in trade are 7000, investors
engaged in service and manufacturing activities 176 and their capital is around 1.53 billion. These
business owners created job opportunity for 5665 people in permanent and temporary.
The infrastructure of the town like access of electricity, telephone , road cobblestone , and pure water
supply, and drainage. Construction is growing from time to time especially expansion of roads in the
town has reached 138.6 k.m; from this 28.14 k.m cobblestone, 15.20 asphalt and the remain sand and
soil road. Its urban economic structure is classified into various sectors, among which commercial and
trade activities are mainly concentrated in the central part of the city, around the bus station and
around the market. Following this, more than 21 private and governmental banks are available there.
And in the city there are different public service delivery offices among them Shire-Endasslassie
Revenue Development Office is one of the public sector in the city administration providing tax
administration service, its tax collection capacity has been developed from year to year. Accordingly
121,389,286.51 birr in 2007E.C revenue collected and this revenue was used for the infrastructural
development of the city administration.

[21]

3.1.2. Topography and Drainage


The town Shire Endaslassei is found on a site with flat topography. Elevation with in the town Ranges
between 1984 M.a.s.l (meter above sea level) around Abune-Argawi Church and 2126 M.a.s.l around
Adie Kent bay hill. The town has no principal river. However, there are gullies and collected water
from Mt. May Umute in the north, Adimollokaks in the west and Adikentibay in the south drives in to
two directions to wards of Gimolo and End abate Rivers. At this time the town of Shire Endaslassei
has about 32.919 km long drainage.

Figure 1 Location of the study area


Source: Adopted from Shire office of Plan and Finance, 2016

[22]

3.2 Research Design


The researcher used descriptive research design. The choice of this research design in this study is
mainly because of the nature of the research problem and research objectives. This design helps
getting relevant and accurate information about the problem (Kothari, 2004) and this method was
chosen for its low cost, its suitability to observe several cases and it helps to summarize large body of
data(Yalow Endaweke,2011). It comprises both quantitative and qualitative research approaches.
According to Slee et al. (2006) cited in Berhanu (2014) quantitative and qualitative research approach
can be used symbolically to avoid the limitation of using a single approach. Thus, the quantitative
approach was employed in order to quantify the results. On the other hand, the qualitative approach is
important to collect and analyze data that were obtained through interview with the key informants.
3.3 Source of Data and Data collection Techniques
3.3.1 Data source
The data for this study were collected from both primary and secondary data sources. These are:

Primary sources: these sources of data were collected from the primary sources of data,
which
includes open ended and close ended questionnaires, structured/semi-structured interviews
Key informants interview and focus group discussions, field observation

with the

displaced farmers and municipality officials kebele administrators and communities


leaders about urban expansion.

Secondary sources: the secondary sources of data were also collected from
different
Secondary data sources such as municipality Kebele report documents of Shire town,
various registers and Publications (like books, journals, research reports and papers,
magazines,) , documents available on different profiles on world wide web site

and

others like, and land use regulations and government policy document.
3.3.2 Data Collection Techniques
In order to acquire the relevant information, the researcher used different models of data collection
tools. These are personal field observation on the field site survey, distributing both type
questionnaires (i.e. open ended and close ended), semi-structured interviews (in the form of
[23]

questionnaire) and finally, focus group discussion (municipality employees, keblel managers/leaders )
using as tools to collect primary sources of data.
3.3.2.1 Questionnaires
To capture the intended information from the given (140-sample) representative samples of farmers in
the peri-urban areas, questionnaires were organized under three different issues. These are the
background and farmland sizes of displaced farmer respondents, issues of compensation &
compliances and finally concerning the socio- economic impacts and changes/challenges on their
livelihood and their survival mechanisms. On the other side, questionnaires were also developed for
the (samples) urban municipality administrative officials (to concerning body) about the legal issues of
land property rights & compensation and their reality/practical implementations.
3.3.2.2 Key Informant Interviews
For the sake of in depth understanding of historical trend (pre and post urban expansion) of the rural
life and the current invasion of urban expansion brings some changes and challenges (vulnerability
and food insecurity) induced/perceived change in the crop production of the rural livelihood in the
study areas. The researcher conducted interview with selected kebele previous and current
administrators, influential elders and/or informal leaders, Woreda land administration and land
management officers and finally, with Kebele development agents.
3.3.2.3 Focus Group Discussions (FGD)
Generally, the researcher of this study employed one focus group discussion during the study. Onegroup discussion was held with 5-8 members in the group discussion. The FGD members were
identified from influential elders and leaders purposively based on their approaches and knowhow to
the loss of farmlands, expropriation and compensation systems. The aim of the discussion is to assess
the major impacts of urban expansion, changes in the farm livelihood and the relationship of farmland
size and food security and finally to identify the farmers adaptation mechanisms.
3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Techniques
Kothari (2010,p.55,153) defines the term Universe as a total of the items or units in any field of
inquiry, whereas the term population refers to the total of items about which information is desired.
When field studies are undertaken in practical life, considerations of time and cost almost invariably
lead to a selection of respondents i.e., selection of only a few items. The selected respondents should
[24]

be a representative of the total population as much as possible to produce a smaller size cross-section.
The selected respondents constitute what is technically called a sample and the selection process is
called sampling technique.
The population for this study comprises farm communities which are affected by the urban expansion
in the peri-urban area in the years between 2007EC-2008EC around Shire town from different
directions that is a total population of 560 farm households. The sample sizes of this study was
determined by the researchers own judgment (using systematic random sampling) that is by taking
25% (140) of the total target population and by considering cost and time as well as other factors in
order to manage the data properly.
After the sample size determination, the next step was the sampling technique for selecting the sample
population. Based on the representative basis, systematic random sampling method was employed to
select the sample elements within the target population in the study.
Thus, the total target population size for the study as mentioned above is 560. Therefore,
based on the following formula, the sampling interval was determined to form the sampling
frame for simple random sampling, 93% Confidence level and 7% precision level are used
at criteria. To determine and calculate the sample size would be used with the following
scientific formula drawn by:
Yamane (1967) formula:

N
1 + Ne2

Where:
n- is desired sample size
N-is target population of the study
e- is margin of error

460
= 140
1 + 460(0.07)2

[25]

4.5 Data Analysis and Interpretation


Primarily data collected from sampled household was processed and analyzed by
using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version (20) Software and
Microsoft excel program prior to analysis; completed questionnaires were coded, inputted
and organized. A coding system of some variables was already prepared at the time
of the questionnaire design. After the completion of coding, all valid questionnaires
were inputted in a coherent format of SPSS database.
Finally, during data analysis and interpretation, the researcher collected the data from different sources
organized into meaningful facts and detail explanation was made. This is to mean that, the data was
analyze through both quantitatively and qualitatively interpretations.
Quantitative data analysis: Data was analysed through the frequency distribution tables and using of
relative measures, such as percentages, which includes the mean. Tables, bar Charts and graphs were
used to present different variables, and to analyse the collected data the researcher used the application
of (SPSS) version (20) software.
Qualitative data analysis: the data collected from various sources were analysed by a detail
description according to the pattern and themes that emerge during interviews and focus group
discussions through identification of key concepts and indigenous categories from the respondents.

