Home / Report

Communicating the Impact of Under-Used Plants in Bilate, Ethiopia

Published 09 Apr 2026

GCBC

Tags

Agriculture Indigenous Peoples

Share

The productivity of a soil and the response of crops to changing climatic conditions are directly related to soil organic matter content.

In Ethiopia, soil organic matter is declining. This results in soils that are less productive, threatening livelihoods, especially for low-income farmers. To reduce soil degradation, much research and extension effort has been focussed on encouraging farmers to incorporate more organic wastes into their soils, usually as compost.

However, increasing use of organic wastes for household energy, due to increasing populations and deforestation, has resulted in limited success of these schemes, and consequent continued and unabated soil degradation.

 

To side-step competing demands for organic wastes, the CROSSROADS project aims to use under-utilised plants to increase organic inputs and reduce losses, so adding value to these species and increasing biodiversity, while also improving livelihoods and climate resilience.

In the Bilate catchment of Southern Ethiopia, CROSSROADS has worked with communities to identify 19 under-utilised crop, grass and tree species with high potential to improve soil health.

During the dry season in February and March 2026, teams from the Central Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute (CEARI), Hawassa University (HU), the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and the University of Aberdeen (UA) began field work to characterise the impacts on soil health, climate resilience, livelihoods and biodiversity of three of these species; Korch or coral tree (Erythrina brucei Schweinf.), Wanza or Sudan teak (Cordia Africana) and Kerkeha or highland bamboo (Yushania alpina – K. Schum.).

Images: 1. Korch – nitrogen fixing boundary tree, easily propagated by cuttings with soil stabilising roots (Wolde Mekuria, IWMI) 2. Wanza – tree with soil stabilising roots and organic matter input from leaf fall (Wolde Mekuria, IWMI) 3. Kekeha – grass species with dense structure of soil stabilising roots (Wolde Mekuria, IWMI).

Soil Studies in the Field and Lab

Team 1, led by Beth Evans, took soil cores from under these plants and from nearby farmland. These samples will be analysed in the laboratory to measure bulk density, soil organic matter, nutrients, pH and microbial activity. The team also measured water content, infiltration, soil temperature and penetration resistance directly in the field.

Team 2, led by Desalegn Tegegne Mengistu, took samples of soil to characterise erosion using a large-scale rainfall simulator in the lab, while Abdul Walid Salik’s Team 3 used a smaller, portable rainfall simulator to measure erosion directly in the field.

Team 4, led by Jacques Holford, tested how the roots of each species help to stabilise soils using a newly designed shear vane. They also collected root samples for detailed analysis in the laboratory.

Images: 1. Characterising root structures back in the lab (credit: Beth Evans, UA) 2. Measuring erosion using a portable rainfall simulator (credit: Paul Hallett, UA) 3. Measuring distance from tree to take soil cores for further analysis (credit: Beth Evans, UA) 4. Measuring infiltration in the field (credit: Paul Hallett, UA).

Early Results Farmers Can See

While the laboratory results are still pending, simple field‑based soil health tests, designed for farmers and development workers (Assessing the impact of nature-based solutions on soil health in sub-Saharan Africa through farmer-centred methods) are already showing clear patterns. Using these tools, Dominik Bittner’s Team 5 compared soils from the most productive parts of farms (home gardens), the least productive parts (far‑fields), and the soils under the three under‑utilised species.

They found that soils beneath Korch, Wanza and Kerkeha had similar quality to soils in the most productive areas. This suggests that leaves from these species, especially the nitrogen‑fixing Korch, could be used to make vermicompost to improve poorer soils.

To help farmers understand these findings, the team devised and used an innovative communication method. Soil blocks were cut from different parts of the farm and placed side‑by‑side so that farmers could directly compare colour, structure, smell, root systems, the presence of soil organisms and underground biodiversity. The depth of penetration of the soil was assessed using a wire and the infiltration of water into the soil was measured using a food can with both ends removed.

These results were then represented beside each block using a stick for penetration and a bottle top for water infiltration. While farmers were watching, an aggregate from each area was dropped into a halved plastic bottle containing water so that they could compare how quickly the aggregates broke down.

Images: 1. Communicating impacts on soil health to farmers (credit: Paul Hallett, UA) 2. The most productive area – the enset home-garden (credit: Paul Hallett, UA) 3. Soil blocks used to communicate soil health (credit: Paul Hallett, UA), 3. Building a mini-exclosure to hold biodiversity tests (credit: Grant Campbell, UA).

