Assessment of Agricultural Production Potential and Constraint Related Natural Resource Management in Selected Food System Resilience Program Districts of Bale and East Bale Zones, Oromia, Ethiopia

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License 100 Global Journal of Research in Agriculture & Life Sciences ISSN: 2583-4576 (Online) Volume 05 | Issue 05 | Sept.-Oct. | 2025 Journal homepage: https://gjrpublication.com/gjrals/ Research Article Assessment of Agricultural Production Potential and Constraint Related Natural Resource Management in Selected Food System Resilience Program Districts of Bale and East Bale Zones, Oromia, Ethiopia *Mulugeta Eshetu Sinana Agricultural Research Center, Soil Fertility Improvement, Research Team, Bale-Robe, Oromia, Ethiopia Introduction Agriculture is the backbone of Ethiopia’s economy, contributing about 33.88% to the national GDP (Plecher, 2020), and serving as the primary source of livelihood for the majority of the population. With approximately 12 million smallholder households responsible for 95% of agricultural output and 85% of total employment, the sector is pivotal not only for economic growth but also for poverty reduction and food security among rural communities (FAO, 2011). Improving extension services, afforestation, livestock and crop protection, financial access, and market linkages is vital for better community livelihoods. Agricultural productivity in Ethiopia continues to face several significant constraints. These include the limited availability of improved seed varieties, insufficient capacity for seed multiplication, and the low profitability and efficiency of fertilizer use largely due to the absence of complementary improved practices and quality seed (Hassena et al., 2023). However, agricultural productivity in the country remains low, primarily due to limited investment in agricultural research and development, along with various production constraints and contributing factors. Understanding farmers' socio-economic conditions, production practices, and environmental contexts is essential to identify constraints Abstract Ethiopia launched the Food System Resilience Program (FSRP) to boost agricultural productivity among farming and pastoral communities. Oromia Regional State is implementing the program through research, extension, and development activities. This study aimed to assess the agricultural production potential and constraints related to natural resource management, with implications for research and development actions in selected FSRP districts of Bale and East Bale Zones. A survey was conducted to identify key constraints, opportunities, and livelihood challenges in agricultural development, aiming to inform effective research and development interventions by stakeholders. Three districts Agarfa, Goba, and Ginir were purposively selected based on their agro-climatic diversity, representing different ecological zones. The districts exhibit varied rainfall patterns, temperature conditions, and soil types, impacting agricultural productivity and farming practices. The study highlighted several key constraints, including inadequate soil fertility management, over-reliance on blanket fertilizer application, and limited use of integrated organic and inorganic fertilizers. Cereal crops like wheat, barley, and maize dominate production, with potato cultivation also prevalent. Fertilizer application rates are often uniform, disregarding sitespecific soil conditions, resulting in inefficient nutrient use and reduced crop yields. Furthermore, the survey identified significant challenges related to grazing land shortages, deforestation, and water management issues, exacerbated by agricultural expansion and urbanization. In conclusion, targeted development interventions and indepth research are essential to address the identified challenges, particularly in areas with similar farming systems. Emphasis should be placed on farmer capacity building and sustainable natural resource management. Keywords: Agroforestry, Constraints, Grazing land, Irrigation, Natural Forest, Opportunity, Soil fertility, Water harvesting Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 101 and opportunities for sustainable agricultural development. Thoughtful the factors influencing agricultural production and the challenges faced by smallholder farmers is vital for enhancing food security and improving livelihoods in the district (Mishra et al., 2020). Furthermore, inadequate irrigation infrastructure and persistent water scarcity further hinder agricultural growth and resilience. Addressing these interconnected challenges is essential for achieving sustainable improvements in agricultural outcomes and rural well-being. Moreover, inadequate transport