[26]

CHAPTER FOUR
4. PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data gathered from Displaced
Farmers, Municipality land use and administration, kebele leaders and influential ilders. Through
questionnaires, interview, focus group discussion (FGD) and document analysis. The analysis part
consists of two parts. The first part deals with the description of characteristics of the respondents. The
second part is concerned with presentation and analysis of data related to the impact of urban built up
area expansion on the livelihood of farm households on the peri urban area in Shire Endaslassei
Northwestern zone of Tigrai Regional state. Tables, pie chart and graphs are used to show the
frequency & percentage of each type of response.
4- Demographic Characteristics of respondents
Table 4-1: Respondents by sex, age and family size
Frequency

Sex

Age

Male
Female
Total
18-30
31-40
41-50
51=60
Above 61
Total

128
12
140
4
27
51
48
10
140

Percent

91.4
8.6
100
2.9
19.3
36.4
34.3
7.1
100

Total family size


Frequency

Percent

236
405
641

36.8
63.2
100

Source; field survey, 2016

From table 4.1 item one, the majority of the respondents, which account 91.4 percent, are males and
the remaining 8.6 percent are female. On the same table regarding the family size, 63.2 percent are
female household family and the remaining 36.8 percent are male household.
With regard to age, table one item two 36.4, 34.3,19.3 and 7.1 percent are found at the age group of
41-50, 51-60,31-40 and above 60 respectively. Moreover, the remaining 2.9 percent are found at the
age group of 18-30.
[27]

Table 4-2: Respondents Marital status and Educational level


1

Item
Marital status

Educational level

Single

Frequency
2

Percent
1.4

Married
Divorce
Widow
Total
Illiterate
Can read & write
Grade 1-4
Grade 5-8
Grade 9-12
Certificate
Diploma & above
Total

119
11
8
140
37
53
37
9
4
140

85
7.9
5.7
100
26.4
37.9
26.4
6.4
2.9
100

Source; field survey, 2016


Table4.2 shows the marital status of respondents. The majority of the respondents, which account 85
percent, are married and the remaining 7.9, 5.7 and 1.4 are divorced widow and single respectively.
Regarding respondents educational level, the majority of the respondents which accounts are 37.9 and
26.4 are can read, and write, and illiterate respectively. The remaining that accounts 26.4, 6.4 and 2.9
are grade 1-4 , grade 5-8 and grade 9-12 respectively.
4.1 Data in relation to eviction from land due to urban expansion

Table 4-3: Data regarding respondents evicted from land due to urban expansion
Item

Responses

Have you lost your farmland due to


urban expansion?

If the answer for question number 1 is


yes, how many hector you lost for urban
expansion?
.

[28]

Frequency

Yes

140

Percen
t
100

No

total

140

100

Below 0.5 hector

29

20.7

0.5- 1hector

95

67.9

1-3 hector

16

11.4

Above 3hector

Total
3

140

100

When did your farmland was taken away 2005-2007


15
10.7
for urban expansion use?
2008-2010
25
17.9
2011-2013
38
27.1
2014-2016
62
44.3
Total
140
100
What type of land did you lost due to
Agricultural land
95
67.9
urban expansion
Residential land
29
20.9
Grass land
16
11.4
Total
140
100
Did the loose of plot of land affects on
Yes
140
100
yearly production
No
Total
140
100
What is the total yearly amount production that decrease due to loss of your agricultural
land interns of quintal and birr
Production
Frequency Percent
in quintal
1-5
38
27.1
5-10
82
58.6
10-15
16
11.4
15-20
3
2.1
>20
1
.7
Total
140
100
What other assets affected you due to
displacement from your agricultural land?
Specify in number

What type of social services previously


did not accessed before displacement?
(you can chose more than two options)

[29]

Price in birr

Transport
Electricity
Water supply
Telephone

Frequenc
y
41
57
32
6
4
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
Frequenc
y
-

Perce
nt
29.3
40.7
22.9
4.3
2.9
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
perce
nt
-

Credit service
School

140
140

100
100

Health center

140

100

1000-5000
5000-10000
10000-15000
15000-20000
>|20000
Total
oxen
cows
sheep
goats
Donkeys
Tree plant
Hourses
Total
Responses

Do you have access of social services


after displacement?

10

What type of social services you have


accessed?

Total

140

100

Yes

140

100

No

Total
Transport
Electricity
Water supply
Telephone
Credit service
School
Health center
Market
Total

140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

Source; field survey, 2016

Table 4.3 item No 1shows all respondents of evicted from land due to urban expansion which
accounts 100 percent are lost their farmland.
As shown table 4. 3 item No 2 95 percent of sample household lost their agricultural land size due to
urban expansion from 0.5-1 hectare and the remain 29 and 16 percent are lost their farmland size
below o.5 and 1-3 hectare respectively.

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2005-2007G.C

2008-2010G.C

2011-2013G.C

Figure 2: Annually number of displaced farmers


[30]

2014-2016G.C

In the same table 4. 3 item No 3 and the above bar chart shown from 2014-2016 62(44.3) percent of
the respondents was taken their farmland due to urban built up area expansion while 38(27.1),
25(17.9) and 15(10.7) percent of sample household lost their farmland at the time of 2011-2013, 20082010 and 2005-2007 respectively.
As shown from the above table 4.3 item No 4 from the total sample household displaced the total land
lost, agricultural land holds the highest which account 67.9 percent. Agricultural land includes crops
land, cash crops and vegetable plots. Residential land is the land farmers hold for the purpose of
residence, which comprises houses, trees and various type of farmers asset. It accounts 20.9 percent
and grassland is the land, which farmers in the area use for grazing their livestock. This type of land
take the lower share from the total land lost which account 11.4 percent .From this it is possible to
conclude that expansion of the town marginalize a large amount of farm land in which most peri-urban
farmers build their livelihood. There for the high percentage of households (69.9) percent lost their
farmland for which the highly depend their lively hood and which intern has negative impact on
agricultural production in order to attain food security in the area.
As identifying, (Aregachew, 2008), urbanization process brings about change in the way to human
life. The change takes place in the peri-urban farming communities and on their socio-economic as
well as cultural lives of the people. The loss of agricultural farmland due to urban built up area
expansion pushed people out of farm. This phenomenon is directly attributed to change in property
rights and food securities such events (landlessness, loss of production, loss of farm land, grazing land
and Livestock) made its impact on the farm livelihoods in the peri urban areas. This cause to loss of
agriculture curatorial livelihood sources (Roth, 2006).