Communicating Biodiversity and Ecological Functions

Grant Cambell’s Team 6 created “mini-exclosures” under each species using simple materials, such as dung, toilet rolls and plasticine caterpillars.  These will stay on the farms for a few months to show how different plant species affect decomposition, pest activity and seed predation. A new method was also devised to allow local development agents to record results using photographs.

 

 

What Comes next?

More information about the effects of these under‑utilised plants on soil health will become available once laboratory analyses are complete, but already we have made significant progress in finding better ways to communicate soil health and biodiversity to farmers. This is an important step towards having a real-world impact on soil health and the productivity of farms in the region.

 

This report was prepared by Prof Jo Smith, University of Aberdeen.

For more information about the CROSSROADS-SSA project, please visit the project page

 

Translation of information sign in Amharic to explain measurements of functional biodiversity (credit: Grant Campbell, UA)
Photo banner (credit: Paul Hallett, UA)

Tags

Agriculture Indigenous Peoples

Share

Related

Principles for Inclusive Nature Action: Driving gender-responsive, locally-led, rights-based approaches to sustainably using, protecting and restoring global biodiversity

Published 22 Sep 2025

GCBC

Tags

Conservation and Restoration Governance Improving livelihoods Indigenous Peoples Social Inclusion

Share

Principles for Inclusive Nature Action: why rights and inclusion are a condition for impact

When we talk with partners and researchers about what works – what actually protects biodiversity and improves lives – the conversation comes back to who holds power, whose knowledge is valued, and who feels safer and better off because of the work. Social justice and rights aren’t a moral add-on to research. They’re a condition for research impact. If rights are ignored or voices sidelined, even the strongest technical ideas fail to take root

The principles for inclusive nature action are intended to provide a guiding framework to help governments, donors, non-governmental organisations and other stakeholders support and scale up transformative action to conserve, restore and sustainably use and manage biodiversity in ways that are locally-led, gender-responsive and inclusive of a wide diversity of rights holders.

This includes women, youth, children, people living with disabilities, displaced people, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, people of African descent and other ethnic groups. These groups are often at the frontline of biodiversity action, yet least empowered to effect change due to systemic barriers and discrimination.

Evidence shows  that these approaches are, ultimately, more effective for biodiversity as well as being more socially just.

The principles were developed during a Wilton Park conference on ‘Transformative change for global biodiversity: the role of gender equality and social inclusion’ hosted by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in September 2024.

They draw on the principles for locally led adaptation and on the Shandia Principles, developed by the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities, as well as the outcomes of discussions during the conference. They are also in line with the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity Gender Plan of Action.

1. Recognise and respect rights
Recognise, acknowledge and advance the rights, knowledge and capabilities of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and people of African descent, especially women and youth as essential partners for reversing biodiversity loss, combating climate change and achieving sustainable development. Accept the universality of human rights while at the same time recognising the characteristics and needs of specific groups and the particular rights, including customary rights, arising in those contexts. Adopt policies and procedures to ensure that rights are respected, protected and fulfilled and implement these in a coordinated and holistic manner across operations at all levels, avoiding trade-offs.

 

2. Devolve decision making and strengthen local leadership
Ensure that local organisations and groups, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities and people of African descent, have increased voice and decision-making power over how biodiversity protection, restoration and sustainable use interventions are prioritised, designed, implemented and evaluated. Build the capacity of local organisations and groups, particularly those led by women and other under-represented groups, to ensure they have the resources, decision-making power, and autonomy to generate durable, place-based solutions, and lead impactful biodiversity initiatives over the long term. Recognise the contributions and achievements of local organisations and groups, particularly those led by women and other under-represented groups, including in formal national and international reporting.

 

3. Recognise and address structural and intersectional inequalities
Recognise and address the intersectional gender, racial and other characteristics that are often the root causes of structural social and economic inequalities. Integrate these considerations into the mainstream of biodiversity action to ensure equitable access to the resources and benefits that are generated. Actively create and sustain environments and mechanisms for inclusive, effective and gender-responsive participation, leadership, decision-making and feedback. Engage with dominant actors that may inadvertently reinforce inequalities, and proactively dismantle the structural barriers to positive change.