infrastructure and limited market access significantly reduce the profitability and attractiveness of adopting improved agricultural practices, as they hinder farmers’ ability to sell their produce efficiently and at competitive prices (Abdulraheem et al., 2021). These factors collectively contribute to low productivity, inefficiency, and slow progress in transforming the agricultural sector both nationally and regionally. Assessing agricultural opportunities and constraints is crucial for identifying specific local needs and resource gaps. It enables evidence-based planning and ensures that interventions are tailored to maximize productivity. Understanding the unique challenges faced by rural communities, policies and technologies can be better aligned. This enhances the effectiveness of resource use, reduces risks, and promotes resilience. Ultimately, such assessments drive sustainable agricultural development and uplift rural livelihoods. The Food Systems Resilience Program (FSRP) seeks to drive transformation in agriculture and enhance smallholder productivity by aligning with Ethiopia’s 10-Year Agriculture Sector Plan (2020–2030). It achieves this through an integrated approach that combines research, extension services, natural resource management, and capacity building to overcome productivity challenges and unlock the country’s agricultural potential. Therefore, this study was undertaken with the objectives to assess the agricultural production potential and constraints related to natural resource management, with implications for research and development actions in selected FSRP districts of Bale and East Bale Zones. Material and Methods Description of the studied districts In this study, three districts from the Bale Zone of Oromia Regional State were selected under the Food Systems Resilience Program (FSRP): Agarfa, Goba, and Ginir. Agarfa District is situated in the northwestern part of Bale Zone, while Goba District lies in the southwestern part. Both are located within West Bale Zone. Ginir District, on the other hand, is found in East Bale Zone, in southeastern Oromia. Agarfa is located approximately 430 kilometers southeast of Addis Ababa, while Goba lies about 445 kilometers in the same direction. Ginir, situated further southeast, is roughly 505 kilometers from the capital. Agarfa has 19 Kebeles (9 highland, 7 midlands, 3 lowland), Goba has 15 (7 highland, 8 midland), and Ginir has 31 (9 highland, 13 midlands, 9 lowland), reflecting diverse agro-ecologies essential for sitespecific agricultural planning. Geographically, the study districts are located within the coordinates ranging from 6°15'0" N to 7°32'0" N latitude and 39°32'0" E to 41°4'30" E longitude (Figure 1). Figure 1: Map of the study area Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 102 Climate conditions and Farming system Agarfa, Goba, and Ginir districts exhibit varied agro-climatic characteristics, supporting diverse agricultural practices. Agarfa is composed of 47% highland, 37% midland, and 16% lowland, receiving 550–1200 mm of annual rainfall, with temperatures ranging from 8°C to 25°C and an average of 16.5°C (Table 1). Goba is dominated by highland (46.67%) and midland (53.33%) zones, receiving the highest rainfall among the three districts (900–1400 mm annually) and sharing similar temperature conditions to Agarfa (8°C to 25°C, average 16.5°C) (Table 1). Ginir shows a more balanced distribution with 29.03% highland, 41.94% midland, and 29.03% lowland, receiving 600–1250 mm of rainfall, and experiencing warmer conditions, with temperatures ranging from 15°C to 29°C and an average of 22°C (Table 1). These variations in agro-ecology, rainfall, and temperature directly influence crop selection, growing seasons, and productivity. The diversity in climate and topography supports the widespread practice of mixed farming systems, enabling farmers to manage climate risks, optimize land use, and enhance livelihood resilience across the districts. The rainfall patterns in Agarfa, Goba, and Ginir districts are bimodal, featuring two distinct rainy seasons: Belg (March to July) and Meher (August to December). In Agarfa and Goba, irrigation-based crop production primarily occurs from December to April, while in Ginir, it is mostly practiced between October and March. Ginir receives approximately 27.39% of its annual rainfall during Belg and 67% during Meher, with irrigation contributing 5.6% to agricultural activities. Across all three districts, the dominant production system is mixed farming, integrating both crop cultivation and livestock rearing. This bimodal rainfall pattern, coupled with supplemental irrigation, supports year-round agricultural activities and enhances food security and income diversification for farming