[31]

70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
1-5 Quintal

5-10 Qunital
58.6%

10-15Quintal

15-20Quintal

>20 Quintal

Figure 3: Annually amount of production


As shown clearly in table 4. 3 item No 5&6 and on the bar chart the respondents of all displaced
farmers lost their farm land was affect on yearly production due to the urban expansion. Not only this
but also decrease the total amount of yearly production in terms of quintal and birr as shown on the
above table 82 percent produced from 5- 10 quintal and 38, 16 and, 3 percent obtained from 1-5, 1015, and 15-20 quintal respectively and the remain 1 percent is obtained above 20 quintal from crop
production specially consumer food like teff, maize, and bean etc were provide from agricultural
farmland. This shown income obtained from crop production, vegetable and grass land.
However, as the town expand more and more, the fertile farmland become converted to residential
house development this condition has now brought about less provision of food to the urban
residences.
Therefore, the town urban built- up area expansion has negative impact for the peri-urban farmers by
loss of agricultural farmland. To gets this information, retrospective data collection method was used
where respondents were asked to provide present information and remember their previous income
from their land lost in current price.
As shown on the above, table a large share of sample household 40.7 percent of lost yearly income
between 10000-20000 birr in relation to displacement from their land.
[32]

According ( DFDI, 2008), Crop production continues to provide a significant source of subsistence
both as a major and supplementary source of income for the farmers on the peri-urban area of Shire
town. The majority of farmers who highly depend on crop production are those who live in more parts
that are rural and fewer of them located in intermediate and urban locations. This is because of greater
magnitude of landless and land loss with increasing proximity to Shire town.
The main reason for the continued significance of crop farming in the area in spite of reduction in
farmland includes the fact that crop farming has traditionally been the mainstay of the community. On
the other hand, the study on the peri-urban interface of Kumasi in Ghana, indicated that crop farming
remains practiced widely in the area because it requires low start-up capital compared to non-farm
activities such as trading. Moreover, lack of awareness of the risks and benefits arising from new nonfarm activities is also one of the reasons for the reluctance of poor people to venture into unfamiliar
non-farm activities. Most farmers on peri-urban areas of Shire town are subsistence in that production
they obtained from agriculture often spends on consumption. Due to urban built-up areal expansion of
the town, available land for agriculture was fragmented where production from agriculture is
decreasing from year to year. Average land holding size of sample household is the lowest to survive
their life. Hence, some households are employed in daily labour and other income earning activities to
compliment their agricultural income. However, old age farmers are still highly either depend on
farmland by renting or enter share copping to other farmers who has the capacity to farm and take the
share of the produce from their land.
On the above, table 4.3 item No 7 clearly shown that evicted from farm land due to urban expansion
has brought a lot of social economic problems in to the lives of the displaced farming households. Of
the entire total sample size (140 sample size), completely have lost property that they have
accumulated before they have been displaced from their land. These were includes oxen, cows, sheep,
goats, tree plants, Donkeys, Poultry production, and Haney bee. The loss of such properties has
seriously harmed their economic situation since they were the prominent income earning sources to
peri-urban area farmers. In addition, all sample respondents as shown on the above table previous
assets that have direct relationship with the size of land holding were decreased.
Regarding,( Chamber and Conway,2006) Other assets in this study include livestock such as Oxen,
Cows, Sheep, Goats, Donkeys, Horses, poultry production, etc which have a great role for farmers in
order to construct their livelihood. On the other hand, assets such as trees, houses, and various
[33]

materials that provide farmers for carrying out traditional agricultural activities are lost due to
agricultural land fragmentation. As some of the sampled farmers explained during interview, previous
assets that have direct relationship with the size of land holding were decreased. For instance, the
numbers of livestock were declined due to shortage of grassland. Particularly, the size agricultural
oxen were decline due to decline of farmlands. Moreover, those farmers who lost their residential land
lost their trees, houses, and other property on the land. However, even though these assets have a
direct relationship with land lost, it does not take critically in to consideration during the valuation of
compensation. During survey, some of the respondent complained that valuation of compensation for
removed assets on the land was not based on the current price in the market. Therefore, expansion of
the town has various consequences on farmers assets beyond marginalizing agricultural land in the
area.
With regard to the study area, all farmers in peri-urban area particularly those who located near by the
town have the access social services such as school, health service, and credit service only before
displaced. While, after displaced all farmers have access to social services, such as Transport,
Electricity, pure water, Telephone, credit services, school and health services. Moreover, easy access
to nearly urban market in one of the main economic advantage for peri urban farmers in order to save
the agricultural with sound price. More ever, the location of various types of institution such as Banks
and saving credit facility in the peri urban area create additional opportunity for the farmers to strength
their economic base.
One of the positive sides of peri-urbanisms is linked with proximity of area for strong urban influence
such as access to markets, social services and urban job opportunity. However, lack of wage
opportunities, limited access to investment funds, poor levels of education and declining access to
natural resources restrict the ability of the poor community to accumulate savings and easily access
these infrastructures.

[34]

4.3 Economical assessment of displaced household

Table 4-4: Economical impact on the lively hood of displaced


Rol
Nol
1

item

Responses

Freque
ncy
140
140
Freque
ncy
140
140
140
140
Freque
ncy
110
18

percent

Have you shifted your previous


occupation due to the town
expansion
If your answer for question No 1 is
yes, what were your previous
occupation and your current
occupation income earning
activities?

Yes
No
Total
Previous Occupation

Driving Bajaj
Total
Due to reduction in production
from current land size
Present occupation is pleasant and
higher in payment than previous
one
Total
Yes
No
Total

12
140
140

8.6
100
100

140
140
140

100
100
100

Local Agriculture
Sales of grass
Engaged in driving vehicle or Bajaj
Daily labor in construction
Permanent employment in
Guarding in government &private
or NGO
Food aid
Sales of tree
Sales of stone
Total

12
98
18

8.6
70
12.9

12

8.6

140

100

Agriculture
Livestock
Vegetables
Total
Current Occupation
Daily labor
Permanent Employment

What are the reasons that forced to


change your previous income earning
activities?

Did you have income source on off


farm activities other than farming
after you lost your farmland for
urban expansion?
If your answer is yes for question No
4, please mention currently the
number of engaged farmer from the
additional source of non-farm land
activities after eviction.

100
100
percent
100
100
100
100
percent
78.6
12.9

Source; fieldsurvey,2016
As shown in the above table 4.4 all respondents are shifted their previous occupation due to urban
built up area expansion. With regard to previous occupation their source of income of the displaced
[35]

farmers are engage on agriculture, livestock and vegetables. While, the current occupation of the
displaced farmers account 70 percent in daily labor employment after their land, 12.9 percent
Permanent employment in Guarding in government &private or NGO The remain 8.6 and8.6 percent
are in Sales of tree and driving Bajaj.
Currently the displaced farmers their source of income from off farm activities other than farming after
you lost their farmland for urban expansion. There existed a lot reasons for displaced farming
households to become participated on daily labor employment after their land has been expropriated.
Daily labor is the dominant employment categories that the people in the area widely participate and
earn their livelihood because of lack of skill, lack of education, and lack of another job opportunity.
Hence, 90 displaced farming households 70 percent of the sample households do not have any
permanent source of income for their livelihood. Rather they are struggling/trying to survive by
engaging in daily laborers with minimum monthly income/wage. On the contrary 18 displaced farming
households 12.9 percent permanent employment, 12 displaced farming households 8.6and 8.6 percent
respectively their income source from sales of tree and driving Bajaj.
As pointed out by Daylong, (2004) farmers have no more other sources of incomes other
than their farmland. For this reason, many farm households (farmers) who have lost their
farmlands were become totally unemployed. According to him, in most developing
countries, there is no yet a social security system for farmers who displaced from their
farmlands.
4.4 Social impacts of displaced household
Because of the towns expansion, social problems like unsafe life condition, family breakdown and
homelessness all have deep-rooted social problems. The social impacts of the displaced farming
household have been summarized in the following table.

