Eucalyptus woodlot adoption and its determinants in the Mecha District, Northern Ethiopia

1. Introduction

Eucalyptus is the most extensively cultivated and grown forest tree by smallholder farmers in the world (Oballa et al., 2010; Tesfaw et al., 2022; Desta et al., 2023). In Kenya, Eucalyptus is expanded primarily for wood fuel demand leading to financial gain for growers (Oballa et al., 2010). Farmers in Ethiopia have grown Eucalyptus as a substitute for other livelihood strategies like crop production and livestock production (Mekonnen et al., 2007). For instance, studies from the northern (Kelemu and Tadesse, 2010), southern (Derbe et al., 2018), and central (Kebebew and Ayele, 2010; Zerga and Woldetsadik, 2016) parts of Ethiopia showed the significant contribution of Eucalyptus as a source of income for farmers. According to all studies, Eucalyptus is the second-most important source of livelihood after crop production for income generation. In Mecha District, Eucalyptus woodlots have been planted since the 1970s. Currently, it is expanding at an ever-increasing rate, even at the expense of agricultural cropland (Tefera and Kassa, 2017). According to Tefera and Kassa (2017), nearly 77% of the sampled households in Ethiopia’s Lake Tana Watershed had planted Eucalyptus. The study also indicated the peculiar increment trends of Eucalyptus plantations since 2002, due to the exclusion of subsidies and credits for agricultural inputs and the beginning of the issuance of agricultural land use certificates (Tefera and Kassa, 2017).

Although Eucalyptus is a beneficial species that farmers have planted at the expense of crops. Factors that determine farmers’ participation and the level of their participation in Eucalyptus planting are, however, not investigated and documented specifically in Mecha District (Tefera and Kassa, 2017). The identification of factors affecting Eucalyptus planting decisions and the level of planting by farmers can be an important input for policy development, decision-makers, farmers, and practitioners. Therefore, this study aimed to examine factors influencing adoption decisions and the level of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlots by farmers in Mecha District, Northern Ethiopia. It also investigates smallholder farmers’ production constraints in Eucalyptus woodlots.

2. Methodology/approach

2.1. Area description

This study was conducted in Mecha District, Northern Ethiopia. Mecha District is one of the 13 Districts of the West Gojjam Administrative Zone and is located 30 km southwest of Bahir Dar and 525 km northwest of Addis Ababa (Alebachew et al., 2015). The District is geographically situated between 11^°10′ N and 11^°30′ N latitudes and between 37^°00′ E and 37^°20′ E longitudes (Figure 1). According to the District Agricultural Office report (2018), the district has a total population of 301,188 of which 151,480 are men and 149,708 are women, and ranges from 1,500 to 2,500 m.a.s.l. with a mean annual rainfall of 1,560 mm and a mean daily temperature ranging from 16 to 20^°C. The topography of the District is predominantly flat (75%), as only about a quarter of its area is characterized by jagged topography, valleys, and mountains (with a total coverage of 156,027 ha) (Tefera and Kassa, 2017).

FIGURE 1

Figure 1. Map of the study area (source own survey).

2.2. Sampling method, procedure, and sample size estimation

To choose sample household heads, a multistage sampling method was used. Multistage sampling is a method in which sampling is done in stages with smaller units being defined and selected at each stage within the units selected at the prior stage (Shimizu, 1998), aimed to select samples that are concentrated in a few geographical regions (Hamed, 2016). The method has been used by Asfaw et al. (2022) to select sample households among Date Producers in Afar Region, Ethiopia, Abebaw and Dea (2016) to determine factors affecting Eucalyptus woodlot planting in the Meket district. Similarly, Wu et al. (2023) adopted a multistage sampling procedure for estimating the forest volume. Thus, in this study, first, among the Districts in the Amhara region, Mecha District was purposefully chosen for its potential and extensive Eucalyptus plantations. As the District agriculture and rural development experts indicated, all the villages in the District are potential areas for Eucalyptus production and marketing. In the second stage, by considering farmers’ tree planting experience, production potentiality, and current expansion rate on productive and irrigation areas, out of the total 39 villages, three villages, namely Enashenifalen, Addisameba, and Rim were purposefully selected. Then, 186 sample respondents were selected using a random sampling technique from the three selected villages and allocated proportionally to the population size of the selected villages. The list of households was acquired from the village agricultural office.

As a reliable estimate of the population variance is often unavailable, selecting a sample size using proportional estimates of variability is frequently favored (Cochran, 1977). The method has been applied in many research studies. For example, Abebaw and Dea (2016) used it to determine the sample size of farmers’ decision-making for planting Eucalyptus trees in Meket District, North Wollow, Ethiopia, and Zeenatul et al. (2022) used it in their study of integrated environment-smart agricultural practices. Similarly, Tamirat (2022) used the Cochran (1977) sample size determination method to investigate factors in chemical fertilizer adoption decisions and their impact on food security in southern Ethiopia. Thus, for this study, a statistical formula developed by Cochran (1977) was used to determine the sample size at a 95% confidence level with a degree of variability of 0.5 and a level of precision of 7% (0.07) and distributed proportionally (Supplementary Appendix Table 1).

