Evaluating land suitability

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
and water availability for
surface irrigation in the
Research
Abbay basin of Ethiopia
Cite this article: Kassie YA, Yimam AY, Assefa Yilkal A. Kassie1, Abdu Y. Yimam2, Tewodros T. Assefa2
TT, Belay SA. 2022 Evaluating land suitability and
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

water availability for surface irrigation in the and Sisay A. Belay2

Abbay basin of Ethiopia. R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 1
School of Civil and Water Resource Engineering, Woldia University, Woldia, Amhara 400,
220674. Ethiopia
2
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220674 Faculty of Civil and Water Resource Engineering, Bahir Dar Institute of Technology,
Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar 26, Ethiopia
TTA, 0000-0003-4241-4159

Received: 6 June 2022 This study was conducted in the Abbay basin of Ethiopia to
Accepted: 22 November 2022 evaluate land suitability for irrigation considering both surface
and groundwater sources using the analytic hierarchy process.
Multiple factors which affect irrigated agriculture productivity
were considered, and an 85% threshold was applied to identify
irrigable land. The suitability result was validated using
Subject Category: ground truth data from existing irrigation projects for surface
Earth and environmental science water sources and depth to groundwater data for groundwater
sources. The low flow potential of rivers, which is dependable
Subject Areas: for surface irrigation, was evaluated against suitable land
hydrology considering the most dominant crops. The result showed that
nearly 10% of the basin area (19 192 km2) and 5.3% of the basin
(10 364 km2) were found suitable for surface irrigation from
Keywords:
rivers and groundwater, respectively. South Gojam was found
land suitability, surface and groundwater
to be the most suitable sub-basin (approx. 3880 km2) for surface
potential, analytical hierarchy process, irrigation, whereas Muger was found to be the most suitable
surface irrigation, Abbay basin sub-basin (approx. 2105 km2) for surface irrigation from rivers
and groundwater, respectively. Depth to groundwater was
shallow for Muger as compared with other sub-basins. The
validation result depicted more than 83% and 73% overlap for
Author for correspondence:
surface and groundwater sources, respectively. Land suitability
Tewodros T. Assefa and water availability assessment result in the Abbay basin
e-mail: [email protected] shows a promising result for surface irrigation developments.

1. Introduction
Agriculture in Ethiopia contributes 43% of the national gross
domestic product (GDP) [1,2]. The crop production system is
mainly on rain-fed agriculture with limited irrigation practice [3,4].

© 2022 The Authors. Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits
unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
 Rainfall variability frequently hampers the rain-fed production system in the nation [5,6]. Consequently, food 2
insecurity and frequent drought caused by the unreliable rainfall distribution are common, which affect the

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
livelihoods of the rural community [7,8], depicting the need to expand irrigated agriculture for sustainable
food supply in the nation [9,10]. Adequate suitable land resources and water availability are key to
transforming the rain-fed agricultural system into irrigated agriculture [11,12].
Irrigated agriculture is critical to reducing the adverse effect of rainfall variability and improving crop
production [13,14]. However, understanding the potential of water resources (surface water and
groundwater source) is essential for the proper planning and development of irrigation projects
[15,16]. Surface water has been used as the main source of irrigation while the use of groundwater is
limited to domestic use [17–19]. Groundwater is more reliable for irrigation than surface water, due to
its slow reaction to climate change and contaminants [20]. Besides, a recent study [19] showed that
about 8% of the irrigable land in Ethiopia could be addressed using only shallow groundwater. Even
though groundwater remains a reliable resource, the lack of technology and information on the
potential of the available resource hampers its use for irrigation [20,21].

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

Water resource planning for surface irrigation requires information about the land suitability, water
availability and water requirements of crops in irrigable areas in time and space [22,23]. Evaluating the
potential of water resources and areas suitable for irrigation purposes helps to increase water and crop
productivity and cost-effective use of land resources [24,25]. On the other hand, identifying suitable land
for surface irrigation requires the evaluation of multiple factors that affect irrigated agriculture using
multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) in a geographic information system (GIS) environment.
The GIS-based MCE technique has been used in several water resource studies such as hydropower
potential site selection [26,27], erosion hotspot identification [28–31], irrigation suitable site assessment
[32,33] and wastewater disposal site selection [34–37]. Similarly, there have been many studies conducted
on the assessment of irrigable land potential [38–41] in the Ethiopian highlands. In the Shaya river sub-
basin of the Oromiya region, around 47.3% of the land was found suitable for irrigation [22]. Similarly, 9%
of land suitable for irrigation was estimated in the Gilo sub-basin of Gambella [39]. Birhanu et al. [41]
reported significant suitable land for irrigation in the Dirma river basin (68.3%). In the Rib and Gumara
watershed of North Ethiopia, around 93% of the land was estimated suitable for surface irrigation
developments [38]. Assefa et al. [20] evaluated potentially irrigable areas for home gardens and found
about 1.2% of the irrigable land of the Lake Tana basin could be addressed from rivers and up to 2.4% of
the irrigable land from groundwater operated under conventional irrigation techniques. Worqlul et al. [42]
found around 20% of the Lake Tana basin is suitable for surface irrigation. Our study focused on the
Abbay basin, which has been designated as one of the growth corridors for economic development by the
government of Ethiopia to end poverty [43]. The basin covers 20% of the nation’s land area, 50% of the
country’s surface water resources, 25% of the nation’s population and over 40% of the nation’s
agricultural product [44]. In addition, a significant amount of run-off from the highlands to the
downstream countries, especially to Sudan and Egypt has been contributed from the Abbay basin [45]
which needs investigation on its potential for irrigation.
There is a little study conducted on the investigation of surface irrigation potential from surface water
sources in the Abbay basin by Yimere & Assefa [46] using GIS-MCE techniques and Yalew et al. [44]
using the Mike Hydro model considering existing irrigation projects. In this study, we integrated
assessment of land suitability and water availability for irrigation considering multiple factors which
are lacking currently in the basin. Besides, the low flow potential of the major rivers in the Abbay
basin for surface irrigation has been addressed. The results from this study would help local decision-
makers and stakeholders by providing evidence of the potential expansion of small-scale irrigated
agriculture to help improve both water and land productivity.

2. Study area
Abbay basin, often called Blue Nile basin, (figure 1) is located in the Northwest part of Ethiopia from latitude
70°450 to 120°460 N and from longitude 340°060 to 400°000 E. The basin extends about 400 km from north to
south and about 550 km from east to west having a total surface area coverage of 199 812 km2. It shares a
boundary with the Tekeze basin to the north, the Awash basin to the east and the Baro-Akobo basin to
the southwest. The country’s largest freshwater lake and the source of the Abbay (Blue Nile) River, Lake
Tana, are located to the north of the basin. Abbay basin is the second largest river basin in Ethiopia next
to the Wabishebele basin. It has the largest share in terms of annual run-off potential (54.8 billion m3). The
basin accounts for more than 28% of Ethiopia’s total population, 45% of the surface water resource, 40%
 37º0′0′′ E 44º0′0′′ E 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E 3

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
14º0′0′′ N

12º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N
6º0′0′′ N

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

main rivers

lakes
0 75 150
0 225 450 Ethiopia river basins km
km Abbay basin

Figure 1. Map of the study area (Abbay basin of Ethiopia).

of the agricultural product and most of the hydropower and irrigation potential [47]. The basin contributes
over 40% of the nation’s agricultural product [44]. The basin has been chosen as a growth corridor to achieve
socio-economic development because of its huge potential [48].
The dominant soil texture of the entire basin is heavy clay [49] and the major soil types are Luvisols,
Vertisols, Nitisols, Leptosols, Gelysolsl and Fluvisols. The rainfall season runs mostly from June to
September with a range of annual rainfall variation from 779 to 2457 mm, observed from the recordings
of 10 years of meteorological data (2008–2018). The average air temperature also ranges from 16 to 25°C
across the basin. Its altitude ranges from 483 (western part of the basin) to 4266 m.a.s.l. (eastern part of the
basin), done during digital elevation model (DEM) preparation. Residents practised irrigation mostly by
traditionally diverting rivers and manual lifting of groundwater to supplement the rain-fed production
system both from groundwater and surface water sources [50].
Rope and washer systems, pulley systems and bucket systems have been practised in some parts of
the sub-basins to extract groundwater and used for drinking and home garden vegetable production. The
dominant vegetables cultivated in the region are onion, carrot, potato, sugarcane, garlic, tomato, pepper
and beetroot [20,51]. Similarly, the dominant cereals grown across the basin are sorghum, wheat and
maize [52]. Irrigation from surface water sources has been implemented to some extent through small-
to large-scale irrigation projects constructed by the government [53]. Among the large-scale irrigation
projects, Fincha, Ribb, Koga, Gilgel Abbay, Anger, Tiss Abbay, Jemma, Beles and Dedissa irrigation
projects were constructed to maximize productivity. The maximum irrigable land from these large
irrigation projects was around 80 000 ha. In addition, there are small-scale irrigation projects, weirs,
constructed by the regional government.

