Assessment of factors determining households' vulnerability to food insecurity and its local coping mechanisms in three Woredas of Gurage zone

This study has been identified household vulnerability to food insecurity and its local copping mechanism in three selected Woredas of Gurage zone with the objective to assess factors determining households' vulnerability to food insecurity and its local coping mechanisms in Gurage zone. Both primary and secondary data sources have been used with structured questioner to collect the relevant data. The descriptive parts of the study were analyzed by mean, variance, standard deviation and frequency distribution, whereas the econometric analysis was analyzed by logistic regression model. The findings of the study revealed that49 percent and 36 percent of the households’ in Mareko and Meskan districts, respectively are not able to meet the daily recommended caloric requirement. Descriptive statistics results revealed that family size in AE, Livestock holding in TLU, crop income per AE, livestock income per AE, annual income per AE, off- farm income per AE and annual food expenditure per AE are contributed to better food security status in Meskan and in Mareko family size in AE, livestock income per annum, annual income per AE, off-farm income per AE and better annual food expenditure per AE, distance to market contributed to better food security status.The binary Logit model indicates that family size, education level, access to credit, cultivated land size, off-farm income per AE and livestock holding measured in TLU were important factors affecting food insecurity status of households. Reducing the number of meals per day and eating less quality and less preferred food were commonly used coping methods followed by sale of animal and animal products.Finally the policy implications of the study are:(1) Proper attention should be given to limit the increasing population in areas by awareness creation and practicing family planning activities through integrated health and education services and training.(2)improving households’ off-farm or non-farm income and identify different possible types of off-farm/non-farm activities that farmers can engage in,necessary knowledge and skills of the various types of off-farm and non-farm activities should be given.Finally, farmers should be encouraged to engage in livestock husbandry and farmers should be provided improved livestock production technologies (health service, improved breeds and feeds, etc.) to improve production and productivity of the sector.