Table 4-5: social impacts of the displaced farming households


Displaced to town

Social problems
yes
37

percent

yes
140
100

No
-

total
140
100

No

Security problems
10
7.14
[36]

103
Family breakdown
20
14.28

total
140
Home less
7
5

Regarding social problems, from the total(140) Respondents 7.14 percent faced . security
problems, 14.28 percent occurred family and 5 percent become home less . the remaining
73.58 percent of the respondents are not faced social, family

breakdown as well as

homelessness. The finding of this study clearly depict that the social profile of peri-urban
farmers were not full of choas and insecure because of the towns expansion
4.5.1. Assessment of urban expansion on socio- interaction aspects of the community
The information gathered from focus group discussions further indicated that the social
Interactions of the displaced farming communities with their respective neighbours at new
residence area is not as smooth as before. Particularly, households who are now settled in
the urban area do not have healthy relationship with previous urban settlers. This is due to
the fact that new settlers do not need to completely lose their domestic animals like cattle,
equines, sheep and others while old residents of the Town do not have these assets due to
limited land for grazing and limited class rooms for breeding.
.4.5 Regarding the compensation package of displacement

Table 4-6: Regarding compensation the displaced farmers


Rol
Nol
1

item

Responses

Frequency

percent

Have you obtained the benefit


package due to the loose of
your land?

Yes
No
Total

140
140

100
100

If the answer for question No


16 is yes in what kind were
you compensated?

In monetary term
Alternative land for
housing
Training to develop skill

92
48

65.7
34.3

Total
Very low
low
moderate
high

140
54
74
12
-

100
38.6
52.9
8.6
-

Very high
Total

140

100

What is your reaction on the


amount and kind of benefit
package allotted to you?

[37]

In which of these skill acquired


training did you have
participate?

Could the compensation


packages you obtained were
enough to support your
livelihood in sustainable base?

Own business
development,
management and
supervision
Financial management /
saving
Basic skill training

Technical training for


livelihood means
Total
Yes
No
Total

140
140

100
100

Source; fieldsurvey, 2016


Table 4.5 clearly shows that all displaced farmers have obtained the compensation package due to the
loose of your land. Nevertheless, the amount of compensation paid to those displaced farming
households not enough.

On the above, table 4.4 Roll No 2 the displaced farmers compensated due to loose of your land. 92 of
them (65.7%) compensated in cash (monetary term). The remain 48 of them (34.3) compensated for
residence land in urban area.
Rate of companssion

8.60%
38.60%
Very Low
Low
52.90%

Moderate

Figure 4: Rate t of compassion


[38]

And the amount of compensation not enough as the above table 4.4 Roll No 3 shows from the total
sample size (140 farmers), about 74 of them (52.9%) have not received enough money for the farm
land they have lost. About 54 farmers (38.6%) also received a sever compensation. The money what
they have produced was very low especially what they have produced on that land for many years no
properly taken in to consideration during expropriation. The remain 12 farmers (8.6%) somehow
amount of compensation.
The displaced farmers did not get any skill development training and appropriate place of work. So,
from the total sample size 140 displaced farmers (100%) were the compensation package you obtained
were not enough to support your livelihood in sustainable base.
Therefore, irrational or unjust compensation was a severe problem to the displaced farming
households. Those farmers, who have lost their farmland not properly compensated particularly the
amount of money allocated not proportional to the farmland as well as the property that existed on the
land. The following above table clearly shows the profile of unjust compensation that practiced in
Shire Endaselassie municipality.
In the focal group desiccation (FDG) many questions have raised specially regarding the compensation
process because, The Federal Constitution of Ethiopia under Article 40(1) and 40(8) states the
farmers who hold farmland have the right not to be displaced without just compensation from their
land. In addition to this Article 44(2) provides that all persons who have been adversely affected as a
result of state programs have the right to commensurate monetary or alternative means of
compensation, including relocation with adequate State assistance. Nevertheless, in Shire- Endaselssie
municipality, this rules and regulations not properly implemented since many farmers have a complain
on the procedural requirements of expropriation and compensation.
The Ethiopian civil code under Article (Art 1463-1473) and Proclamation No. 455/2005 also provide
the mandatory legal procedures of expropriation starting from declaration of public interest to payment
of just composition. Shire- Endaselssie administrative town, however did not seem to have
implemented the supreme law of the land as well as the subordinate law properly. As a result, there
seem to have been some household together with their families that have been displaced from their
farmland with insufficient compensations.
Moreover, the fertility statuses of a land are not taken in to consideration in any urban expansion plan.
The compensation decision process is not participatory and land fertility status are not considering in
valuing it for compensation. The city administrations are leasing many farmlands at a good price but
the farm communities are not benefiting from the increasing price of the leasing land. It is clearly that
the land security issue of the country is very low. Farmers do not have any power in protecting their
land from any action by government. In the compensation decision process the family size of the
households are not considering. This has risked many farmers for food problems, which their family
size is large. Many farmers are under a risk of displacement. The decision process of displacement is
not participatory.
[39]

4.5 Regarding the Local Government intervention support made after eviction

Table 4-7: concerning the intervention and support given by the local government
Rol item
Responses
Frequency
Nol
1
Is there any support made by Yes
140
municipality administration
No
after eviction?
Total
140
2
No

If the answer for question 1 is yes, please rate or level the participation as follows
Type intervention
Very
%
low %
moderate %
High %
low
1
Informing before
eviction
2
Compensation of
54
38..6 74 52.9 12
8.6
money
3
Compensation of land
92
65.7 for agriculture
4
Compensation of plots 48 34.3 for housing
5
How to use the
140
100 compensation money
6
Training on
140
100 entrepreneurship skill
for income
diversification in non
farm activities
7
Networking with
140
100 saving and credit
establishment for loan
8
Support on expansion
140
100 of urban agriculture
9
Expert support for
140
100 following up
10 Safety net for food
140
100 support
Total
Source; field survey, 2016

percent
100
100

Very High
-

As demonstrated the above table 4.6 after eviction, the local government support to add to the value of
money and any other opportunity was completely absent. From the total sample, size all of them 140
(100%) were not able to gain local government support to add the value of money. Therefore, the
study has founded that the impact of urban built up area expansion of shire town has negatively
[40]

Hig

stricken the peri-urban farmers on the fringe by the loss of their land as well as their property through
unjust compensation.
By supporting this research, finding (Treeger 2004) has informed that compensation must be
prompting adequate and effective. This means it should reflect the value of the expropriated property.
Besides, it must be handed over within a reasonable period after expropriation. However, if the
government or the competent authority has failed to do so base on standards, interest should be paid.
During the interview Most of the farmers who lost their land and new settlers, complained about low
compensation and lack of other economic options to make a living. According to the respondents, prior
to displaced, people from the government bodies came and convinced to the people by telling them as
there are various compensation packages provided for the land lost. These include employment
creation and skill development and other opportunity. They told them as skill development is provide
for them by organizing them and provision of appropriate working place and made favourable
conditions to employ in investment activities in the areas. However, the respondents who lost their
land complained that they did not get any training and working place so that to recruit themselves. At
last, people from local government bodies came to the area and order them not to cultivate the land.
During interview, some respondents complained that even the time for preparedness was not giving to
them. However, in some cases orientation people have given regarding the way to utilize cash
compensation from urban administration.
4.6 Exacerbation of conflicts