3. Material and methods

First, suitable land for irrigation was identified in the Abbay basin from both surface and shallow
groundwater sources using the multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) technique (figure 2). Shallow groundwater
for this study is defined as any subsurface water accumulated in a well depth of less than 25 m [19]. Soil
capability index (SCI), land use/land cover, slope, rainfall deficit, proximity to urban centres and road
networks and population density were considered as major factors commonly used for suitability
evaluation, both from surface and groundwater sources [19,42]. In addition, proximity to the river
network was considered for land suitability evaluation from the surface water, whereas depth to
groundwater and salinity were considered for land suitability evaluation from groundwater sources.
Several spatial and temporal data (table 1) were used in this study to achieve the research objectives. The
factors were reclassified based on their suitability ranges (table 2) for surface irrigation. The pairwise
ranking technique was used to develop weights for the factors comparing one-to-one (comparison matrix)
 4
DEM river urban road population soil land use climate GW

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
rainfall reference

soil capability index

slope Euclidian distance (depth, texture and
drainage) rainfall deficit

reclassify

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

pairwise ranking
weighted
overlay

constraints

validation
suitable land for surface suitable land for surface
irrigation from shallow irrigation from surface

irrigation demand

potential of rivers

Figure 2. Framework to identify suitable land for irrigation from surface and groundwater (GW).

Table 1. Spatial and temporal data used in this study and their sources.

data type source spatial resolution (m)

digital elevation model (DEM) United States Geological Survey (USGS) 30

land use land/cover Abbay Basin Authority 30
soil Africa Soil Information Services (AfSIS) 250
population density Global Gridded Population Database 1000
groundwater depth and salinity British Geological Survey (BGS), for validation 5000
existing groundwater depth for Amhara National Regional State Water Resources Bureau —
validation
road network, the network of Abbay Basin Authority —
towns and the river network
climate Ethiopian National Meteorological Agency —
stream discharge Abbay Basin Authority —
irrigated land in Abbay basin Abbay Basin Authority —

separately for surface water source [40,42] and groundwater source [19,20,54]. The weighted overlay was
used to identify potentially irrigable land from the surface and groundwater sources. A constraint map
was developed from water bodies, wetlands, urban areas and protected areas. Potentially irrigable land
 Table 2. A general framework of land suitability classification for irrigation [20]. 5

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
class name land description

S1 highly suitable land without significant limit; this land is the best possible and does not reduce
productivity or required increased inputs
S2 moderately suitable land that is suitable but has a limitation that either reduces productivity or
requires an increase of inputs to sustain productivity compared with S1
S3 marginally suitable land with limitations so severe that benefits are reduced and/or the input
required to sustain production needs to be increased so that this cost is only
marginally justified
S4 (N1) currently not land having limitations that may be surmountable in time but which cannot be

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

suitable corrected with existing knowledge at a currently acceptable cost
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

S5 (N2) permanently not land having limitations that appear as severe as to preclude any possibilities of
suitable successful sustained use of the land of a given land use

was multiplied with a constraint map which is 0 (constraint) and 1 (can be used for irrigation) to limit
irrigation in the constraint areas. An 85% threshold value was used based on Worqlul et al. [19] and
Assefa et al. [20] to identify suitable areas for irrigation. In the second stage, the land suitability evaluation
result was validated using information from shallow groundwater wells (depth) and currently irrigated
lands from rivers. In the third stage, a case study was conducted to evaluate the potential of main rivers
to address suitable land for irrigation considering the irrigation requirements of dominant crops grown in
the basin, and the low flow (90 percentile flow) of rivers based on Yimam et al. [55].

3.1. Slope
The slope of land has a major impact on irrigation suitability in terms of land preparation and irrigation
operation and efficiency [56]. A 30 m DEM was used to drive the slope map of the study area for
irrigation suitability analysis. The slopes were reclassified based on their suitability for surface
irrigation according to [42] into five classes; highly suitable (0–2%), moderately suitable (2–8%),
marginally suitable (8–12%), less suitable (12–30%) and currently not suitable (greater than 30%).

3.2. Soil capability index

The suitability of soil for sustained production of cultivated crops which depends on soil depth, soil
texture and soil drainage was expressed using the SCI [57], which describes the ability of soil for
irrigation practices [20]. The data from AfSIS are available with 250 m resolution across depth; 0–5 cm,
5–15 cm, 15–30 cm, 30–60 cm, 60–100 cm and 100–200 cm. The depth-wise soil physical properties
were aggregated by weighted average techniques and classified according to the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil classification method to get the texture, depth and drainage of
the entire Abbay basin soils considering the maximum root depth of crops grown in the area
(100 cm). The suitability of the soil for irrigation was determined by the SCI using equation (3.1) [58].
   
B C
SCI ¼ A   , ð3:1Þ
100 100

where A, B and C are soil texture rating, soil depth rating and soil drainage class rating, respectively. The
SCI was reclassified according to Teka et al. [58], as highly suitable (greater than 80%), moderately
suitable (60–80%), marginally suitable (45–60%), less suitable (30–40%) and currently not suitable (less
than 30%).

3.2.1. Soil texture rating

The textural class for the Abbay basin was clay, clay loam, loam, sandy clay loam, silty clay and silty clay
loam (figure 3a). The soil water-holding capacity was taken as the most important parameter for
 (a) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E 6
N

12º0′0′′ N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
9º0′0′′ N
soil texture
silty clay loam
silty clay
sandy clay loam
loam
0 75 150 clay loam
km clay

(b) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (c) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E 42º0′0′′ E

N N

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

12º0′0′′ N

12º0′0′′ N
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

9º0′0′′ N

9º0′0′′ N

soil drainage
well drained
soil depth (cm) very poorly drained
somewhat poorly drained
high : 175
somewhat excessively drained
0 75 150 low : 13 0 75 150 poorly drained
km km moderately well drained

Figure 3. Soil capability indexing factors in the Abbay basin; (a) soil texture, (b) soil depth (cm) and (c) soil drainage.

irrigation [59] and used for suitability classification in this study. According to FAO [59], soil textures
were classified into four based on suitability for irrigation practice considering water-holding capacity
as a suitability indicator. These are highly suitable (silt, silt loam and silty clay loam), moderately
suitable (silty clay and clay), marginally suitable (sandy clay loam) and not suitable (sand).

3.2.2. Soil depth rating

FAO [60] standard guidelines for evaluation of surface irrigation were used for soil depth (figure 3b)
suitability classification considering more water and nutrient be provided for plants in a deeper soil
than in shallow soil depth. Consequently, the soil depth was classified into four suitability classes:
highly suitable (greater than 100 cm), moderately suitable (80–100 cm), marginally suitable (50–80 cm)
and not suitable (less than 50 cm).

3.3. Soil drainage rating

Soil drainage is important for good aeration in plant roots and better growth and productivity of
irrigated crops. The soil drainage (figure 3c) for the Abbay basin has six classes; well-drained,
moderately well-drained, somewhat excessively drained, poorly drained, somewhat poorly drained
and very poorly drained soils. The soil drainage classes were reclassified into four suitability classes,
based on FAO [60], which are a function of soil depth. Thus, the suitability classes are well-drained to
moderately drained soil (depth greater than 100 cm), imperfectly drained soil (depth 80–100 cm),
poorly drained soil (depth 50–80 cm) and very poorly drained soil (depth less than 50 cm). The order
of suitability classes was from highly suitable (the former) to currently not suitable (the latter).