$\text{n}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{N}}^{*}{\text{z}}^2{}^{*}\text{p*q}}{{\text{e}}^2\left(\mathrm{N}-1\right)+{\text{z}}^2{}^{*}\text{p*q}}}={\displaystyle \frac{3,{727}^{*}{1.96}^2{}^{*}\text{0.5*0.5}}{{0.07}^2(3,727-1)+{1.96}^2{}^{*}\text{0.5*0.5}}}$

$=186.25\approx 186$

Where: n = sample size of household heads; P = 0.5, the maximum level of variability taken when previous population variability is unknown; q = 1-0.5, i.e., 0.5; e is the precision level (i.e., 0.07); and N = total population size of the selected villages (3,727), obtained from the administrative office of the selected villages.

2.3. Data collection methods and sources

For this study, a cross-sectional mix of primary and secondary data was used. Various tools were used to gather the primary data. This includes in-depth interviews, key informant interviews, direct field observation, and focused group discussions. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Semi-structured questionnaires (open and closed-ended) were used to conduct an in-depth interview. The household surveys were carried out to collect quantitative data that was used to investigate the factors influencing farmers’ adoption and intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlots by farmers. A key informant (KI) who had a broad knowledge of the farming practices of Eucalyptus plantations in the area was given priority for selection. A total of 13 KI interviews were conducted with nine village agricultural experts (three from each village) and one District expert, and three farmers who have long-standing know-how in farming, production, and marketing of Eucalyptus were contacted. Three focus group discussions, one at each village level, with a group of 12 farmers using men’s, women’s, and youth groups, were conducted. The discussion was focused on the status of Eucalyptus woodlot management, reasons for the expansion of Eucalyptus woodlots by converting cropland, and opportunities and challenges for Eucalyptus production and management.

Secondary data were collected from literature and the work of other researchers. Mecha District Agricultural Office (MDAO), Amhara Region Environment, Forest and Wildlife Protection and Development Authority (AREFWPDA) were contacted to gather information about Eucalyptus planting experiences and their determinates in the district.

2.4. Analytical framework

In this study, an econometric model was used to identify the factors that affect the adoption decision and adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlots by farmers. Different methods can be employed to analyze factors influencing the adoption and adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlots. One approach to analyzing the issue is to use the well-known Tobit model. The standard Tobit model, originally formulated by James Tobin in 1958, was the first model to attempt a censored dependent variable. However, the Tobit model has a number of potential shortcomings due to the restrictive assumptions it makes. First, it assumes that both the decision to participate in an activity and the level of participation are determined by the same variables with the same sign (Wooldridge, 2002), which means both the value of continuous observations on the dependent variable and the discrete variables were determined by the same stochastic process. Hence, according to the Tobit model, the decision to participate in Eucalyptus woodlot adoption and the intensity of the adoption are jointly determined and influenced by the same parameters. Such an assumption may not be appropriate in this study because the factors that affect whether or not a household adopts Eucalyptus woodlot may be significantly different from the factors that affect the adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot. Secondly, the Tobit model assumes that all the zero observations are, in fact, standard corner solutions (Garcia, 2013) and those households that do not adopt are a result of their economic circumstances. This means, the zero values on the dependent variable, intensity of woodlot adoption in this case, are attributable to economic factors alone. However, the Tobit model currently has been generalized by the use of the double-hurdle model that the possibility of zeros is due to non-participation decision, which arises from factors such as economic, institutional and demographic characteristics (Martínez-Espiñeira, 2006). A test for the double-hurdle model against the Tobit model was made by estimating three regression models (Tobit, truncated and probit regression models) separately the result indicated the rejection of the Tobit model (Supplementary Appendix Table 5).

Cragg’s (1971) double-hurdle model, relaxes the restrictive assumption of the Tobit model by specifying determinants of adoption and the level of intensity of adoption into two separate steps used to determine the adoption decision and level of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlots. The pattern suggests that in every decision-making process, farmers face two obstacles: deciding whether to adopt and determining the level of adoption (Asfaw et al., 2010, Kiyingi et al., 2016). The model has been widely used in the literature on decision-making behavior across different research fields, such as consumer purchasing behavior (Asfaw et al., 2022), consumption analysis (Wei et al., 2023) and agricultural and forest technology adoption (Mal et al., 2012; Kiyingi et al., 2016; Jara-Rojas et al., 2020; Gebru et al., 2021). The essential premise of this study is that a farmer makes two decisions: whether to allocate land to establish a Eucalyptus woodlot and the intensity of the area assigned for a Eucalyptus woodlot. In the first hurdle, a probit model was employed to determine the probability that the households adopt Eucalyptus woodlot. In the second hurdle, a truncated regression model was used to determine the intensity of the adoption. The general form of Cragg’s double-hurdle model employed in this study is as follows:

${\text{D}}_{\text{i}}^{*}=\mathrm{\alpha }{\text{Z}}_{\text{i}}+{\mathrm{\mu }}_{\text{i}}(\mathrm{Adoption}\mathrm{Decision}\mathrm{Equation}:\mathrm{first}\mathrm{hurdle});$

$\mathrm{\hspace{1em}}\mathrm{Di}=1,\mathrm{if}{\mathrm{D}}_{\text{i}}^{*}>0;{\text{D}}_{\text{i}}=0,\mathrm{otherwise}$

Where, D_i* is the latent variable describing the farmer’s decision of whether or not to adopt a Eucalyptus woodlot and takes the value of 1 if the farmer adopted and 0 otherwise. D_i is the observed variable that represents the farmer’s adoption decision; Z_i’ is a vector of explanatory variables influencing the farmer’s initial adoption decision; α is a vector of parameters to be estimated; and μ_i is the error term.

${\text{Y}}_{\text{i}}^{*}=\mathrm{\beta }{\text{X}}_{\text{i}}+{\mathrm{\epsilon }}_{\text{i}}(\mathrm{Intensity}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{adoption}\mathrm{equation}:\mathrm{second}\mathrm{hurdle});$

$\mathrm{\hspace{1em}}{\mathrm{Y}}_{\text{i}}=1,\mathrm{if}{\mathrm{Y}}_{\text{i}}^{*}>0;{\text{Y}}_{\text{i}}=0,\mathrm{otherwise}$

Where Y_i* is the latent variable describing its decision on the proportion of land to allocate to the Eucalyptus woodlot. Y_i is the area allocated for the Eucalyptus woodlot in hectares, suggesting the intensity of the adoption. X_i is the vector of explanatory variables influencing how much the farmer adopts Eucalyptus woodlot; β is a vector of parameters to be estimated; and ε_i is the error term.

If both decisions made by the individual farmers are independent, the error term is assumed to be independently and normally distributed as:

${\mathrm{\mu }}_{\text{i}}\sim \text{N}(0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1})\mathrm{and}{\mathrm{\epsilon }}_{\text{i}}\sim \text{N}(0,{\mathrm{\delta }}^2)$

The log-likelihood function, which is the sum of the log-likelihood from a Probit and a truncated regression (Cragg, 1971), is estimated using the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) technique following Cragg (1971).

Variance-inflating factor (VIF) was used to detect multicollinearity problems among continuous and discrete variables (Gujarati, 2004) and a VIF value of more than 10 indicates a high correlation while less than 10 indicates a weak association among explanatory variables. Contingent coefficient (C.C) techniques were used to detect multicollinearity problems among discrete variables and a value of 0.75 or more indicates stronger associations while a value less than 0.75 indicates weak associations among explanatory variables.

Additionally, a hypothesis test for the double-hurdle model against the Tobit model was made by estimating three regression models (Tobit, truncated and Probit regression models) separately and then conducting a likelihood ratio test that compares the Tobit with the sum of the log-likelihood functions of the Probit and truncated regression models. The LR statistic was computed using the formula developed by Greene (2003) as Γ = −2[lnLT − (lnLP + lnLTR)] ∼ χ²k.

Where LT = likelihood for the Tobit model; LP = likelihood for the Probit model; LTR = likelihood for the truncated regression model and k is the number of independent variables in the equations. The test hypothesis is written as H₀: λ = $\frac{\mathrm{\beta }}{\mathrm{\sigma }}$ and H₁: λ ≠ $\frac{\mathrm{\beta }}{\mathrm{\sigma }}$; the null hypothesis (H0) that the Tobit model is the best-fit model will be rejected on a pre-specified significance level if Γ > χ² k.

Grounded on the existing knowledge from literature review including Ewnetu (2008), Duguma and Hager (2010), Gebreegziabher et al. (2010), Rafael (2011), Jenbere et al. (2012), Anik and Salam (2015), Abebaw and Dea (2016), Kiyingi et al. (2016), Zerga and Woldetsadik (2016), Gizachew (2017), Sete (2017), and Derbe et al. (2018) the possible explanatory variables hypothesized to affect adoption and level of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot were specified (Supplementary Appendix Table 2).

2.5. Data analysis and presentation

Descriptive statistics such as mean, maximum, minimum, standard deviation, and frequency distribution were employed to get a clear picture of the socio-economic, institutional, and demographic characteristics of sample households. A chi-square test and an independent sample t-test were used to test the significance of variables associated with the adoption and intensity of Eucalyptus woodlots adoption and to identify variables that vary significantly between adopters and non-adopters of Eucalyptus woodlots. MS Excel, the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 19.0, and Stata version 12.0 software were used for entering and analyzing the data.