Table 4-8: Frequency of farmers complains or conflicts on practical implementations of rules


and regulations
Government body that received complain

Farmers who have complained


Frequency

percent

Valid percent

Municipality/woreda administration
Zone administration
Regional administration
Federal goverment

124
12
4
-

88.6
8.6
2.9
-

88.6
8.6
2.9
-

Cumulative
percent
88.6
97.1
100
-

Total

140

100

100

Source; field survey, 2016


[41]

The above table 4.7 depicts that, the displaced farming households were complaining during
expropriation as well as the compensation paid to them. About 124 farmers (88.6) have complained to
the municipality or woreda administration, the rest 12 farmers (8.6%) have brought their complain to
the zone administration and the remain 4 farmers (2.9%) have complained to the regional
administration. There is a serious conflict between the municipality and the farmers who have been
displaced from their farmland.
These displaced farming household were rising complain to the different levels of government
administration i.e. from the city government up to the federal level. The flowing clearly shows the
numbers of farmers who have complain on the practical implementation of rules and regulations
during expropriation as well as the government bodies that have received the farmers complain.
Therefore, the study has founded that those displaced farming households have full complain for the
in appropriate implementation of rules and regulation during expropriation so that the impact
assessment of urban built up area expansion of shire town to the peri urban farming households has
exacerbated conflict between farmers and different government bodies

[42]

CHAPTER FIVE
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This study was mainly aimed on assessing the impact of urban built-up area expansion of the
livelihood of farm households, on the peri-urban area of the displaced farmers the case of shire town.
The data gazer from Municipality land use and administration, kebele leaders and influential elders.
Through questionnaires, interview, focus group discussion (FGD) and document analysis. The data
interpreted, organized analyzed and presented in chapter four by tables, graphs, and pie charts. Their
result is described in written form. This chapter presents the conclusion and recommendation.
5.1 Conclusion
This research finding revealed that fast urban built-up expansion is creating many problems in the
livelihood of per urban farm community. Farmers in per urban are less educated even if they are in
much closed distance to educational facilities. The reason for farmers less participation in formal
education is the engagement of in less paid and time-consuming activities to fulfill their daily needs.
Most of lands taken for urban expansion are very fertile. The fertility statuses of a land are not taken in
to consideration in any urban expansion plan. The compensation decision process is not participatory
and land fertility status are not considering in valuing it for compensation.
The city administrations are leasing many farmlands at a good price but the farm communities are not
benefiting from the increasing price of the leasing land. It is clearly that the land security issue of the
country is very low. Farmers do not have any power in protecting their land from any action by
government. In the compensation decision process the family size of the households are not
considering. This has risked many farmers for food problems, which their family size is large. Many
farmers are under a risk of displacement. The decision process of displacement is not participatory.

The urban built-up area expansion of the town over rural village located on the edge has found to be a
tremendous economic, social, political and environmental impact in recent years. One is land scarcity
to widely engage in agricultural activities. Due to marginalization of agricultural lands, it became
difficult for the farmers in the area to satisfy their familys consumption let alone to obtain higher
production and supply for markets.
The survey results of sampled households indicated that the loss of croplands in which most farmers
depends their livelihood holds the highest share from the total lands lost. This has a negative
implication in terms of in attaining food security in the area. Moreover, expansion of the town has
[43]

another implication on the other assets in connection with the reduction of land size. This includes
livestock, tree plants, and other that enhance farmers to carry out agricultural activities.
Finding from the survey results indicated that most evicted families decrease the number of livestock
due to decrease in size of farmlands and shortage grassland. Tree plants are also other farmers asset,
which affected after displacement. The negative aspect of rural land taking by federal, regional
agencies and municipality is that, the displaced farmers do not get another alternative piece of land to
farm or business of room to invest. For this reason, they faced difficulties in starting a new urban
livelihood because this is the only skill they have on farming work.
In addition to this, mechanisms are not in a place to provide them with social and financial
management advice and train them in new livelihoods and skills. As a result most evicts squander, the
compensation they receive because they do not know what to do with it. Though Shire Municipality
has given compensation for displaced farmers, most of them (91.4%) were not satisfied with the
expropriation and compensation process.
As a result, they have been complaining to different levels of the governments by nominating
representatives together with those farmers who have low compensations. The mandatory legal
procedures and measures that could be exercised during the expropriation and compensation process
do not seem to have been practiced before and during the displacement of farmers. Consequently,
many displaced farmers with their families have faced intricate economic and social problems.
Most of the farmers who are expected to be displaced in the near future are in fear of displacement
even with compensation and substitution. This is because both the compensation in cash and
substitution of land (not farmland) were not just, transparent and participatory in the past. This implies
that the municipality will face serious challenges in acquiring lad from per urban area.
On the other hand, one of the critical issues found from the survey and other close sources is issues of
land security among peri-urban farmers who possess land nearby the town and a prospects to loose in
the future due to further expansion of the town. In relation to land insecurity, some farmers located
near to the town sell their agricultural land to low prices to land speculators prior to expropriation by
urban authority.

[44]

One of the advantage come up with expansion of urban centre for per-urban farmer is easy access to
infrastructure such as credit facilities, roads, electricity, markets, telephone and pure water etc. With
regard to study area, during fieldwork it was possible to observe electric accessibility even farmers
located at rural village. Moreover, it was possible observe rural roads that connect rural villages with
the others and the town. Most households engaged in casual work usually employ themselves in daily
labour. This is because local people lack of skill, awareness, and education. Therefore, there was a gap
among the concerned local government institutions in terms of rehabilitating the livelihood of evicted
household. The sample survey result on the other hand indicated daily labour is the dominant
livelihood strategies for the sampled communities living in peri-urban interface of Shire town.
Permanent employment in different organization is the second livelihood strategies for the sample
household. Moreover, driving Vickels like Bajaj.
Finally, assessment was made on reaction towards the compensation given for those who dispossessed
their land due to the town urban built-up area expansion. During survey, most dislocated household
complained on the inappropriateness on the amount and types of compensation given. In most cases,
monetary compensation was given for the households that displaced from their land. However, the
compensation money given does not replace resource base that is land. Some respondents also
complained on other compensation mechanisms like skill development that was promised by
government but not put into practice.