3.4. Land use and land cover

The land-use pattern of a watershed has a strong impact on water quality and water resource availability
for irrigation practice and also for irrigation operation [61]. The Abbay basin land-use types (figure 4)
were reclassified based on FAO [60] guidelines ranging from highly suitable to permanently not
suitable based on the cost of land preparation for agriculture and constraints (urban area, water body,
 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E 7
N

12º0′0′′ N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
land use types
bush land
9º0′0′′ N cultivated
grassland
water body
rock land
shrub land
urban
0 75 150

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

km forest

Figure 4. Land use and land cover of Abbay basin.

wetlands). Accordingly, agricultural land is classified as highly suitable, followed by grassland, which
requires land clearing and levelling as moderately suitable land. Shrub and bare land require a higher
initial investment and are classified as marginally suitable land. Rock land, woodland, bamboo, forest
and plantations were currently not suitable classes, whereas, water, urban and wetland were
permanently not suitable classes.

3.5. Population density and proximity to urban, road and rivers

Market outlets having easy access to roads and proximity to the urban centres with densely populated
areas are regarded as highly suitable for irrigation to access agricultural inputs and sell products. In
addition, distance from rivers is influential for surface irrigation from rivers. Geometric interval
ranging techniques were used to reclassify the suitable land for irrigation due to the high variability
of the population density data based on Huan et al. [62]. Proximity to the road network, urban centres
and river networks was computed using Euclidean distance and reclassified using the equal interval
ranging technique based on Teshome & Halefom [63]. Reclassification was made into eight classes for
each factor based on Worqlul et al. [19].

3.6. Rainfall deficit

Rainfall deficit is one of the harmful effects of climatic shocks which affect agricultural productivity and
guide the use of irrigation practices to improve productivity [64]. A positive rainfall deficit value
indicates that the rainfall is higher than evapotranspiration and a sufficient amount of water is
available from rainfall, indicating irrigation supplement is not needed. Whereas, the negative rainfall
deficit values indicate that evapotranspiration is higher than rainfall, indicating the need for
additional irrigation water for crop production, which is the case for this study. Ten-year monthly
rainfall, temperature, wind speed, sunshine hour and relative humidity of 58 meteorological stations
were collected from the Ethiopian National Meteorological Agency (ENMA) from the years 2008 to
2018 (figure 5). The monthly rainfall was aggregated on an annual basis for each station. The
potential evapotranspiration was computed using the Penman–Monteith method [65] as shown in
equation (3.2) for each station and aggregated into annual values for each station. The inverse distance
weighting (IDW) technique [66] was applied to map both rainfall and evapotranspiration on a
basin scale, and rainfall deficits were computed by deducting evapotranspiration from rainfall. The
arithmetic averaging technique and normal mean ratio method [67] were used to fill the missing data.
The rainfall deficit was reclassified into five classes based on the equal interval ranging technique.
900
0:408D(Rn  G) þ g u2 ðes  ea Þ
ETo ¼ T þ 273 : ð3:2Þ
D þ gð1 þ 0:34u2 Þ

where ETo, Rn, G, T, u2, es, ea, Δ and γ are reference evapotranspiration (mm d−1), net radiation at the crop
surface (MJ m−2 d−1), soil heat flux density (MJ m−2 d−1), air temperature (°C), wind speed at 2 m height
 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E 8
N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
12º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

meteorological stations
0 75 150 Abbay sub basins
km

Figure 5. Meteorological stations in the Abbay basin.

36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E
N
12º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N

depth to groundwater
VS (less than 7 m)
S (7 – 25 m)
0 75 150 SM (25 – 50 m)
km

Figure 6. Depth to groundwater in the Abbay basin.

(m s−1), saturation vapour pressure (KPa), actual vapour pressure (KPa), slope vapour pressure curve
(KPa °C−1) and psychometric constant (KPa °C−1), respectively.

3.7. Groundwater depth and salinity

Groundwater is an important source of water for irrigation where surface water is relatively scarce,
depending on the salt concentration [68], in which low-salinity areas have greater productivity from
irrigation [69]. Depth to groundwater was used to evaluate the land suitability for irrigation using a
groundwater source (figure 6). The depth of groundwater was reclassified into suitability classes
based on the effort needed to extract water [20], and only shallow groundwater was considered for
this study. In addition, the concentration of salt in the groundwater was also obtained from BGS, and
 Table 3. Pairwise comparison matrix scaling [72]. 9

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
intensity of importance definition explanation

1 equal importance two factors contribute equally to the objective

3 somewhat more important experience and judgement are slightly favourable one over
the other
5 much more important experience and judgement strongly favour one over the other
7 very much more important experience and judgement strongly favour one over the
other; its importance is demonstrated in practice
9 absolutely more important the evidence favouring one over the other is of the highest
possible validity

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

2,4,6,8 intermediate values when compromise is needed
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

its suitability for irrigation was judged based on the concentration of total dissolved solids (TDSs)
according to Singh & Singh [70].

3.8. Constraint to irrigation

A constraint serves to limit the alternatives under consideration. In many cases, constraints are areas
excluded from the consideration that should be coded with a zero, and those open for consideration
should be also coded with a one. In this study, permanently unsuitable land (constraint) such as water
bodies, wetlands, major paved roads, urban/built-up areas and protected areas were considered as
constraints for physical land suitability for irrigation. A constraint map with a value of 0 and 1 was
used to exclude the non-suitable areas from the preliminary suitable land. A constraint map (map
with 0 and 1 values) was developed and multiplied with the developed suitability map to avoid
limitations (water body, wetland, urban areas, forest and protected areas) that influence surface
irrigation practice.

3.9. The pairwise ranking technique

The pairwise ranking technique [71] was used to assign a weight to the factors comparing them on a one-
to-one basis using a scale from 1 to 9 (table 3). The highest value (9) refers to absolute importance,
whereas, the lowest value (1) refers to equal importance and is reciprocated in the transpose position
to indicate insignificant. The pairwise comparison matrix was adopted from [19,20,42,54]. The
analytical hierarchical process (AHP) [73] was applied to compute the final suitability mapping for
surface irrigation. The overall weights of the factors were distributed to individual factor suitability
classes using the equal interval ranging technique.

3.10. Assessment of land and water potential for irrigation

The suitability of land for surface irrigation was determined from both groundwater and surface water
using the weighted overlay of all factors. A suitability threshold (85%) was considered to identify the
most suitable area for irrigation based on Worqlul et al. [19]. The suitability map was developed
separately for both water sources in the Abbay basin. The suitable land at different threshold levels,
starting from 80% with a 2% increment, was done to get insight into the suitable area for surface
irrigation at various threshold levels.
The suitable land for irrigation from surface water was compared with small- to large-scale existing
irrigation projects command areas for irrigation diversion in the basin. The command areas of ten
irrigation projects—Dedissa, Beles, Fincha, Megech (Robit and Seraba pump), Ribb, Koga, Jemma,
Gilgel Abbay and Anger Abbay—were used to validate the suitable land at 85% threshold from the
surface water source. Similarly, the suitable land for surface irrigation from groundwater at an 85%
threshold was validated using groundwater depth data in some selected portions of the basin.
In addition, the low flow potential of rivers in the basin for irrigation was computed and compared
with the suitable land area at the 85% threshold for the North Gojam sub-basin as a case study. The
 North Gojam sub-basin was selected because of data availability and access to stream flow. A total of 15 10
river gauging stations were considered. The low flow volume (90 percentile flow) of rivers was

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
considered to compute the potentially irrigable land from rivers [55]. Low flow volume was divided
by the net irrigation requirement of crops dominantly grown in the Abbay basin (sorghum, wheat
and maize) [19], using equation (3.3) to get the potentially irrigable land from rivers without the need
for storage structure. Crop water requirement was done using the crop water assessment tool (i.e.
CROPWAT 8). The crop coefficient of the dominant crops was taken from FAO [74].
NIR ¼ 1:6  Kc  ETo – ER, ð3:3Þ

where NIR, Kc, ETo and ER are net irrigation requirement (mm), crop coefficient (dimensionless),
reference evapotranspiration (mm) and effective rainfall (mm), respectively. The coefficient 1.6 behind
Kc was introduced to account for the inefficacy of surface irrigation due to water application losses,
conveyance losses, losses for land preparation and leaching [55]. Details of surface irrigation losses in
the region can be referred from Belay et al. [75].