households. Table 1. Agro-climatic zones and climate conditions of the selected Districts Districts Agro-climatic zones (%) Rainfall (mm) Temperature (oC) Highlands Midlands Lowland Min Max Annual Min Max Agarfa 47 37 16 550 1200 16.5 8 25 Goba 46.67 53.33 0 900 1400 16.5 8 25 Ginir 29.03 41.94 29.03 600 1250 22 15 29 Topography The three districts Agrfa, Goba, and Ginir exhibit distinct topographic characteristics that significantly influence agricultural potential, infrastructure development, and natural resource management. Agrfa is dominated by undulating terrain (60%) with moderate plains (25%) and limited hills and mountains. Its altitude ranges from 1239 to 3784 meters, indicating varied microclimates suitable for diversified agriculture, though the undulating nature may pose erosion risks and require conservation measures (Table 2). Goba presents a mixed topography, with significant proportions of plains (43.5%), hills and mountainous areas (each 19.7%), and rugged land (16%). With the highest altitude range (1517–4378 m), Goba offers potential for highland crop production and forest conservation but requires careful land management in rugged and elevated zones. Ginir is predominantly flat (60.02%) but has a notable share of rugged land (32.68%) and minor mountainous and gorge areas (Table 2). Its lower altitude range (893–2524 m) favors intensive and mechanized farming on plains, though rugged areas may demand soil and water conservation interventions. Understanding these topographic and altitudinal variations is crucial for zoning land use, targeting agricultural interventions, managing natural resources, and reducing environmental degradation through context-specific development planning. Table 2. Topographic Features and Altitudinal Ranges of Selected Districts Districts Topographically Altitude Ranges (m) Plain (%) Hill (%) MT (%) UD (%) Rugged (%) Wetlands (%) Gorge (%) Agrfa 25 10 5 60 0 0 0 1239 3784 Goba 43.5 19.7 19.7 0 16 1 0 1517 4378 Ginir 60.02 0 4 0 32.68 0 4.30 893 2524 Where, MT= Mountainous, UD = Undulated Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 103 Land use and land cover The LULC classification of the study area identified six major land use types with varying spatial coverage. Cultivated land dominates, covering 229,576.41 ha (45.58%), reflecting the region’s agricultural dependency and its role in local livelihoods (Table 3 and Figure 2). Shrub land, the second largest class at 141,853.28 ha (28.16%), likely indicates degraded or transitional lands affected by overgrazing or deforestation. Forest land (13.23%) and Afro-alpine vegetation (10.87%) represent ecologically vital zones for biodiversity and water regulation, requiring conservation (Table 3 and Figure 2). Settlements account for a small portion (2.07%), consistent with the area’s rural character, while grassland is minimal (0.09%), possibly limited use for pasture. Overall, the land cover distribution reflects both natural ecological zones and intensive human land use, emphasizing the need for sustainable land management practices (Table 3 and Figure 2). Table 3. Land use land cover classifications LULC Types Area (ha) Area (%) Afro Alpine Vegetation 54762.53196 10.87 Cultivated Land 229576.4073 45.58 Forest Land 66643.32397 13.23 Grass Land 470.1521752 0.09 Shrub Land 141853.2833 28.16 Settlement 10413.49171 2.07 Figure 2. Land use land cover classification of the study area Soil Types The dominant soil types in the area Eutric Vertisols (33.96%), Chromic Luvisols (25.28%), Chromic Cambisols (17.85%), and Lithic Leptosols (15.73%) present both opportunities and constraints for land use (Table 4 and Figure 3). Vertisols and Luvisols are generally fertile and well-suited for crop production when properly managed, while Cambisols offer good drainage and support a variety of agricultural practices. However, Vertisols pose challenges due to waterlogging and difficult tillage when wet, and Leptosols, being shallow and stony, limit root growth and moisture retention. Addressing these constraints through targeted soil management can significantly improve land productivity and sustainability. Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 104 Table 4. Major soil types and its spatial extents Major Soil Types Area (ha) Area (%) Cambic Arenosols 4637.40 0.91 Chromic Cambisols 90624.32 17.85 Chromic Luvisols 128356.74 25.28 Eutric Cambisols 25791.27 5.08 Eutric Leptosols 1027.66 0.20 Eutric Vertisols 172398.73 33.96 Haplic Nitosols 162.26 0.03 Humic Nitosols 4833.23 0.95 Lithic Leptosols 79862.27 15.73 Figure 3. Soil types Map of the study area Sampling Techniques and Data Collections Three districts Agarfa and Goba from Bale Zone, and Ginir from East Bale were purposively selected for this study under the FSRP (Food Systems Resilience Program) based on their distinct agro-climatic zones, which are representative of the broader production environments in the region. The selection was strategically aimed at capturing the diversity of agricultural production constraints across different ecological settings. Within each district, two representatives Kebeles were identified: Ali and Sebaja in Agarfa; Aloshe and Ititu Sura in Goba; and Arda Tere and Wetei Atota in Ginir making a total of six Kebeles. These Kebeles were chosen using clear and concrete criteria, including agro-climatic representativeness, the presence of dominant agricultural commodities, prevalence of key production constraints, and their geographic proximity to the respective district capitals. This multi-level selection approach ensured that the survey results reflect the real challenges faced by farmers across varied agro-ecologies, enhancing the relevance and applicability of the findings for future interventions. Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 105 Methods and Sources of Data Collection A combination of qualitative and quantitative methods was employed to ensure comprehensive and reliable data collection. Primary data were gathered directly from the field using structured questionnaires, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). The FGDs were carefully composed to ensure representativeness by selecting participants based on well-defined criteria, including age, socio-economic (wealth) status, and gender, to capture diverse perspectives within the farming community. Key informants included subject-matter experts and development agents with in-depth local knowledge. Secondary data were systematically collected from credible sources, including both published and unpublished reports, statistical records, and documents obtained from the respective District Offices of Agriculture. These secondary sources were used to complement, validate, and triangulate the primary data, enhancing the overall accuracy and depth of the analysis. Data Analysis The primary data obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with representative farmer groups across distinct agro-climatic zones were analyzed using rigorous qualitative assessment techniques. These included thematic categorization, conceptual mapping, frequency tabulations, and percentage breakdowns to identify recurring patterns, key constraints, and local knowledge systems. The qualitative responses were systematically organized into meaningful categories to facilitate interpretation and ensure that the diverse perspectives of different socio-economic and agroecological groups were accurately reflected. Additionally, quantitative data derived from secondary sources were processed using descriptive statistical tools such as frequency distributions, cross-tabulations, and percentage analyses. These tools enabled the summarization of key variables and supported the triangulation of findings from the qualitative data, ensuring both analytical robustness and contextual relevance. This integrated approach provided a holistic understanding of agricultural production constraints in the study areas. Results and Discussion Major crop types grown and fertilizer application Rates Cereal crops like teff, wheat (bread, durum, and emmer), barley, and maize are widely grown in Agarfa, Goba, and Ginir, with sorghum added in Ginir. Pulses and oilseeds such as faba bean, field pea, chickpea, and linseed are common in Agarfa and Goba, while Ginir focuses on chickpea, field pea, and haricot bean. Horticultural crops include potato, cabbage, and pepper in Agarfa; a broader variety in Goba; and diverse fruits and vegetables in Ginir. Ginir also grows spices like fenugreek, black cumin, and coriander, along with khat, supporting both nutrition and local livelihoods. Most farmers in the studied districts particularly in the highland (Agarfa and Goba) practice continuous wheat mono-cropping, which has led to soil degradation and an increase in soil-borne diseases, ultimately resulting in reduced crop yields. Similarly, Yu et al (2024) reported that continuous monocropping can lead to soil degradation commonly referred to as soil sickness and an increase in soil-borne diseases, ultimately resulting in reduced crop yields. Inorganic Fertilizer application rates for major cereal Crop productions Survey results obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) across selected districts in Bale and East Bale zones revealed wide variation in NPS and Urea use across districts and crops. Fertilizer rates were largely influenced by farmer perceptions, crop needs, and input access (Figure 4). A blanket approach dominated: Agrafa applied 100 kg/ha NPS and 150 kg/ha Urea (except maize, which