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of Eucalyptus woodlot adopters and non-adopters respondents

As indicated by Derbe et al. (2018), a Eucalyptus woodlot is a parcel of land devoted to Eucalyptus plantations and has a size of 0.1 hectares, or what is conventionally called a “block,” which is 40 m by 25 m and above. In the study area, almost all smallholder farmers own Eucalyptus trees. However, for the interest of this study, farmers who had a Eucalyptus woodlot size of 0.1 ha were considered as Eucalyptus woodlot adopters. Therefore, of the total 186 sample respondents interviewed, 157 (84.41%) were found to be adopters of Eucalyptus woodlot while 29 (15.59%) were non-adopters. Adopters of Eucalyptus have allocated the high coverage of their land 65.38% (0.84 ha with a standard deviation of 0.24 ha on average) to Eucalyptus woodlot.

The sample respondent’s ages ranged from 25 to 77 with an average age of 45.04 years. The minimum and maximum years of schooling for adopters were 0 and 10 years, while the non-adopters have a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 6 years of schooling. Concerning family size, woodlot adopters were found to be 5.64 per family while non-adopters were found to be 4.36 per family on average (Supplementary Appendix Table 6). Among the total respondents, 80.60% of them are male-headed while 19.40% of them are female-headed households. Out of 157 Eucalyptus adopter participant households, 17.80% are female-headed and the remaining 82.20% are male-headed. The mean land holding for Eucalyptus woodlot adopters was 1.30 ha with maximum and minimum of 4.0 and 0.25 ha, respectively. The corresponding figure for the non-adopter households was 0.62 ha with maximum and minimum of 1.75 and 0.10 ha, respectively. Thus, the non-adopters had a limited land area. It indicates that farmers with large farm sizes are more likely to participate in the adoption and intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot than those farmers who have smaller farm sizes.

Adopters were found to own more livestock than their counterparts. It was observed that adopters of Eucalyptus woodlot had livestock holding 4.88 Tropical Livestock Units (TLU) on average, while non-adopters had 3.72 TLU. It indicates as farmers own large livestock units, the chance of participating in Eucalyptus woodlot adoption become increases. It is because livestock ownership provides the draught power (oxen) for the establishment of Eucalyptus woodlots. In the study area, Eucalyptus is commonly planted after plowing the land with oxen for crop production. Moreover, as farmers own large livestock populations, the availability of financial income in the household from the sale of livestock, especially bulls for meat, small ruminants, and chickens, increases, which in turn leads to investment decisions in Eucalyptus woodlot production. Of the total 186 sample households, only 9.14% (9.55% of adopters and 6.90% of non-adopters) of the sample respondents had got training related to Eucalyptus planting by the village representatives, the other (90.86%) of the respondents did not have access to training (Supplementary Appendix Table 7). It shows farmers are planting Eucalyptus simply because of its economic impacts without or with less government support. On average, Eucalyptus woodlot adopters earn 18,349.36 Ethiopian Birr (ETB), while non-adopters had 12,253.45 ETB annually from crop and livestock production. Of all respondents, who had market access 66.24% were Eucalyptus woodlot adopters and the other 17.24% were non-adopters. The result indicates that Eucalyptus woodlot adopters had better market access than non-adopters did. It means that farmers with market access are more likely to adopt and intensify their adoption of Eucalyptus woodlots than farmers without market access.

Farmers’ perception of the relative advantage of Eucalyptus woodlot production is one of the factors that can facilitate or undermine their participation in Eucalyptus woodlot adoption. Farmers were asked to respond as to how they perceived the importance of Eucalyptus woodlot production. From the total respondents, about 77.70% of Eucalyptus woodlot adopters and 31.00% of non-adopters were perceived positively on Eucalyptus woodlot production. It means farmers who had a positive perception of Eucalyptus woodlot production adopted and allocated more land for Eucalyptus woodlot production than those who had a negative perception.

The chi-square test result indicates that farmers’ perception towards Eucalyptus woodlot production (χ² = 25.603, df = 1, p = 0.000), off-farm work engagement (χ² = 4.737, df = 1, p = 0.012), adjacent farm (χ² = 29.799, df = 1, p = 0000) and market access (χ² = 24.227, df = 1, p = 0.000) were showed a variation between adopter and non-adopters. For the t-test, family size (t = 2.928, df = 190, p = 0.003), land holding size (t = 4.891, df = 190, p = 0.000), number of parcels of land (t = 5.57, df = 190, p = 0.000), livestock holding (t = 2.742, df = 190, p = 0.006) and income of the household head (t = 3.822, df = 190, p = 0.000) were compared and showed variation between the adopter and non-adopter groups.