[45]

5.2 Recommendation
In the light of the presentation, analysis and interpretation of the study, it is possible to suggest the
following recommendations.
The municipality should compensate the displaced farmers based on the monetary value of
their product during the expropriation period and pay bank interest starting from the time of
their displacement from their farmlands.
The municipality should build its capacity and employ professionals by modifying the existing
structure or level with the woreda administration and Regional urban development and
construction Bureau. In addition to these, it should seek on job training programs for its staff
and apply modern technology to manage the land resources in the rural-urban fringe areas
properly.
The municipality should, in order to give fair, legal and just compensation not only for the
displaced farmers but also for those who has displaced, raise its financial capacity through
efficient and effective revenue collection and expenditure management.
It should also strengthen its human and non-human capacities to assure proper implementation
of law especially in relation to expropriation and land use management in the town.
The town administration should make profound discussion with the rural woreda (Tahatay
koraro woreda) administration units to alleviate the economic and socio-cultural problems of
the displaced farmers who are living in the rural urban fringe areas, so that rate of migration
and compliant will minimize.
It is evident that urban centers interact with their surrounding rural areas economically, socially
and administratively. Having this in mind, there should be positive and mutual relationship
between these areas.
Therefore, when there is an urban expansion to the rural-urban areas, it should will be fair,
transparent and participatory and follow the legal systems of the country and international law
in tune with the best experiences of other countries.
Because farmers in peri-urban area of Shire town constrained with scarcity of land to widely
engage in agricultural activities, some of them diversify their livelihood in off-farm activities.
Therefore, skill development and training has central role increases factors as productivity,
quality, diversity and occupational safety and improves health, thereby increasing incomes and
[46]

hence leading to reductions in poverty levels for these peoples. Understanding this fact,
government and other relevant stakeholders should work on this area to sustain livelihood of
displaced household living on peri-urban area of the town.
Other mechanisms that mitigate the negative impact of displacement such as production of
high value crops and growing vegetables on limited land to increase agricultural income of
displaced farmers should be promote. Hence, responsible government bodies and other
stockholders should work on this area and enhance the livelihood of farming community periurban area of the town.
Moreover, supplying credit facilities for the displaced household has a central role in reestablishing and improving their livelihood and to start-up new business activities that support
their lives. Although proximity to the urban center exposes the area in accessing many types of
financial institutions operating in rural and urban area, there was lack of awareness among the
farmers take this advantage.
Hence, concerned institutions should support the community in terms of provision of trainings,
supplying market information and better infrastructure to improve their productivity and
enhance their livelihood.
Issue of land security in relation to land expropriation is another problem that has been
happened on the area. Farmers living on the edge of the town and in urban area who possess
agricultural land fear an expectation that urban authority will expropriate their land.
Hence, they sell their land with low prices and many of them became landless. Therefore,
concerned government bodies should follow up and work on these issues to improve tenure
security among farmers in order to improve production and productivity.
In principle, concerned local government offices of the town like the towns Micro and Small
Scale Enterprise, social affair, land Administration, Other stockholders and the responsible
institutions that rehabilitate displaced peri-urban farmers. These includes the responsibility to
identify evicted farmers and give skill development training, appropriate the place of work and
made favourable condition to engage private investment activities. However, no works were
done on this area by any of local government bodies.
Therefore, concerned local government institution should put into practice their responsibility in
rehabilitating evicted households.

[47]

References

Africa: The Unique Case of Ethiopia. CSA (2007). Population and Housing Census of 2007 CS(2010).
Population and Housing Census of 2010
B. Cohen (2004). Urban Growth in Developing Countries: A Review of Current Trends and a Charles
L.
Redman and Nancy S. Jones (2004). The Environmental, Social, and Health.
CSA (2010). Agricultural sample survey 2009/ 2010 (2002 E.C.). Report on area andproduction of
crops (private peasant holdings, Meher season). Statistical bulletin vol. I Addis Ababa
DFID (1999): Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. Introduction. Department for
International Development (DFID). Available at: http://www.difd.gov.uk/
DFID (2000): Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. Methods. Department for International
Development (DFID). Available at: http://www.difd.gov.uk/
DFID (2008). Who Can Help the Peri-urban Poor? : Adoption and Impact of Livelihood Activities on
Community Members in the Kumasi Peri-Urban Interface R8090 Revised Research
Report 4
E.Adu Ampong, F (2008). Socio-economic Transitions; Changing Livelihoods in the Periurban
Interface, A case study in Peri-urban interface of Kumasi, A draft Report
ECA (2006). Land Policy in Africa: A Framework of Action to Secure Land Rights, Enhance
Productivity and Secure Livelihoods, Issued paper presented for Consultative Workshp,
27 to 29 March 2006 on Economic Commission of Africa
Ermias Abera (2009). Urban Development-induced Displacement: Prospective andChallenges of Real
Estate Development on the Livelihoods of Rural Communities: the case of Lega Tafo
Lega Dadi,
MA theses. Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa.
Federal Negarit Gazeta ( 2005). Expropriation of Land Holding for Public Purposes andPayments of
[48]

Compensation. Proclimation No. 455/2005, P. 3124-3132


Feleke Tadele (1999). Impact of Urban Development on Peasant community in Ethiopia: the case for
Yeka Tafo, MA Thesis. Addis Ababa University
Fayera Abdisa(2005). Urban Expansion and Livelihood of the Peri-urban AgriculturalCommunity: the
case of Addis Ababa, MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University.
Firew Bekele(2010) The Negative Impact of urbanization in the peri urban area case of Hawasa city
of
SNNPRS, MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University
Gebre Yntiso (2008). Urban Development and Displacement in Addis Ababa: The Impact of
Resettlement Projects on Low-Income Households, Eastern Africa Social Science
Research Review, Volume 24, Number 2, June 2008, pp. 53-77 (Article)
Mara Gittleman (2009) .Urban Expansion in Addis Ababa: Effects of the Decline of Urban Agriculture
on Livelihood and Food Security. A paper presented at the United Nations 17th
Commission on Sustainable Development
Marshall, F., Waldman, L., MacGregor, H., Mehta, L. and Randhawa, P. (2009). On the Edge of
Sustainability: Perspectives on Peri-urban Dynamics, STEPS Working Paper 35,
Brighton: STEPS Centre.
Martin Adams (2008).Tenure Security, Livelihoods and Sustainable Land Use in Southern Africa,
Paper presented at the SARPN conference on Land Reform and Poverty
Alleviation in Southern Africa.
Nicodemus Mandere Mandere1, Barry Ness1 and Stefan Anderberg (2010). Peri-urban development,
livelihood change and household income: A case study of peri-urban Nyahururu,
Kenya. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development Vol. 2 (5) pp.
R. A. Machnachie and J. A. Binns (2006). Sustainability Under Threat? The Dynamics of
Environmental Change and Food Production in Peri-urban Kano, Nigeria. Journal of
Land Degradation and Developmen.t, Vol. 17, pp. 159171
[49]