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Land suitability for surface irrigation based on individual factors
The consistency ratio (CR) of a pairwise matrix was checked and found to be 0.078, and 0.071 for surface
and groundwater sources, respectively. According to Chen et al. [76], the result was found trustworthy
(CR ≤ 0.2). According to Saaty [77], the judgement during pairwise comparison becomes
untrustworthy if the CR is far from 0.1, which shows our results are within acceptable limits. The
procedures and approaches used to calculate the CR can be referred from Mu & Pereyra-Rojas [78].
The result from the pairwise matrix (table 4) showed that proximity to the river network was the
most important factor (26%) followed by the slope (20%) and SCI (18%). Rainfall deficit and land use
were found to be the least important factors, accounting for 6% and 4% weight, respectively, for
surface irrigation. Similarly, the most important factors for surface irrigation from groundwater
sources were depth to groundwater (30%), slope (20%) and SCI (18%), respectively, (table 5); whereas,
road and land use were found to be the least important factors accounting for 6% and 4%, respectively.
The suitability of land for surface irrigation based on individual criteria is presented in figure 7.
Considering slope, about 6.3% of the Abbay basin, was found highly suitable (0–2%), 30% moderately
suitable (2–8%); 13.3% marginally suitable (8–12%), 30.2% less suitable (12–30%) and 20.2% currently
not suitable (greater than 30%), respectively, (figure 7a). The land-use suitability assessment showed
that about 52% of the landmass (i.e. dominantly cultivated, moderately cultivated, irrigation,
perennial crops and state farmland) was found highly suitable followed by 6.5% marginally suitable
(i.e. shrub and bush land) (figure 7b). Similarly, suitability based on SCI showed that about 63% of
the landmass was found highly suitable indicating good water-holding capacity of soil which is
well drained (figure 7k) and deep soil depth (figure 7j ). Moderately suitable land use which requires
relatively less investment for land preparation was found at about 27% of the landmass (figure 7c).
Considering the proximity to the road network, urban centre and river network (figure 7d–f ); the
highly suitable landmass was found at 52%, 24% and 42%, respectively. On the other hand, the
densely populated regions (i.e. 16 234–46 324 persons km−2) cover 15 km2 of the basin (figure 7g).
About 36% of the basin has a sparsely populated area which had 364–809 persons km−2. According to
the rainfall deficit suitability rating (figure 7h), about 50% of the basin area is suitable for surface
irrigation, (i.e. highly suitable (31%) and 20% marginally suitable). Considering depth to groundwater
(figure 7i), about 25% of the basin was highly suitable, and 71% was a moderately suitable area. The
very shallow depth (0–7 m below ground level) is accessed in 25% of the basin area, and a large share
(71% of the basin area) has been covered by a moderately suitable groundwater depth. The effect of
salinity on irrigation (figure 7l ) was evaluated based on the TDSs and found suitable for the entire
basin. The concentration of TDS for the entire basin was below 5 g l−1 and is moderately suitable [70].

4.2. Land suitability assessment from rivers

The suitability map (figure 8a) combining all factors showed a value ranging from 42% (least suitable) to
100% (most suitable land). After multiplying with the constraint map (figure 9), the range of suitability
ranges from 0% (least suitable) to 100% (highly suitable). The percentage of suitable land for surface
 Table 4. Pairwise comparison matrix and weight from rivers [19,40,42]. Note: SCI, RD and UR are soil capability index, rainfall 11
deficit and urban centre, respectively.

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
factors river slope SCI population RD UR road land use weight

river 1 2 3 3 4 3 2 5 26
slope 1/2 1 3 2 2 4 3 3 20
SCI 1/3 1/3 1 3 5 4 3 4 18
population 1/3 1/2 1/3 1 2 1 2 3 10
RD 1/4 1/2 1/5 1/2 1 1/3 1/3 3 6
UR 1/3 1/4 1/4 1 3 1 1 3 9
road 1/2 1/3 1/3 1/2 3 1 1 2 8
land use 1/5 1/3 1/4 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/1 1 4

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

Table 5. Pairwise comparison matrix and weight from groundwater [19,20,54]. Note: GWD is to mean groundwater depth.

factors GWD slope SCI population RD UR road land use weight

GWD 1 3 3 3 4 3 5 7 30
slope 1/3 1 3 3 4 3 3 3 20
SCI 1/3 1/3 1 3 5 4 3 4 18
population 1/3 1/3 1/3 1 2 1 2 3 9
RD 1/4 1/4 1/5 1/2 1 2 2 2 7
UR 1/3 1/3 1/4 1 1/2 1 ½ 3 7
road 1/5 1/3 1/3 1/2 1/2 2 1 2 6
land use 1/7 1/3 1/4 1/3 1/2 1/3 ½ 1 4

irrigation from rivers was extracted by the 16 sub-basins of the Abbay basin at an 85% threshold level
(table 6). The result showed that the highest suitable land for surface irrigation was found in the
South Gojam sub-basin (23%), followed by Fincha (22.9%) and Tana (21.5%) sub-basins. The suitable
land area at different threshold levels for the Abbay basin is presented in figure 8b with a 2%
increment (from 80% to 100%) for the prioritization of irrigation investments.

4.3. Land suitability for surface irrigation from shallow groundwater

The suitable land for surface irrigation from shallow groundwater ranges from 36% to 99% in order of
suitability from least suitable to most suitable (figure 10a). The suitable land was extracted at an 85%
threshold level for the 16 sub-basins and the potentially irrigable land is presented in table 7. The
result showed Muger, Jemma, Guder, Anger and Fincha had 26%, 19%, 17%, 14% and 13% suitable
land shares, respectively. Figure 10b depicts the irrigable area at the different threshold levels for the
prioritization of irrigation investments.

4.4. Low flow potential of rivers for irrigation

The low flow potential of rivers (stream flow) for surface irrigation located in the North Gojam sub-basin
is shown in table 8. The result showed a total of around 2263 km2 of potentially irrigable land from rivers
in the North Gojam sub-basin. Among the rivers in the sub-basin, the Abbay river contributes the
greatest low flow potential (1015.84 Mm3) for irrigation. The largest share of potentially irrigable land
from the Abbay river was found at around 2199 km2 followed by the Andassa river (38 km2). Based
on the low flow potential of rivers for irrigation, 64.5 km2 of irrigable land could be met through
rivers except for the Abbay River. The result also showed around 97% of the potentially irrigable land
 (a) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (b) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (c) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E 12
N N N
12º0′0′′ N

12º0′0′′ N

12º0′0′′ N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
9º0′0′′ N

9º0′0′′ N

9º0′0′′ N
suitability for slope suitability for SCI
S1 suitability for land use S1
S2 S1 S2
S3 S2 S3
S4 S3 S4
0 75 150 0 75 150 0 75 150
km S5 km S4 km S5

(d) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (e) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (f) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E

N N N
12º0′0′′ N

12º0′0′′ N
12º0′0′′ N

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

9º0′0′′ N

9º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N

suitability for road suitability for river

suitability for urban rivers S5
roads S5
S1 S5 S1 S6 S1 S6
S2 S6 S2 S2 S7
S7
S3 S7 S3 S8 S3 S8
0 75 150 0 75 150 0 75 150
km S4 S8 km S4 km S4

(g) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (h) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (i) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E

N N
12º0′0′′ N
12º0′0′′ N

12º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N

suitability for rainfall deficit 9º0′0′′ N

suitability for population density
S1
S1 S5 suitability for depth to groundwater
S2
S2 S6 S1
S3
S3 S7 S2
0 75 150 0 75 150 S4 0 75 150
km S4 S8 km km S3
S5

(j) 41º0′0′′ E 58º0′0′′ E

N
15º0′0′′ N
0

Abbay basin
0 500 1000 area of saline groundwater (>5 g/I TDS)
km

Figure 7. Land suitability for surface irrigation considering individual factors.

from rivers of the North Gojam sub-basin was contributed by the Abbay River. The maximum and
minimum net irrigation requirement for the entire Abbay basin was found to be 615 and 280 mm,
respectively (figure 11). The range of net irrigation requirements in the North Gojam sub-basin was
from 452 to 503 mm (table 8). In addition, the potential of all rivers for surface irrigation in the North
Gojam sub-basin (2263 km2) was found greater than the potential suitable irrigable land area from the
surface water source at 85% threshold level (1396.2 km2).