3.2. Determinants of adoption and adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot

Before running regression analysis, both the continuous and discrete explanatory variables were checked for the existence of multicollinearity using the Variance Inflating Factor (VIF) and the Contingency Coefficient (CC) methods, respectively. Thus, the VIF values displayed in Supplementary Appendix Table 3 show that all the continuous explanatory variables had no serious multicollinearity problem, as the VIF is less than 10. Likewise, the values of the contingency coefficient are less than the rule of thumb of 0.75, (Supplementary Appendix Table 4), implying a weak degree of association among the variables considered. The likelihood ratio test that compares the Tobit with the sum of the log-likelihood functions of Probit and Truncated regression indicated the rejection of the Tobit model and acceptance of the Double-hurdle model. The calculated statistical value of the likelihood ratio was 50, which was greater than the tabulated or critical value of χ² (15) = 32 at a 1% level of significance, which shows the existence of two separate decision-making stages during the adoption process (Supplementary Appendix Table 5). This proves the farmers’ independent decision-making possibilities regarding the adoption and intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot. Similarly, Heckman’s two-step model was regressed and the independence between the participation and intensity decision was tested and the corresponding Wald test of independence suggests the independence assumption cannot be rejected (p-value = 0.2), as Mills ratio is insignificant, which strengthens the use of double hurdle-approach. In other words, the sample-selection bias is not an issue in this study.

The likelihood ratio of the chi-square result revealed that the overall fitness of the model was found to be significant at a 1% probability level, indicating the partial effects of each explanatory variable on the response of the dependent variable and similar to the intensity of adoption. Out of the fifteen explanatory variables, four variables from the probit model and six variables from the truncated model were found to be significantly determining adoption and intensity (area of Eucalyptus planted in hectare) of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot at 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively Supplementary Appendix Tables 8, 9).

The number of parcels of land was found to positively and significantly influence the probability of adoption and intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot at less than 5 and 1% level of significance, respectively. It indicates that if the other factors are kept constant, a unit increase in the number of plots of land increases the probability of adoption and intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot by 8.80, and 10.60%, respectively. Similarly, the positive perception of farmers towards Eucalyptus woodlot production increased the adoption and its level by 14.03 and 7.74%, (1 and 5% of significance level), respectively.

Off-farm work engagement and credit availability were found to positively and significantly influence the probability of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot at a 5% level of significance. The marginal effect estimate indicates that if the other factors are kept constant, participation in off-farm work increases the adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot by 10.23% and a 1% increase in credit availability for households increases the adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot by 8.8%. While land holding size, adjacent farms (the farm of another framer which is adjacent or close to the owner of Eucalyptus woodlot) and access to market had a positive and significant influence on farmers’ decision to allocate land for Eucalyptus woodlot at less than 1% significant level, which increases the land allocated for Eucalyptus woodlot by 47.27%. Likewise, keeping all other variables constant, the intensity of adopting Eucalyptus woodlot was increased by 18.72 and 19.78% for the households who have more land near to Eucalyptus woodlot and have access to market, respectively. While, a one-person increase in the family size decreases the land allocated for Eucalyptus woodlot by 3.34% at a 1% significance level, ceteris paribus.

Moreover, lack of support (59%), lack of training (34%), lack of segregation of land (22.14) and disease (18%) were the major constraints on tree growers (Supplementary Appendix Figure A1). Moreover, policies that encourage Eucalyptus planting activities have not existed and rules and regulations on production and marketing of Eucalyptus are not functional as evidenced from the key informant interviews and focus group discussions.

4. Discussion

Currently, many of the Ethiopian smallholders have been planting Eucalyptus in their productive and fertile lands mainly in a form of woodlots primarily due to its economic significance. In the current study, majority of farmers are adopting Eucalyptus in their productive lands and allocated more than half of their lands mainly for income generation. In line with this, Jenbere et al. (2012) stated majority (74.8%) of the farmers practiced the establishment of Eucalyptus woodlots by dividing their land into smaller units. Similarly, as Tefera and Kassa (2017) stated close to 77% of the sampled households had planted Eucalyptus in the Tana watershed of Ethiopia. Despite this expansion, adoption and intensity of adoption by farmers have been influenced by several socioeconomic, demographic and institutional factors. For instance, in this study, adopter and non-adopter farmers were significantly different in their perception towards Eucalyptus woodlot production, land-holding size, number of parcels of land, livestock holding, income, off-farm work engagement, adjacent farm and market access, etc., that in turn determines their decision to adopt and intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot on their limited land.

Farmers who have a positive perception of Eucalyptus woodlot production tend to adopt and allocate more land to Eucalyptus woodlot than farmers who have negative perceptions. In connection with this result, Derbe et al. (2018) indicated the positive and significant influence of the perception of farmers on Eucalyptus woodlot adoption. Similarly, Jenbere et al. (2012) stated that despite the perceived negative ecological impacts of Eucalyptus plantings among the respondent farmers, the majority (96%) of the respondents still support the continued expansion of Eucalyptus plantations. Correspondingly, households that have a greater number of parcels of land are more likely to adopt Eucalyptus and allocate more land to Eucalyptus woodlot than their counterparts. The high number of plots indicated high fragmentation of land, which is the main determinant of land productivity (Alemu et al., 2017). In line with this, Ewnetu (2008) indicated the positive and significant effects of the number of plots of land on the farmer’s decision to allocate and plant a tree. In addition, as the number of plots increased the likelihood for many of the plots to be located away from the homestead is usually high and thus these plots of land are preferred to be used for tree planting, which requires less supervision and protection at least after the establishment stages (Ewnetu, 2008).