got no Urea), ignoring crop-specific needs. Goba applied the most to wheat (200 NPS, 100 Urea) and less to barley, potato, and tef. In Ginir, barley received minimal inputs (50 NPS, 50 Urea), reflecting resource limits and underscoring the need for soil-based recommendations (Figure 4). In the Bale and East Bale zones, farmers routinely apply blanket rates of NPS and urea fertilizers for cereal crop production a practice strongly influenced by past yield gains and the widespread nutrient depletion of highland soils. This approach is not arbitrary; it is based on the consistent responsiveness of cereals like wheat and barley to nitrogen and phosphorus, regardless of soil type or agro-ecological variation. The use of uniform fertilizer rates aligns with standardized government recommendations and has become the default strategy due to the absence of localized soil testing and tailored extension support. However, recent soil analyses across the Bale Zone reveal high variability in key fertility indicators such as available phosphorus, total nitrogen, and organic matter content. This uneven soil fertility landscape means that applying the same fertilizer rate across all fields leads to over-fertilization in some areas and under-fertilization in others, reducing nutrient use efficiency, limiting crop performance, and increasing financial losses. Furthermore, the ongoing use of blanket rates is largely a risk-avoidance strategy by smallholder farmers, who operate with limited access to affordable soil testing, extension services, and credit facilities. Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 106 In the absence of tailored agronomic advice, farmers rely on conventional practices or mimic neighbors’ input levels, even when such practices are inefficient or suboptimal for their specific plots. Most farmers in the study area rely on blanket fertilizer recommendations, which limits crop productivity due to the absence of site-specific nutrient management tailored to varying soil conditions. Previous research by Mulugeta et al (2024) confirmed that conventional blanket fertilizer recommendations, which overlook differences in soil types, crop responses, and agro-ecological conditions, have proven less effective. As a result, there has been a shift toward site-specific, soil test-based phosphorus calibration studies an approach that promotes more targeted and efficient fertilization strategies. Figure 4. Blanket rates of Inorganic fertilizer practiced by the farmers in the districts for common cereal crops Inorganic fertilizer application for potato production In the Bale and East Bale zones, farmers apply blanket fertilizer rates for potato mainly 100 kg/ha NPS with 0–150 kg/ha urea based on historical yield success and the nutrient-poor nature of highland soils. In Agarfa, 150 kg/ha urea complements NPS to meet the crop's high nitrogen demand and boost tuber formation. Goba relies on 100 kg/ha NPS alone, likely due to fertile Vertisols or manure use, though this risks nitrogen shortfalls (Figure 5). Ginir applies a moderate 100:100 NPS-to-urea ratio, balancing cost with crop needs in moderately fertile soils. These blanket rates, guided by national policy and limited soil testing, overlook significant local variation in soil fertility. As a result, some fields are overor under-fertilized, reducing efficiency and economic returns. Transitioning to site-specific, soil-testbased recommendations is crucial to improve productivity, profitability, and sustainability. 0 50 100 150 200 250 Durum wheat Barely Maize Bread wheat Food Barely Durum wheat Bread wheat Tef Food Barely Bread wheat Durum wheat Maize Agrfa Goba Ginnir Fertilizer Rates (kgha-1) Crops and Districts NPS Urea Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 107 Figure 5. Blanket rates of Inorganic fertilizer practiced by the farmers in the districts for potato productions. Sources of Fertilizers for Crop Production FGD and KII survey results across Bale and East Bale zones reveal that inorganic fertilizers are the primary source for crop production, consistently ranked first in all districts (Agarfa, Goba, and Ginir). This preference reflects farmers’ reliance on quick-acting nutrient inputs to meet immediate crop demands and maximize yields. Farmyard manure ranks second, highlighting its ongoing importance. Compost is moderately used, while liquid fertilizers and bio-fertilizers show limited adoption. Vermicomposting ranks last across all zones, likely due to limited training and infrastructure (Table 5). The ranking underscores the importance of adopting integrated soil fertility management that blends organic and inorganic inputs while improving awareness and access to alternative nutrient sources such as bio-fertilizers and vermicompost