4.5. Validation of land suitability assessment

The comparison of suitable land for surface irrigation from rivers at an 85% threshold and the
corresponding existing irrigation projects for the selected basin is shown in table 9. The percentage
area of intersection for irrigation projects of Fincha, Ribb, Koga and Gilgel Abbay was found 100%.
Similarly, Anger, Tiss Abbay and Jemma irrigation projects have a large percentage of intersections;
94%, 92% and 88%, respectively. The last two irrigation projects (i.e. Beles and Dedissa) share the least
percentage area of intersection; 40% and 30%, respectively. On average, about 83% area of the
intersection was found from the existing irrigation projects as compared with the 85% suitable
land assessment.
 (a) 36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E (b) 13
N
12º0′0′′ N 60

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
suitable land area in thousands (km2)
suitability (%)
lakes 50
42 – 52
52 – 57 40
57 – 60
60 – 64 30
64 – 69
9º0′0′′ N

69 – 72 20
72 – 77
77 – 79
79 – 84 10
84 – 88

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

0 75 150 88 – 92 0
km
92 – 100 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98100
suitability threshold (%)
Figure 8. Land suitability for surface irrigation; suitability map (a) and suitability of land at different threshold levels (b).

36º0′0′′ E 39º0′0′′ E
N
12º0′0′′ N
9º0′0′′ N

constraint
0 75 150 no limitation
km

Figure 9. Constraint map.

Similarly, the suitable land from shallow groundwater computed with an 85% threshold was
compared with existing well depths (figure 12). A total of 18 shallow groundwater wells having a
maximum well depth of 29 m below ground level were selected for validation. The result showed that
more than 73% of wells used for validation were located on suitable land for surface irrigation from
groundwater sources.

5. Discussion
Land suitability assessment done in different parts of Ethiopian highlands indicated a promising result
for surface irrigation practice [19,20,38,39,42,44]. In the Shaya river sub-basin in Oromiya, around 47% of
the land was found suitable for surface irrigation from surface water sources [22]. The suitability analysis
from individual factors according to the study indicated soil, land use land cover and slope were
dominating, accounting for 98%, 93% and 66% of suitability, respectively. Similar work done on the
Gilo sub-basin of Gambella [39] reported around 9% of the land is suitable for surface irrigation. The
individual factors suitability from this study indicated around 92%, 90% and 87% suitability from
land use/land cover, soil and slope, respectively. Results from our findings indicated that SCI, land
use/land cover and slope had suitability of land for surface irrigation 99%, 61% and 50% of landmass,
respectively. The slope of land has a greater impact on surface irrigation for gravity flow, and its
 (a) 36°0'0"E 39°0'0"E (b) 35 14
N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
suitable land area in thousands (km2)
12°0'0"N 30
suitability (%)
lakes 25
36 – 47
47 – 51 20
51 – 55
55 – 60 15
60 – 65
65 – 70 10
9°0'0"N

70 – 74
74 – 78 5
78 – 82
82 – 86 0
86 – 91

80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

0 75 150
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

km
91 – 99 suitability threshold (%)

Figure 10. Land suitability for surface irrigation from shallow groundwater; land suitability (a) and suitability of land at different
threshold levels (b).

Table 6. Land suitability for surface irrigation from rivers across Abbay sub-basins at 85% threshold level.

name of sub-basin area of sub-basin (km2) suitable area (ha) percentage of suitable area

Anger 7878 72351.12 9.2

Beles 14 202 53823.58 3.8
Beshelo 13 184 8843.18 0.7
Dabus 20 241 200112.28 9.9
Didissa 19 229 242551.74 12.6
Dinder 14 807 250.52 0.09
Fincha 3923 89879.55 22.9
Guder 6937 101402.61 14.6
Jemma 15 628 169310.31 10.9
Muger 8129 132801.27 16.4
North Gojam 14 379 139621.51 9.7
Riad 8192 763.95 0.1
South Gojam 16 739 387977.50 23.2
Tana 11 975 256861.49 21.5
Welaka 6415 37768.69 5.9
Wenbera 12 952 22195.86 1.7

impact on suitability elaborated according to Worqlul et al. [54] indicated it has an impact on land
preparation, which affects a significant initial investment that weakens the economic feasibility.
Studies on the Lake Tana basin by Worqlul et al. [42] showed that 130 000 ha (11%) of land is suitable
for surface irrigation from surface water sources, which is slightly lower than our findings (21.5%). A
similar estimate was also reported by Assefa et al. [20] on the Tana basin, which is 21% considering
water storage structures. Similarly, [38,41] reported that 68% and 93% of the landmass in the Dirma
watershed and the Rib and Gumara watershed located in the upper Blue Nile was found suitable for
surface irrigation from rivers, respectively. Worqlul et al. [19] reported groundwater-surface irrigation
potential for Ethiopia to be around 8%. The study also showed Abbay basin is mostly dominated by
shallow groundwater wells (less than 25 m) with 5706 mm groundwater storage, 3.8 l s−1 aquifer yield
and approximately 21 186 km2 (11%) of suitable land for irrigation at an 85% suitability threshold. The
potential of irrigable land in the Abbay basin using surface water and groundwater sources was
found at 10% (19 165 km2 of land) and 5% (10 364 km2 of land), respectively, according to our study.
 Table 7. Potentially irrigable land from shallow groundwater across Abbay sub-basins at 85% threshold level. 15

area of sub-basin (km2)

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
name of sub-basin suitable area (ha) percentage of suitable area

Anger 7878 110937.74 14.1

Beles 14 202 565.69 0.04
Beshelo 13 184 73169.43 5.6
Dabus 20 241 3911.97 0.2
Didissa 19 229 32614.43 1.7
Dinder 14 807 0.10 0.0
Fincha 3923 50094.42 12.8
Guder 6937 117629.82 17.0

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Jemma 15 628 300869.76 19.3
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

Muger 8129 210453.79 25.9

North Gojam 14 379 25839.58 1.8
Riad 8192 307.64 0.04
South Gojam 16 739 12482.79 0.7
Tana 11 975 41729.30 3.5
Welaka 6415 51289.31 8.0
Wenbera 12 952 4464.50 0.3

Table 8. Low flow potential of rivers to address suitable land for surface irrigation in the North Gojam sub-basin. NIR and Q are
net irrigation requirement (mm) and stream flow volume (Mm3) at 90% exceedance probability.

irrigation potential

river name NIR (mm) Q (@90%) (Mm3) km2 ha

Abbay 462 1015.84 2198.78 219877.71

Andassa 470 18.01 38.32 3831.91
Azuari 473 2.26 4.78 477.80
Chena 435 0.19 0.43 43.45
Ezana 485 0.22 0.44 44.43
Mendel 455 0.34 0.75 74.73
Muga 503 1.66 3.29 329.03
Sedie 482 1.46 3.02 301.87
Suha 481 1.11 2.30 229.73
Tigdar 468 0.65 1.38 137.82
Wenka 430 0.15 0.36 35.81
Shina 452 2.25 4.97 496.68
Shegez 452 0.73 1.62 161.50
Tull 450 0.39 0.87 87.22
Zemma 470 0.72 1.53 153.19

The combined potential of groundwater and surface water was found to be 15% (29 529 km2 of land).
This indicated a slight reduction of suitable irrigable land from groundwater to the previous study.
This might be due to the coarse spatial resolution used for suitability factors and the method of
evapotranspiration estimation used and adopted by the previous study. In addition, a little study on
land suitability assessment from surface water in the Abbay basin was reported [44,46]. According to
 36°0'0"E 39°0'0"E 16
N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
12°0'0"N

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

9°0'0"N

NIR of Abbay basin

value (mm)
high : 615

low : 280
0 75 150
km

Figure 11. Net irrigation requirement. NIR (mm) for Abay basin.