Credit service is an important source of finance for poor farmers to buy inputs for Eucalyptus production. In line with this study, Abebaw and Dea (2016) indicated that the availability of loans and credit facilities for farmers had a positive effect on the Eucalyptus tree adoption decision. The possible reason for the positive and significant effect of off-farm work in Eucalyptus woodlot adoption is that farmers can be able to generate more income from the off-farm work and thus their willingness for taking risks in long-term investment alternatives such as growing Eucalyptus. However, according to Ewnetu (2008), off-farm work engagement discourages farmers to plant a tree. Landholding size and intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot adoption have a positive and significant relation with land holding size, while it has negatively related to family size. It means farmers with more land are more likely to allocate a larger proportion of their land to Eucalyptus woodlot to maximize their gain from the sale of its products. This result is in line with Abebaw and Dea (2016), and Gizachew (2017) that the total number of Eucalyptus trees that a farmer planted was positively correlated with the farm size. In contrast, the negative and significant influence of family size on the intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot adoption indicated farmers with big families are less likely to allocate more hectares of land to Eucalyptus woodlot than those with small family sizes. The reason could be that as family size increases, the requirement for food may also increase and this needs intensive and extensive crop production for the survival of the family members. As a result, resources including family labor, land, money and time have been devoted to crop production instead of planting Eucalyptus to feed their large family (Gizachew, 2017; Derbe et al., 2018). Opposing this, according to Abebaw and Dea (2016), household size had a positive and significant effect on farmers’ decision in adopting Eucalyptus woodlot.

As market access increased, the intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot adoption also increased. It indicates, farmers who have access to the market can get the required input for Eucalyptus woodlot production as well as could sell products of Eucalyptus at the right time and at a reasonable price. Derbe et al. (2018) found a similar result that farmers who had market access had a high probability of planting Eucalyptus than their counterparts. In addition, Bernard (2011) pointed out that the availability of a market for farm forest products increases households’ decision to use the land to plant trees. The positive and significant relationship between land allocation and adjacent land indicated that farmers who have land adjacent to the Eucalyptus woodlot of their neighbor are more likely to allocate more land for the Eucalyptus woodlot. This could be associated with the negative impacts of Eucalyptus on other crops. As indicated by Alebachew et al. (2015), crops grown adjacent to Eucalyptus stand has poor performance as compared to crops grown without Eucalyptus mainly because of the competition for growth resources between Eucalypts and adjacent food crops.

5. Conclusion and recommendations

Generally, adopters of Eucalyptus woodlot differ from their counterparts in various demographic, socioeconomic, and institutional-related perspectives. About 84.41% of sampled farmers have already adopted Eucalyptus woodlot while 15.59% of them are non-adaptors of the Eucalyptus woodlot. Eucalyptus adopters were allocated on average 0.84 ha (65.38%) of their land to Eucalyptus woodlot. A double-hurdle model result shows that the adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot follows two independent decisions: the decision to adopt Eucalyptus and the decision concerning the intensity of adoption of Eucalyptus. The finding of this study revealed that the result confirmed the model assumptions of independent sets of variables that some of the variables under investigation affecting the probability of adoption decisions were not affecting the adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot and vice versa. Among the fifteen explanatory variables used:

• Market access was found to be positively and significantly influencing the adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot. Thus, providing a well-organized and integrated marketing system with appropriate infrastructure is critical to optimize the contribution of Eucalyptus woodlot production.

• Landholding size had a positive association with the adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot, however, land is the main constraint in the study area, therefore, developing efficient land use systems, improving the productivity of land and better management practices needs to be critically performed by the national, regional and local level governments.

• Perception of farmers toward Eucalyptus woodlot has a positive and significant effect on the adoption and adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot. Training needs to be provided on the advantage and disadvantages of Eucalyptus to increase farmers’ awareness about Eucalyptus woodlot production.

• Number of parcels of land positively and significantly influencing adoption and adoption intensity of Eucalyptus woodlot. However, the increase in parcels of land is an indication of land fragmentation, as land is fragmented more and more, land productivity becomes reduced, which in turn puts the livelihood of the society in question, as Eucalyptus alone may not be a sustainable solution for food security. Thus, there is a need to develop systems that help to minimize land fragmentation such as controlling population growth and increasing the productivity of land

• Adjacent farmland was found to be a positive and significant influence on the intensity of adoption. Appropriate policies need to be developed for Eucalyptus planting for example through cluster plating, which also helps to avoid conflict between farmers.