Samuel Gebreselassie (2006). Land, Land Policy and Smallholder Agriculture in Ethiopia: Options
and Scenarios. Paper prepared for the Future Agricultures Consortium meeting at
Institute of Development Studies 20-22 March 2006.
Shishay Mehari (2011) The Impact of Urban built up Area of Expansion on the Livlihood of the peruI urban the case of Mekelle City,MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University
UN Habitat (2010). Urban Sprawl Now a Global Problem, a report on state of World Cities
2011/2011.
UN Habitat (2008). Ethiopian Urban Profile. United Nations Human Settlements Programme Regional
and Technical Cooperation Division World Bank (1993). Urbanization, Agricultural
development and Land allocation. World Bank discussion paper. .
Yuan Hong, Liu Aili , and Xie Ting(2008). A review of non-agricultural land-use in peri urbanization
: Research progress and perspectives. Ecological Economy (2008)4: 105-114
CSA (2010). Agricultural sample survey 2009/ 2010 (2002 E.C.). Report on area and
production of crops (private peasant holdings, Meher season). Statistical bulletin vol. iv,
Addis Ababa
Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, (1984). Report on the National population and
housing census of Ethiopia, Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, 1984, Addis Abeba
Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, (2006). National population projection, Central
Statistical Authority of Ethiopia 2006, Addis Ababa.
Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, (1994). Report on the National population and
housing census of Ethiopia, Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, 1994, Addis
Ababa.
Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, (2007); Report on the National population and
housing census of Ethiopia, Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia, 2007, Addis
Ababa.
[50]

E.A. Literature Bureau (1979). Urbanization; its social problem and consequences,
published for Kenya National council of social services. Kenya, Nairobi
Hailu Worku (ed.), (2002). Urban planning implementation and problems in Ethiopia future
prospects, National Urban Institute, Addis Ababa.
Tegegne G/Egziabher and Daniel Solomon (ed.) (1997). Urban and regional development
planning and implementation in Ethiopia; proceedings of the national conference onurban
and regional development planning and implementation in Ethiopia, National Urban
Planning Institute, Addis Ababa.
Tran Thi Van (2006). Urban expansion and loss of agricultural land in north of hochiminh city: A GIS
and Remot Sensing Approach, Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City, 2006.
UNDP, IDRC, UNWITO and UNICEF (2001). Urban and peri-urban agriculture, issues of\ urban and
peri-urban agriculture in Ethiopia (2001), Addis Ababa.
United Nations (2000). Universal declaration of human rights, adopted on December 23, 2000 by the
general assembles of United Nations.

Shiferaw, B., H.A. Freeman, and S.M. Swinton (eds), 2005. Natural Resources Management in
Agriculture: Methods for Assessing Economic and Environmental Impacts, CABI Publishing.
Simtowe, F.P., 2010. Livelihoods diversification and gender in Malawi. African Journal of
Agricultural Research, 5(3): 204-216.
Singh, A., 1989. Digital change detection techniques using remotely-sensed data. Int.J.Remot Sensing,
10(6):989-1003.
Solomon Abebe, 2005. Land-Use and Land-Cover Change In Headstream Of Abbay Watershed, Blue
Nile Basin, Ethiopia. A Thesis Submitted To The School Of Graduate Studies Of Addis Abeba
University, Ethiopia.
Soubbotina, P. T., 2004. Beyond Economic Growth: An Introduction to Sustainable Development.
Second Edition, The World Bank. 205p.
Stata Corp. 2007. Stata Statistical Software: Release 10. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
[51]

SWMA (Solid Waste Management Autority - Addis Abeba City Administration), 2010. Overview of
Addis Abeba City Solid Waste Management System.
Tacoli, C, 1998. Rural-urban Interactions: a Guide to the Literature, Environment and Urbanization,
10 (1): 147-166
Tadesse W., Tsegaye, T. D.and Coleman,T.L., 2001. Land use/cover change detection of the city of
Addis Abeba, Ethiopia using remote sensing and GIS technology
Tho, N., 2006. Livelihoods of People Living in a Peri-Urban Area of Ho Chi Minh City Case study
Hung Long commune, Binh Chanh district, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Master Thesis No 34,
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
UN HABITAT, 2007. State of the World Cities 2010/2011: Bridging the Urban Divide. United
Nations Human Settlements Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
____________, 2010. Cities without Slum; Situation Analysis of Informal Settlements in AddisAbeba, A Slum upgrading program United Nations Human Settlements Program Nairobi, Kenya.
Verbeek, M., 2004. A Guide to Modern Econometrics, 2nd edition, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West
Sussex, England.
Vinha, K., 2006. A Primer on Propensity Score Matching Estimators, CEDE Documentation.
Wassie, B., D. Colman and B. Fayissa, 2008. Diversification and Livelihood Sustainability in a Semiarid Environment: A Case Study from Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Development Studies, 43(5): 871889.

[52]

Appendix 1
MEKELLE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

POSTGRADUATE PROGRAM IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES


QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE FILLED BY SAMPLE RESPONDENTS
Dear respondents, the main purpose of this questionnaire is to gather information or data to
investigate the impacts of urban built up area expansion on the livelihood of farm households in the
peri-urban areas where predominantly affected. Moreover, it is to asses on policy or strategy measures
undertaken by the urban local government in order to ensure food security among farmers displaced
or/and evicted from their land due to urban expansion with specific reference to Shire Endaslassei
town as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of a masters degree in development
studies.
Therefore, the researcher is expected you to provide genuine, accurate and balanced information with
respect to impacts of urban expansion in relation to the local urban government program intervention
measures for empowering the evicted farmers economically and socially to ensure food security at
household level. Your honest information is highly important as it plays a key role in the success of
this study. Finally, the researcher is very much appreciative for the dedication you pay to this end and
the information gathered will be highly confidential and only will use for the purpose of this research.
Thank you in advance!
General Directions:
Please put x mark in the box given for the answer that meets your choice and fill on the blank space
for related extra answers.
Part I: Demographic and Social Characteristics of the Household
1.Sex of respondents

1 male

2. Age of respondents

1. 18- 30
4. 51- 60

2 female
2. 31=40
5. Above 60
[53]

3.41-50

3. Marital Status of respondents 1 Single

2. Married

3. Divorced

4. Widow
4. Level of education

1. Illiterate

2. Can read & write

3. Grade 1-4

4.grade 5- 8

6. Certificate

7. Diploma and above

5. House hold Family size

5. Grade 9-12

1.Number of males

2.Number of female

3. Total house hold members


Part II Data in relation to eviction from land due to urban expansion
Instruction II Please Circle for the answer that meets your choice
1. Have you lost your farmland due to urban expansion?
1. Yes

2. No

2. If the answer for question number 1 is yes, how many hector you lost for urban expansion?
.
3. When did your farmland was taken away for urban expansion use?
1, from 2005-2007

2.From 2008- 2010

3. From 2011 2013

4. 2014- 2016

4. What type of land did you lost due to urban expansion?


1. Agricultural land

2. Residential land

3. Grassland

4. Others (specify) .

5. Did the loose of plot of land affects on yearly production?


1. Yes

2. No

6.If you answer for question No 6 is yes what is the total amount of production that decrease due to
the loss of your agricultural land interims of quintal or birr
7. What other assets affected you due to displacement from your agricultural land? Specify in number
1. Oxen..