Table 9. Comparison of suitable land area at 85% threshold with the existing irrigation projects (ground truth).

name of irrigation irrigation potential suitable land at 85% threshold percentage area of
project (ha) (ha) intersection

Fincha 20 000 19 715 100

Ribb 14 600 17 997 100
Koga 7004 9599 100
Gilgel Abbay 9980 13 422 100
Anger 14 450 13 528 94
Tiss abbay 14 928 13 797 92
Jemma 11 615 10 276 88
Beles 75 000 30 148 40
Dedissa 80 000 24 175 30

Yalew et al. [44] around 57 050 km2 (28.6%) highly suitable, 97 812 km2 (48.9%) moderately suitable land
for irrigation was found which is far beyond our findings. This is because of two reasons: (i) suitability
factors used in the study were somewhat different and (ii) reclassification of the factors for surface
irrigation suitability was not based on FAO standards. Similarly, Yimer & Assefa [46] reported around
738 138 ha of suitable land for surface irrigation from rivers and irrigation projects using the Mike
Hydro model, but the analysis was full of assumptions and scenarios based on 50% irrigation
efficiency considering different cropping patterns.
Irrigation requirement indirectly determines the size of irrigable land and needs careful investigation.
The range of net irrigation requirements for Ethiopian highlands ranged from 830 to 1630 mm [19] but
our findings showed a range of 280–618 mm for the Abbay basin. The minimum net irrigation
requirement across the nation (830 mm) was not even balanced by the maximum net irrigation
requirement across the Abbay basin. This might be due to the adoption of MODIS global large spatial
resolution evapotranspiration data to estimate the reference evapotranspiration and the choice of crops
to estimate irrigation requirements by the former study.
 36°0'0"E 39°0'0"E 17
N

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
12°0'0"N

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

9°0'0"N
Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

well
S4
S3
S2
0 75 150
km S1

Figure 12. Validation of suitable land from shallow groundwater using depth to wells. The red-coloured points on the map are
those wells selected for validation having a range of groundwater depth from 0 to 29 m.

groundwater source surface water source

400 000
suitable land area (ha)

320 000
240 000
160 000
80 000
0
Anger
Beles

Dinder
Beshelo

Muger

Riad

Wenbera
Dabus
Didissa

Guder

Welaka
North Gojam
Fincha

Jemma

South Gojam
Tana

Figure 13. Comparison of suitable land area for surface irrigation from rivers and shallow groundwater sources at 85% threshold
level for the Abbay sub-basins.

The suitable land for surface irrigation from shallow groundwater and rivers in each sub-basin is
shown in figure 13. The result showed that about 23.2% (3879.78 km2) of the South Gojam sub-basin
is suitable for surface irrigation from rivers, which was the highest among Abbay sub-basins, followed
by Fincha (22.9%) and Tana (21.5%) sub-basins. Whereas, the Dinder sub-basin has the least suitable
area from rivers (about 251 km2) mainly due to its higher elevation region dominated by steep slopes
mostly greater than 30%. A previous study by Assefa et al. [20] on Lake Tana showed 21% suitable
land for irrigation from surface water, considering water storage structures, which supports our
findings. Similarly, the maximum suitable land percentage for surface irrigation from shallow
groundwater was found at the Muger sub-basin (25.9% or 2104.54 km2) followed by Jemma (19.3%)
and Anger (14%). This is due to the suitability of slope, land use/land cover type, SCI and depth to
groundwater for irrigation compared with others in the basin for surface irrigation. The most suitable
sub-basins for surface irrigation using surface water and groundwater (figure 13) were, Anger
(9%,14%), Fincha (23%,19%), Guder (15%,17%), Jemma (11%,19%) and Muger (16%,26%) sub-basins,
 respectively. This is because these areas have suitable land for surface irrigation in terms of slope, SCI, 18
population and proximity to urban and roads, respectively. Dinder, Riad and Wenbera sub-basins

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
were the least suitable sub-basins for irrigation. The percentage area of intersection between irrigation
potential of existing irrigation projects and suitable land assessment at 85% threshold at selected
basins from Abbay basin showed 40% and 30% for Beles and Dedissa, respectively. The reason might
be that the designer might not consider the different land suitability factors for surface irrigation,
because most of the time designers may favour slope for gravity flow to happen to meet the farthest
command area over the other factors.

6. Conclusion
This research was done to evaluate the potential of irrigable land and water availability, considering both
surface water and groundwater sources using GIS-MCE techniques in the Abbay basin. A total of nine
factors were selected to identify the suitable land for surface irrigation. Groundwater depth

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

availability, proximity to the river and the slope were found the dominant factors affecting the
practice of surface irrigation, and their corresponding weights were 30%, 26% and 20%, respectively.
The potentially irrigable land from surface and groundwater sources at 85% suitability threshold was,
respectively, 10% and 5.3% of the entire Abbay basin. The suitable land assessment was validated and
found reasonable. Existing irrigation projects in the Abbay basin and their irrigation potential were
used to validate the surface water source irrigation suitability. The result indicated around 83% of the
area of intersection from the entire Abbay basin. Similarly, 73% of the area of the intersection was
found from the entire Abbay basin for groundwater source irrigation validated using the existing well
depths in the basin.
The potential of stream flow for surface irrigation was assessed based on the crop water requirement
of dominating crops cultivated in the region (sorghum). The maximum and minimum irrigation
requirement across the Abbay basin was found to be 615 and 280 mm, respectively. The result showed
almost 97% of the potentially irrigable land from stream flow was contributed by the Abbay River. A
total of around 2263 km2 of land could be irrigated from stream flow in the North Gojam sub-basin.
The potential of rivers except Abbay contributed only 64.5 km2 of irrigable land area in the sub-basin.
The most suitable sub-basins for surface irrigation using surface water and groundwater were Anger
(9%,14%), Fincha (23%,19%), Guder (15%,17%), Jemma (11%,19%) and Muger (16%,26%) sub-basins,
respectively. Dinder, Riad and Wenbera sub-basins were the least suitable sub-basins for surface
irrigation. The results from this study would help local decision-makers and stakeholders with the
expansion of small- to large-scale irrigation projects in suitable regions. In addition, it will give insight
to agricultural experts on where to supply agricultural inputs and advisory services to farmers to
increase agricultural productivity in the basin.
Data accessibility. The data can be found at Dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.zgmsbccds [79].
Authors’ contributions. Y.A.K.: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation,
writing—original draft; A.Y.Y.: conceptualization, formal analysis, methodology, visualization, writing—review and
editing; T.T.A.: conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, supervision, validation,
visualization, writing—review and editing; S.A.B.: conceptualization, supervision, writing—review and editing.
All authors gave final approval for publication and agreed to be held accountable for the work performed therein.
Conflict of interest declaration. The authors declare no competing interests.
Funding. This paper does not receive any funding sources.
Acknowledgement. We would like to acknowledge the Ethiopian National Metrological Agency (ENMA) and Abbay Basin
Authority for providing quality data for this research.

References
1. Nakawuka P, Langan S, Schmitter P, Barron J. 3. Gangadhara Bhat H, Moges DM. 2021 Climate 5. Yang M, Wang G, Ahmed KF, Adugna B, Eggen
2018 A review of trends, constraints and change and its implications for rainfed M, Atsbeha E, You L, Koo J, Anagnostou E. 2020
opportunities of smallholder irrigation in East agriculture in Ethiopia. J. Water Clim. Change The role of climate in the trend and variability
Africa. Glob. Food Sec. 17, 196–212. (doi:10. 12, 1229–1244. (doi:10.2166/wcc.2020.058) of Ethiopia’s cereal crop yields. Sci. Total
1016/j.gfs.2017.10.003) 4. Tilahun H, Teklu E, Michael M, Fitsum H, Environ. 723, 137893. (doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.
2. Kassa M, Andualem TG. 2020 Review of Awulachew SB. 2011 Comparative performance 2020.137893)
irrigation practice in Ethiopia, lessons from of irrigated and rainfed agriculture in Ethiopia. 6. Wondimagegnhu BA, Bogale BA. 2020 Small-
Israel. Irrig. Drain. Syst. Eng. 9, 1–6. World Appl. Sci. J. 14, 235–244. scale irrigation and its effect on food security of
 rural households in North-West Ethiopia: a 20. Assefa T, Jha M, Reyes M, Srinivasan R, Worqlul machine learning and statistical approaches in 19
comparative analysis. Ethiop. J. Sci. Technol. 13, AW. 2018 Assessment of suitable areas for home eastern India. Nat. Hazards 104, 1259–1294.
31–51. (doi:10.4314/ejst.v13i1.3) gardens for irrigation potential, water (doi:10.1007/s11069-020-04213-3)