• Developing an appropriate credit system for farmers with a reasonable interest rate should also be seen critically by the local and national government.

• Off-farm work engagement is also an important variable for Eucalyptus adoption. Thus, diversification of the livelihood portfolios of farmers is vital to improving their income and the productivity of Eucalyptus woodlot.

• Moreover, specific policies for Eucalyptus production have not existed and rules and regulations are not enforced, thus developing specific policies and enforcing the existing forest rules and regulations are critical for sustainable utilization and livelihood improvement.

• Provision of services including training on silviculture tree management, processing, marketing as well as technology development to tree growers, arranging credit facilities, road, and transport access, etc., are essential for the development of the sector by the government or NGOs.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent from the participants was not required to participate in this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author contributions

AA designed and performed the experiments, analyzed and interpreted the data, contributed materials, analysis tools, or data, and wrote the manuscript. YM guided the experiment, analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript. AE wrote and proofread the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Acknowledgments

We extend our sincerest thanks to Mecha District administrators, development agents, experts, village communities, and others for their willingness and support during the field stay.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2023.1111301/full#supplementary-material

References

Abebaw, S., and Dea, M. (2016). Determinants of farmers’ decision-making for planting Eucalyptus trees in Meket district, North Wollo, Ethiopia. Res. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 6, 62–70.

Google Scholar

Alebachew, M., Amare, T., and Wendie, M. (2015). Investigation of the effects of Eucalyptus camaldulensis on performance of neighbouring crop productivity in Western Amhara, Ethiopia. Open Access Library J. 2, 1–10. doi: 10.4236/oalib.1100992

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Alemu, G. T., Berhanie, A. Z., and Abelieneh, B. A. (2017). Effects of land fragmentation on productivity in Northwestern Ethiopia. Adv. Agric. 2017:9. doi: 10.1155/2017/4509605

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Anik, A. R., and Salam, M. A. (2015). Determinants of adoption of improved onion variety in Bangladesh. J. Agric. Environ. Int. Dev. 109, 71–88.

Google Scholar

Asfaw, D. M., Shifaw, S. M., and Belete, A. A. (2022). Determinants of market participation decision and intensity among date producers in Afar region, Ethiopia: a double hurdle approach. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 22, 741–758. doi: 10.1080/15538362.2022.2119189

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Asfaw, S., Shiferaw, B., and Simtowe, F. (2010). “Does technology adoption promote commercialization? evidence from chickpea technologies in Ethiopia,” in Proceedings of the CSAE 2010 Conference on Economic Development in Africa, (University of Oxford: Oxford).

Google Scholar

Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research Methods in Anthropology: Quantitative and Quantitative Approaches, Fifth Edit Edn. Lanham: Altamira Press.

Google Scholar

Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques, 3rd Edn. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 39.

Google Scholar

Cragg, J. G. (1971). Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods. J. Econom. Soc. 39, 829–844. doi: 10.2307/1909582

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Derbe, T., Yehuala, S., and Agitew, G. (2018). Factors influencing smallholder farmer’s adoption of Eucalyptus woodlot in Wogera district, North Gondar zone. Int. J. Sci. Res. Manag. 6, 566–774. doi: 10.18535/ijsrm/v6i7.em07

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Desta, T., Haimanot, T., and Tewodros, M. (2023). Insights of smallholder farmers on the trade-offs of a eucalyptus plantation. Environ. Challenges 10:100663. doi: 10.1016/j.envc.2022.100663

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Duguma, L., and Hager, H. (2010). Woody plants diversity and possession and their future prospects in small-scale tree and shrub growing in agricultural landscapes in central highlands of Ethiopia. Small Scale For. 9, 153–174. doi: 10.1007/s11842-009-9108-0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ewnetu, Z. (2008). Smallholder Farmers’ Decision Making in Farm Tree Growing in the Highlands of Ethiopia. With Special Reference to Basona Werena and Sodo Zuria District Areas. PhD Thesis. Oregon: University of Oregon State.

Google Scholar

Garcia, B. (2013). Implementation of a double hurdle model. Stata J. 13, 776–794. doi: 10.1177/1536867X1301300406

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Gebreegziabher, Z., Mekonnen, A., Kassie, M., and Kohlin, G. (2010). Tree Planting in Tigrai, Northern Ethiopia. Tree Species, Purposes, and Determinants. Discussion Paper Series. Sweden: Environment for Development.

Google Scholar

Gebru, M., Holden, S. T., and Alfnes, F. (2021). Adoption analysis of agricultural technologies in semiarid northern Ethiopia: a panel data analysis. Agric. Food Econ. 9:12. doi: 10.1186/s40100-021-00184-6

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Gizachew, K. (2017). Expansion of Eucalyptus Woodlot and its factors in Cheha district. Southern Ethiopia. World Sci. News 66, 163–180.

Google Scholar

Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric Analysis, 5th Edn. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Google Scholar

Gujarati, D. (2004). “Basic econometrics,” in United States Military Academy, West Point, 4th Edn. New York: The McGraw -Hill Companies.