2. Cows.. 3 sheep. 4.Goats

5 tree plants 6. thatched/corrugated iron House


[54]

8. What type of social services previously did not accessed before displacement? ( you can chose
more than two options)
1. Trasport
station

2. Electricity 3. Water supply 4. Telephone 5.credit service 6 school 7,Health

9. Have got access of social services after displacement?


1. Yes

2.No

10 . If your answer is yes for question No 9 What type of social services you have accessed ? ( you
can chose more than two options)
. 1. Trasport
service

2. Electricity 3. Water supply 4. Telephone 5.credit service 6. School 7, Health

Part III Economic Impact assessment of Displaced


1. Have you shifted your previous occupation due to the town expansion?
1. Yes

2. No

2. If your answer for question No 11 is yes, what were your previous occupation and your current
income earning activities?
Previous income earning activities

current income earning activities

..

..

..

3. What are the reasons that forced to change your previous income earning activities?
1. Due to reduction in production from your current land size
2. Present occupation is pleasant and higher in payment than previous one
3. Both
4. Other reason
.

[55]

4. Did you have income source on off farm activities other than farming after you lost your farmland
for urban expansion?
1. Yes

2.No

5.If your answer is yes for question No 14, please mention an estimation of income per year in birr
from the additional source of non-farm land activities after eviction.

No
Off farm activities
1
Local agriculture
2
Sales of Grass or fodder
3
Engaged in driving vehicles/ Bajaj/
4
Sales of stone
5
Daily labour in construction
6
Permanent employment in government
7
Food aid
8
Sale of tree / poles for construction
Part IV Socio Impact assessment of Displaced

Amount earned in birr per year

1- Have you faced socio problems after displaced?


1. Yes

2. No

2. If the answer for question No 1 what kind of socio problems?


1. Security problem

2. Family breakdown

3.Homelens

4. Others specify.
Part V regarding the compensation package of displaced farmers
1. Have you obtained the benefit package due to the loose of your land?
1. Yes

2. No

2. If the answer for question No 16 is yes in what kind were you compensated?
1. In monetary term

2. Alternative land

3. Training to develop skill

4. Others specify.
3. What is your reaction on the amount and kind of benefit package allotted to you?
1. Highly satisfied

2. Satisfied

3. Indifferent 4. Highly discouraged and dissatisfied

4. In which of these skill acquired training did you have participate?


[56]

1, Own business development, management and supervision


2, Financial management / saving
3, Basic skill training
4, Technical training for livelihood means
5. Could the compensation packages you obtained were enough to support your livelihood in
sustainable base?
1, Yes

2, No

6. If the answer question 20 is no, what is the reason?


..
.

[57]

7. In which one these training/trainings you pleased most and why?


1,
2, .
8. In the above compensation packages which one you promised but did not obtained.
..
9. Have you ask concerned body about compensation package promised but did not provided and what
were the responses you obtained for?

.
10, Have you any other additional comments and recommendations on the compensation packages?

[58]

Part VI- Local Government intervention support made after eviction.


1, Is there any support made by municipality administration after eviction?
1, Yes

2, No

2, If the answer for question 24 is yes, please rate or level the participation as follows.
No

Type intervention

Informing before eviction

Compensation of money

Compensation of land for agriculture

Compensation of plots for housing

How to use the compensation money

Training on entrepreneurship skill for

Very low low

moderate

High Very High

income diversification in non farm


activities
7

Networking with saving and credit


establishment for loan

Support on expansion of urban agriculture

Expert support for following up

10

Safety net for food support

Part VI Exacerbation of conflict


R/N To whom body you have raised complain

Number of participants on
the complain

Municipality/Town Administration
Zone Administration
Regional Administration
Federal Government

[59]

Remark

Appendix 2
MEKELLE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAM IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
GUIDELINE FOR KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW
A an interview question for kebele current administrators, influential elders and leaders, woreda land
resource administrations and land management
Dear respondents, the main purpose of this interview question is to gather information or data to
investigate the impacts of urban built up area expansion on the livelihood of farm households in the
peri-urban areas where predominantly affected. Moreover, it is to asses on policy or strategy measures
undertaken by the urban local government in order to ensure food security among farmers displaced
or/and evicted from their land due to urban expansion with specific reference to Shire Endaslassei
town as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of a masters degree in development
studies.
Therefore, the researcher is request you to fill or answer this questionnaire and the accuracy and
liability of the study will be depend on the correct and proper filling of the questionnaire by the
respected respondents, so you are kindly requested to answer all questions accurately and properly
This study is aimed only for academic purpose
Finally, I would like to say thank you in advance for your willingness and devotion of your time for
the interview..

Thank you
1/ sex

male

female

2/Position ---------------------------------------3/Educational level -------------------------------------4/Work experience --------------------------------------1. What do you think the factors that contribute for the rapid expansion of the town for the last ten
years?..........................................................................................................................................................

[60]

.....................................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................

2. To what extent is the awareness given for the community prior to the displacement of house hold
farmers?.

.
3. What are the complains raised from displaced farmers in relation to compensation given so far and
what are the response given by the local government bodies
........................................................................................................................................................

4.What are the current and future challenges and opportunities created for farmers on peri-urban areas
due to the towns expansion?......................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................
5.What is the government responses to mitigate the problem related to displaced households farmers
from their land?...........................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................
6.Do you think that the compensation given for the displaced household farmers is adequate?

.
7.What plan are developed by the municipality administration for resettlement of evicted farmers?

.
8.What type of skill training and follow up is given for the displace farmers by the concerned body?
[61]

Appendix 3
MEKELLE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAM IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Guide lines for focus group discussion
1. What are the advantages and disadvantage of urban expansion in terms of
A.Economiccondition

B. Social condition.

.
2. Descusse the major benefits and challenges of displaced house hold farmers due to urban
expansion?...............................................................................................................................................
.
3 Descusse the training and follow up given for the farmers after evicted

..
4. To what extent did you satisfy by the compensation and is there a change in compensation from
year to year ?............................................................................................................................................

[62]

.
.

1
2 :x
1.

2.

1.

2.
3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

3.
4.
1.

2.

3. 1-4
4 5-8

5. 9-10
[63]

6.11-12

7.

[64]

/ /
II.
1. //
2.

1.

2.

3.
1.1997 -1999

2.2000-2002 3.2003 2005 4. 2006 2008

4.
1. 2. 3. 4.
5.
1.

2.

6. 5
7.
1.

2. 3. 4. 5.

6. / /
8. /
/
1. 2. 3. 4 5. 6. 7.
9.
1.

.10 9
[65]

. 2. 3. 4 5. 6. 7.
III.
1.
1.

2.

2. 1

...............................................

.............................................

3.

1.
2. .
3.
4.
4.
1.

2.

5. 4


[66]

IV

1.
1.

2.

2. 1
1.

2.

3. 4.

..
3.
1. 2.

3.

4.

4.
1.
3.

2.

4.

5.
1.

2.

6. 5 /
/

7.
[67]

8.

9.

..
10.

V.
1.
1.

2.

2. 2 .


1

2

[68]


6


7

[69]




.
.
.
.

1.

1.

2.

2.
3 .
4.
1. 10
/

2.
..
.

[70]

3.
..
......................................................................
4.
..
..
..
5. //
....................................................................................................
.............................................................................
. . 6.
.............................................................................
...................................................................................
..............................................
7.

..
8.

[71]





1.
.

.
. ..

..
2.
..

.
.
..

3.

..

[72]

..
3.
.
..
.

[73]

You might also like