 

4. Encourage flexible, adaptive biodiversity programming
Encourage flexible, adaptive, gender-responsive and locally-driven biodiversity management and programming to facilitate local leadership, as well as to address and respond to the inherent uncertainty of biodiversity under a changing climate, and to recognise and adapt to diverse ecological and cultural contexts. Support local leadership by making the processes of designing, and delivering programmes more streamlined, simple and transparent, ensuring mutual accountability between local stakeholders and donors or intermediaries. Ensure that programme decision making is shared, inclusive and gender-responsive.

 

5. Provide direct, patient, flexible, predictable and accessible funding
Ensure the provision of adequate, direct, transparent, gender-responsive funding – including core support – for long-term biodiversity protection, restoration and sustainable management. Provide longer-term, predictable funding to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, people of African descent, women and youth groups with a focus on supporting sustainable outcomes rather than short-term results. Funders and intermediaries should be prepared and supported to hold risk, take a holistic and cross-sectoral approach, and invest in strengthening capacity at all levels.

6. Recognise the mutual value of scientific, and local and traditional knowledge

Build a robust understanding of biodiversity risks, opportunities, uncertainties and definitions of success through a combination of different forms and sources of knowledge. Recognise and protect the leadership of women from Indigenous Peoples and local communities and people of African descent in safeguarding intergenerational traditional or ancestral knowledge that sustains biodiversity.  Prioritise the protection, intergenerational transfer and application of this knowledge for future use to enable societal and ecological resilience under a planetary crisis.

 

7. Promote collaborative and coherent action and investment
Encourage inclusive collaboration between stakeholders across sectors, to ensure that different initiatives and sources of funding complement and support, rather than duplicate each other and allow for greater reach. Prioritise partnerships that amplify the leadership of local actors, particularly women and underrepresented groups, and ensure that their priorities and knowledge drive collaborative action. States should adopt a co-ordinated ‘whole-of-government’ approach across the environmental challenges of biodiversity loss, climate change and desertification, as well as finance, trade, investment, agriculture, development and human rights.

 

8. Safeguard local actors, beyond ‘do no harm’
Go beyond harm prevention by actively promoting the realisation of human rights and the well-being and resilience of local actors, especially Indigenous Peoples and local communities and people of African descent, women and youth. Create enabling environments that support their leadership and agency. Take proactive action to protect local stakeholders – including environmental defenders – from harm, including gender-based violence and actions which undermine their agency or cause further marginalisation.

How GCBC projects are already putting the Principles to work

Across the portfolio we see these ideas in motion. In Colombia, the Gran Tescual Indigenous Reservation Climate Plan was proposed by Indigenous women, with research designed around community priorities – an example of devolved decision-making and recognition of rights. In Ethiopia, Multifunctional Agroforestry (ICRAF) is testing options with smallholder farmers in highland systems, adapting approaches as the work unfolds—flexible programming in practice.

Along coasts, Translating Research into Action for Seagrass (WWF-UK) in Vietnam focuses on how evidence can inform local management and livelihoods, while GlobalSeaweed (SAMS) in Indonesia and Malaysia works with small-scale seaweed farmers on production, quality and market issues—joining up biodiversity aims with everyday economic realities.

Projects also show what collaboration looks like across systems. Building Adaptive Fisheries Governance Capacity (University of Birmingham) in Uganda and Malawi works with agencies and communities on decision-making and learning cycles that can persist beyond any single project. In Kenya, Understanding Cherangani links to human wellbeing (Nature Kenya) brings together community forest associations and conservation actors to align protection with local needs.

Finally, BioOmo (University of Leeds) is examining biodiversity and climate resilience in the Omo–Turkana Basin, where understanding different knowledge systems, and making space for them, matters for policy and practice. Across these and other projects, the through-line is clear: when rights are respected, decisions shared, and multiple knowledges valued, biodiversity outcomes are more durable and benefits better distributed.

 

 

Hosting the Principles on the GCBC website is a small step. The real work is in how research projects are co- created, designed and delivered, and how people are treated along the way. We’ll continue to share stories and learning from across GCBC projects that show what inclusive nature action looks like in practice, and we welcome examples, thoughts and ideas from others doing the same.

Tags

Conservation and Restoration Governance Improving livelihoods Indigenous Peoples Social Inclusion

Share

Related