Google Scholar

Hamed, T. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology; how to choose a sampling technique for research. SSRN Electronic J. 5, 18–27.

Google Scholar

Jara-Rojas, R., Russy, S., Roco, L., Fleming-Muñoz, D., and Engler, A. (2020). Factors affecting the adoption of agroforestry practices: insights from silvopastoral systems of Colombia. Forests 11:648. doi: 10.3390/f11060648

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Jenbere, D., Lemenih, M., and Kassa, H. (2012). Expansion of Eucalyptus farm forestry and its determinants in Arsi Negelle district, South Central Ethiopia. Small Scale For. 11, 389–405. doi: 10.1007/s11842-011-9191-x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kebebew, Z., and Ayele, G. (2010). Profitability and Household Income Contribution of Growing Eucalyptus globulus (Labill.) to Smallholder Farmers: the Case of Central Highland of Oromia Ethiopia. Available online at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/277405748

Google Scholar

Kelemu, K., and Tadesse, W. (2010). “Analysis of Eucalyptus role in the livelihoods of rural households,” in Proceedings of the Congress, Eucalyptus Species Management, History, Status and Trends in Ethiopia, eds L. Gil, W. Tadesse, E. Tolosana, and R. López (Addis Ababa: Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research).

Google Scholar

Kiyingi, I., Edriss, A., Phiri, M., Buyinza, M., and Agaba, H. (2016). The impact of farm forestry on poverty alleviation and food security in Uganda. J. Sustain. Dev. 9, 150–163. doi: 10.5539/jsd.v9n1p150

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mal, P., Anik, A. R., Bauer, S., and Schmitz, P. M. (2012). Bt cotton adoption: a double hurdle approach for North Indian farmers. AgBioForum 15, 294–302.

Google Scholar

Martínez-Espiñeira, R. (2006). A box-cox double-hurdle model of wildlife valuation: the citizen’s perspective. Ecol. Econ. 58, 192–208. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.07.006

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mekonnen, Z., Kassa, K., Lemenih, M., and Campbell, B. (2007). The role and management of eucalyptus in Lode Hetosa district. central Ethiopia. For. Trees Livelihoods 17, 309–323. doi: 10.1080/14728028.2007.9752606

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Oballa, P. O., Konuche, P. K. A., Muchiri, M. N., and Kigomo, B. N. (2010). Facts on Growing and Use of Eucalyptus in Kenya. Kenya: Kenya Forestry Research Institute.

Google Scholar

Rafael, N. (2011). Determinants of Agricultural Technology Adoption in Mozambique. Post-Doctoral Research Fellow. Maputo: IFPRI.

Google Scholar

Sete, Y. (2017). Analysis of the Profitability of Smallholder Farmers’ Eucalyptus Woodlot Production System in the Case of Wogera District Amhara region, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis. Ethiopia: University of Gonder.

Google Scholar

Shimizu, I. (1998). “Multistage sampling,” in Encyclopedia of Biostatistics, eds P. Armitage and T. Colton (London: John Wiley & Sons).

Google Scholar

Tamirat, N. (2022). Adoption of chemical fertilizer technology and household food security in Southern Ethiopia. Agric. Conspec. Sci. 87, 151–163.

Google Scholar

Tefera, B., and Kassa, H. (2017). “Trends and driving forces of Eucalyptus plantation by smallholders in the Lake Tana Watershed of Ethiopia,” in Social and Ecological System Dynamics. AESS Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies and Sciences Series, eds K. Stave, G. Goshu, and S. Aynalem (Cham: Springer). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-45755-0_31

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Tesfaw, A., Alemu, D., Senbeta, F., and Teferi, E. (2022). Eucalyptus succession on croplands in the highlands of Northwestern Ethiopia: economic impact analysis using farm household model. Resources 11:71. doi: 10.3390/resources11080071

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wei, Y., Qi, J., Lu, Y., Tantiwat, W., Guo, J., and Arif, M. (2023). Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of and willingness to pay for biodegradable mulch films in China. Sustainabil. Analytics Model. 3:100016. doi: 10.1016/j.samod.2023.100016

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wooldridge, J. W. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, 2nd Edn. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Google Scholar

Wu, H., Xu, H., Tian, X., Zhang, W., and Lu, C. (2023). Multistage sampling and optimization for forest volume inventory based on spatial autocorrelation analysis. Forests 14:250. doi: 10.3390/f14020250

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zeenatul, I., Noor, E., and Ruhul, S. (2022). Integrated environment-smart agricultural practices: A strategy towards climate-resilient agriculture. Econ. Anal. Policy 76, 59–72.

Google Scholar

Zerga, B., and Woldetsadik, M. (2016). Contribution of Eucalyptus tree farming for rural livelihood: in Eza Wereda. Ethiopia. PJ Palgo J. Agric. 3, 111–117.

Google Scholar