to ensure sustainable soil health and productivity. Similarly, Aryal et al (2021) noted that the use of organic and inorganic fertilizers is influenced by a range of socio-economic and geographical factors. Table 5. Sources of fertilizers Zones Districts Management Practices Rank Bale Agarfa Inorganic fertilizer 1 Bio-fertilizer/Rhizobium 5 Conventional compost 3 Farm yard manure 2 Liquid fertilizer 4 Vermicomposting 6 Goba Inorganic fertilizer 1 Bio-fertilizer/Rhizobium 5 Conventional compost 3 Farm yard manure 2 Liquid fertilizer 4 Vermicomposting 6 East Bale Ginir Inorganic fertilizer 1 Bio-fertilizer/Rhizobium 5 Conventional compost 3 Farm yard manure 2 Liquid fertilizer 4 Vermicomposting 6 Sources: Own Focus group discussion (FGD) and key informant (KII) survey 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 POTATO POTATO POTATO AGARFA GOBA GINIR Axis Title Axis Title NPS Urea Global J Res Agri Life Sci. 2025; 5(5), 100-114 @ 2025 | PUBLISHED BY GJR PUBLICATION, INDIA 108 Constraints and Management practiced on Natural Forest Survey results obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) from Bale and East Bale zones identified major drivers of natural forest degradation, including agricultural expansion, poor management, pests, charcoal use, and population growth. Watershed management and forest enterprises are helping address land degradation and improve forest governance. Seedling nursery expansion and the Green Legacy Initiative support reforestation and resilience. Integrated approaches are promoting sustainable forest use and community involvement for long-term conservation. The survey findings reflect a multifaceted set of constraints impacting natural forests in Bale and East Bale. However, the region has also seen a variety of context-specific management approaches ranging from national campaigns like the Green Legacy to localized initiatives such as forest enterprises and watershed management. The effectiveness of these strategies hinges on continued community engagement, capacity building, and institutional support. Long-term success will require integrating these management efforts into regional development planning to ensure both environmental sustainability and livelihood security. Grazing Land Constraints Table 6 reveals that farmers face severe grazing land shortages, with little to no communal land available. In Bale and East Bale zones, grazing land constraints vary significantly, with agricultural expansion emerging as the top constraint in both Agarfa and Goba districts, scoring 4.5 and 4, respectively. Urbanization ranks second in both zones, with scores of 4 and 3.8. Erratic rainfall and overgrazing are also notable concerns, ranking third to fifth across the districts. In Goba, eucalyptus tree expansion poses an additional challenge. In East Bale’s Ginir, agricultural expansion is the highest concern, scoring 5, followed by urbanization (4.5) and erratic rainfall (4), while grazing land shortage and low moisture are lower priorities. Respondents noted that due to declining free grazing areas and quality, farmers rely on crop residues, weeds, hay, green grass, and factory by-products for feed. FGDs and KIIs suggest that adopting forages like oats and legumes, using urea, implementing SWC measures, fencing, proper hay storage, and using local crop residues can help address feed shortages and costs. Table 6. Grazing land constraints score and ranks Zones Districts Constraints Score Rank Bale Agarfa Agricultural expansion 4.5 1 Urbanization 4 2 Erratic Rainfall 3.1 4 Overgrazing 3 5 Climate change 3.4 3 Goba Agricultural expansion 4 1 Overgrazing 3.0 4 Urbanization 3.8 2 Eucalyptus trees expansions 3.5 3 East Bale Ginir Dry due to low moisture 3.8 4 Agricultural expansion 5 1 Urbanization 4.5 2 Erratic Rainfall 4 3 Shortage of grazing land 3.4 5 Sources: Own Focus group discussion (FGD) and key informant (KII) survey Soil related constraints Survey results from FGDs and KIIs confirm that soil-related issues are key barriers to agricultural productivity, requiring zone-specific interventions. In Bale zone (Agarfa and Goba), soil erosion is the top-ranked constraint due to unchecked cultivation on slopes, causing significant topsoil loss (Table 7). Soil fertility decline follows, driven by nutrient depletion and limited organic inputs. Waterlogging affects flatlands during the rainy season, while low soil moisture stress is a concern in Agarfa, linked to poor water retention (Table 7). In East Bale (Ginir), the top constraint is soil fertility decline from prolonged nutrient depletion, followed by moisture stress from dry spells and poor retention (Table 10). Termite infestation, a distinct biotic issue, ranks third due to root and organic matter damage (Table 7).