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
7. Lewis K. 2017 Understanding climate as a availability, and water-lifting technologies. 32. Neissi L, Albaji M, Boroomand Nasab S. 2020
driver of food insecurity in Ethiopia. Clim. Water (Switzerland) 10, 495. (doi:10.3390/ Combination of GIS and AHP for site selection of
Change 144, 317–328. (doi:10.1007/s10584- w10040495) pressurized irrigation systems in the Izeh plain,
017-2036-7) 21. Walker D, Parkin G, Schmitter P, Gowing J, Iran. Agric. Water Manag. 231, 106004. (doi:10.
8. Asrat D, Anteneh A. 2020 Status of food Tilahun SA, Haile AT, Yimam AY. 2019 Insights 1016/j.agwat.2020.106004)
insecurity in dryland areas of Ethiopia: a review. from a multi-method recharge estimation 33. Neissi L, Albaji M, Nasab SB. 2019 Site selection
Cogent Food Agric. 6, 1853868. (doi:10.1080/ comparison study. Groundwater 57, 245–258. of different irrigation systems using an
23311932.2020.1853868) (doi:10.1111/gwat.12801) analytical hierarchy process integrated with GIS
9. Yohannes DF, Ritsema CJ, Solomon H, Froebrich 22. Tukura NG, Feyissa TA. 2020 GIS-based irrigation in a semi-arid region. Water Resour. Manag. 33,
J, van Dam JC. 2017 Irrigation water potential assessment on Shaya River sub-basin 4955–4967. (doi:10.1007/s11269-019-02434-1)
management: farmers’ practices, perceptions in Bale Zone, Oromia region, Ethiopia. J. Degrad. 34. Triantakonstantis D, Detsikas S, Kavvadias V,
and adaptations at Gumselassa irrigation Min. Lands Manag. 7, 2075. (doi:10.15243/ Papadopoulou Z, Sparangis P, Katsenios N,
scheme, North Ethiopia. Agric. Water Manag. jdmlm.2020.072.2075) Vlachakis D, Efthimiadou A. 2021 Land
191, 16–28. (doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2017.05.009) 23. Gonfa BG, Hatiye SD, Finssa MM. 2021 Land suitability assessment for olive mill wastewater

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

10. Assefa TT, Adametie TF, Yimam AY, Belay SA, suitability and surface water resources potential disposal by integrating multicriteria decision
Degu YM, Hailemeskel ST, Tilahun SA, Reyes for irrigation in Becho Plain, upper Awash basin, support tools. EMBnet.journal 26, 947. (doi:10.
MR, Prasad PVV. 2021 Evaluating irrigation and Ethiopia. Irrig. Drain. 70, 936–957. (doi:10. 14806/ej.26.1.947)
farming systems with Solar MajiPump in 1002/ird.2575) 35. Kuru A, Tok E, Guroglu Aktas M, Demir HH,
Ethiopia. Agronomy 11, 1–20. 24. Suênio Anderson SAF, Coelho VHR, Tsuyuguchi Özcan HK, Demir G. 2021 GIS and multicriteria
11. Jägermeyr J. 2020 Agriculture’s historic twin- BB, de O. Galvão C, Rêgo JC, Almeida C das N, decision analysis for landfill site selection in
challenge toward sustainable water use and Abels A, Pinnekamp J, Rufino IAA. 2021 Spatial Edirne Province, Turkey. J. Inst. Sci. Technol. 11,
food supply for all. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4, multicriteria approach to support water resources 969–981. (doi:10.21597/jist.792249))
35. (doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.00035) management with multiple sources in semi-arid 36. Dolui S, Sarkar S. 2021 Identifying potential
12. Jaramillo S, Graterol E, Pulver E. 2020 Sustainable areas in Brazil. J. Environ. Manag. 297, 113399. landfill sites using multicriteria evaluation
transformation of rainfed to irrigated agriculture (doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113399) modeling and GIS techniques for Kharagpur city
through water harvesting and smart crop 25. Pedras C, Lança R, Martins F, Soares C, Guerrero of West Bengal, India. Environ. Chall. 5, 100243.
management practices. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. C, Paixão H. 2015 Remote sensing technologies (doi:10.1016/j.envc.2021.100243)
4, 437086. (doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.437086) applied to the irrigation water management on 37. Kursah MB. 2018 Resolving the landfill siting
13. Yimam AY, Assefa TT, Adane NF, Tilahun SA, Jha a golf course. In EGU General Assembly, Vienna, impasse: modelling technocratic and indigenous
MK, Reyes MR. 2020 Experimental evaluation Austria, 12–17 April. Conf. Abstracts. perspectives using GIS multicriteria approach.
for the impacts of conservation agriculture with 26. Badang DAQ, Sarip CF, Tahud AP. 2019 GeoJournal 83, 707–724. (doi:10.1007/s10708-
drip irrigation on crop coefficient and soil Geographic information system (GIS) and 017-9796-5)
properties in the sub-humid Ethiopian multicriteria decision making (MCDM) for 38. Balew A, Nega W, Legese B, Semaw F. 2021
highlands. Water (Switzerland) 12, 1–20. optimal selection of hydropower location in Suitable potential land evaluation for surface
(doi:10.3390/W12040947) Rogongon, Iligan City. In 2018 IEEE 10th Int. water irrigation using remote sensing and GIS–
14. Worqlul AW, Dile YT, Schmitter P, Jeong J, Meki Conf. on Humanoid, Nanotechnology, MCE in the case of Rib–Gumara Watershed,
MN, Gerik TJ, Srinivasan R, Lefore N, Clarke N. Information Technology, Communication and Ethiopia. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 49,
2019 Water resource assessment, gaps, and Control, Environment and Management, 707–724. (doi:10.1007/s12524-021-01383-w)
constraints of vegetable production in Robit and (HNICEM). Baguio City, Philippines, 29 39. Hailu T, Shoeb Q. 2017 GIS based surface
Dangishta watersheds, Upper Blue Nile Basin, November–1 December 2018, pp. 1–5. (doi:10. irrigation suitability assessment and
Ethiopia. Agric. Water Manag. 226, 105767. 1109/HNICEM.2018.8666266) development of map for the low land Gilo sub-
(doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105767) 27. Romanelli JP, Silva LGM, Horta A, Picoli RA. basin of Gambella, Ethiopia. Civ. Environ. Res. 9,
15. Alattar MH, Troy TJ, Russo TA, Boyce SE. 2020 2018 Site selection for hydropower 21–27.
Modeling the surface water and groundwater development: a GIS-based framework to 40. Nigussie G, Moges MA, Moges MM, Steenhuis
budgets of the US using MODFLOW-OWHM. improve planning in Brazil. J. Environ. Eng. 144, TS. 2019 Assessment of suitable land for surface
Adv. Water Resour. 143, 103682. (doi:10.1016/j. 04018051. (doi:10.1061/(asce)ee.1943-7870. irrigation in ungauged catchments: Blue Nile
advwatres.2020.103682) 0001381) Basin, Ethiopia. Water (Switzerland) 11, 1465.
16. Santhanam K, Abraham M. 2018 Assessment of 28. Mhiret DA, Dagnew DC, Assefa TT, Tilahun SA, (doi:10.3390/w11071465)
surface water potential and groundwater Zaitchik BF, Steenhuis TS. 2019 Erosion hotspot 41. Birhanu A, Murlidhar Pingale S, Soundharajan BS,
recharge in ungauged watersheds: a case study identification in the sub-humid Ethiopian Singh P. 2019 GIS-based surface irrigation
in Tamil Nadu, India. Environ. Earth Sci. 77, highlands. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 19, 146–154. potential assessment for Ethiopian River Basin.
1–8. (doi:10.1007/s12665-018-7972-7) (doi:10.1016/j.ecohyd.2018.08.004) Irrig. Drain. 68, 607–616. (doi:10.1002/ird.2346)
17. Melesse AM, Abtew W. 2015 Landscape 29. Assefa TT, Jha MK, Tilahun SA, Yetbarek E, 42. Worqlul AW, Collick AS, Rossiter DG, Langan S,
dynamics, soils and hydrological processes in Adem AA, Wale A. 2015 Identification of erosion Steenhuis TS. 2015 Assessment of surface water
varied climates. Cham, Switzerland: Springer hotspot area using GIS and MCE technique for irrigation potential in the Ethiopian highlands:
International Publishing. Koga watershed in the upper Blue Nile Basin, the Lake Tana Basin. Catena 129, 76–85.
18. Assefa T, Jha M, Reyes M, Tilahun S, Worqlul Ethiopia. Am. J. Environ. Sci. 11, 245. (doi:10. (doi:10.1016/j.catena.2015.02.020)
AW. 2019 Experimental evaluation of 3844/ajessp.2015.245.255) 43. Awulachew SB, Yilma AD, Loulseged M,
conservation agriculture with drip irrigation for 30. Keddi Lencha B, Moges A. 2016 Identification of Loiskandl W, Ayana M, Tena A. 2007. Water
water productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa. Water soil erosion hotspots in Jimma Zone (Ethiopia) Resources and Irrigation Development in
11, 530. (doi:10.3390/w11030530) using GIS based approach. Ethiop. J. Environ. Ethiopia. Working Paper 123. Colombo, Sri
19. Worqlul AW, Jeong J, Dile YT, Osorio J, Schmitter Stud. Manag. 8, 926–938. (doi:10.4314/ejesm. Lanka: International Water Management
P, Gerik T, Srinivasan R, Clark N. 2017 Assessing v8i2.7s) Institute.
potential land suitable for surface irrigation 31. Chakrabortty R, Pal SC, Sahana M, Mondal A, 44. Yalew SG, van Griensven A, Mul ML, van der
using groundwater in Ethiopia. Appl. Geogr. 85, Dou J, Pham BT, Yunus AP. 2020 Soil erosion Zaag P. 2016 Land suitability analysis for
1–13. (doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.05.010) potential hotspot zone identification using agriculture in the Abbay basin using remote
 sensing, GIS and AHP techniques. Model. Earth 55. Yimam AY, Assefa TT, Sishu FK, Tilahun SA, 67. El kasri J, Lahmili A, Ouadif L, Bahi L, Soussi H, 20
Syst. Environ. 2, 1–4. (doi:10.1007/s40808-016- Reyes MR, Vara Prasad PV. 2021 Estimating Mitach MA. 2018 Comparison of the relevance
0167-x) surface and groundwater irrigation potential and performance of filling in gaps methods in

royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos
45. Kansara P, Li W, El-Askary H, Lakshmi V, under different conservation agricultural rainfall datasets. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 9,
Piechota T, Struppa D, Sayed MA. 2021 An practices and irrigation systems in the Ethiopian 992–1000.
assessment of the filling process of the grand highlands. Water (Switzerland) 13, 1645. 68. Li X, Cui J, Shi H, Sun Y, Ma H, Jia B. 2021
Ethiopian renaissance dam and its impact on (doi:10.3390/w13121645) Analysis of soil salinization risk and
the downstream countries. Remote Sens. 13, 56. Dawit M, Dinka MO, Leta OT, Muluneh FB. 2020 groundwater environment based on indicator
711. (doi:10.3390/rs13040711) Impact of climate change on land suitability for kriging. Nongye Jixie Xuebao/Trans. Chin. Soc.
46. Yimere A, Assefa E. 2021 Assessing and the optimization of the irrigation system in the Agric. Mach. 52, 297–306. (doi:10.6041/j.issn.
mapping irrigation potential in the Abbay River Anger River Basin, Ethiopia. Climate 8, 97. 1000-1298.2021.08.031)
Basin, Ethiopia. Russ. J. Agric. Socio-Econ. Sci. (doi:10.3390/CLI8090097) 69. El-Fadel M, Deeb T, Alameddine I, Zurayk R,
114, 97–109. (doi:10.18551/rjoas.2021-06.11) 57. Bouma J, van Ittersum MK, Stoorvogel JJ, Batjes Chaaban J. 2018 Impact of groundwater salinity
47. McCartney M, Alemayehu T, Shiferaw A, NH, Droogers P, Pulleman MM. 2017 Soil on agricultural productivity with climate change
Awulachew SB. 2010 Evaluation of current and capability: exploring the functional potentials of implications. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan. 13,
future water resources development in the Lake soils. In Global soil security, pp. 27–44. Cham, 445–456. (doi:10.2495/SDP-V13-N3-445-456)
Tana Basin, Ethiopia. IWMI Research Report 134. Switzerland: Springer. (doi:10.1007/978-3-319- 70. Singh V, Singh UC. 2008 Assessment of

R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 220674

Downloaded from https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ on 10 April 2024

Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water 43394-3_3) groundwater quality of parts of Gwalior (India)
Management Institute. (doi:10.3910/2010.204) 58. Teka K, Van Rompaey A, Poesen J. 2010 Land for agricultural purposes. Indian J. Sci. Technol.
48. Taye MT, Haile AT, Fekadu AG, Nakawuka P. suitability assessment for different irrigation 1, 1–5. (doi:10.17485/ijst/2008/v1i4/29241)
2021 Effect of irrigation water withdrawal on methods in Korir Watershed. North. 71. Singha C, Swain KC, Swain SK. 2020 Best crop
the hydrology of the Lake Tana sub-basin. Ethiop. J. Drylands 3, 214–219. rotation selection with GIS-AHP technique using
J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 38, 100961. (doi:10.1016/j. 59. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United soil nutrient variability. Agriculture 10, 213.
ejrh.2021.100961) Nations. 1977 A framework for land evaluation. (doi:10.3390/agriculture10060213)
49. Assefa WW, Abebe WB. 2018 GIS modeling of Rome, Italy: FAO. 72. Assefa T, Jha M, Worqlul AW, Reyes M, Tilahun
potentially suitable sites for aquaculture 60. Food and Agricultural Organization of the S. 2019 Scaling-up conservation agriculture
development in the Lake Tana basin, Northwest United Nations. 1976 A framework for land production system with drip irrigation by
Ethiopia. Agric. Food Secur. 7, 1–15. (doi:10. evaluation. FAO Soils Bulletin No. 32. Rome, integrating MCE technique and the APEX model.
1186/s40066-018-0222-0) Italy: FAO. Water (Switzerland) 11, 2007. (doi:10.3390/
50. Hordofa T, Menkir M, Bekele S, Erkossa T. 2008 61. Li Y, Wright A, Liu H, Wang J, Wang G, Wu Y, Dai L. w11102007)
Irrigation and rain-fed crop production system in 2019 Land use pattern, irrigation, and fertilization 73. Toledo R, Engler A, Ahumada V. 2011
Ethiopia. In Impact of irrigation on poverty and effects of rice-wheat rotation on water quality of Evaluation of risk factors in agriculture: an
environment in Ethiopia: draft proc. of the symp. ponds by using self-organizing map in agricultural application of the analytical hierarchical
and exhibition, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 27–29 watersheds. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 272, 155–164. process (AHP) methodology. Chil. J. Agric. Res.
November 2007, pp. 27–36. Colombo, Sri Lanka: (doi:10.1016/j.agee.2018.11.021) 71, 114–121. (doi:10.4067/s0718-5839201
International Water Management Institute 62. Huan H, Wang J, Teng Y. 2012 Assessment and 1000100014)
(IWMI). validation of groundwater vulnerability to 74. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M. 1998
51. Teweldebrihan MD, Pande S, McClain M. 2020 nitrate based on a modified DRASTIC model: a Crop evapotranspiration – guidelines for
The dynamics of farmer migration and case study in Jilin City of northeast China. Sci. computing crop water requirements. FAO
resettlement in the Dhidhessa River Basin, Total Environ. 440, 14–23. (doi:10.1016/j. Irrigation and drainage paper no. 56. Rome,
Ethiopia. Hydrol. Sci. J. 65, 1985–1993. (doi:10. scitotenv.2012.08.037) Italy: FAO. (doi:10.1016/j.eja.2010.12.001)
1080/02626667.2020.1789145) 63. Teshome A, Halefom A. 2020 Potential land 75. Belay AM, Assefa TT, Belay SA, Yimam AY. 2022
52. Temesgen M, Uhlenbrook S, Simane B, Van Der suitability identification for surface irrigation: in Evaluating the performance of small-scale
Zaag P, Mohamed Y, Wenninger J, Savenije case of Gumara watershed, Blue Nile basin, irrigation schemes in subhumid Ethiopian
HHG. 2012 Impacts of conservation tillage on Ethiopia. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. highlands. Irrig. Drain. (doi:10.1002/ird.2753)
the hydrological and agronomic performance 6, 929–942. (doi:10.1007/s40808-020- 76. Chen L, Chan C-M, Lee H-C, Chung Y, Lai F.
offanya juusin the upper Blue Nile (Abbay) river 00729-6) 2014 Development of a decision support
basin. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 16, 4725–4735. 64. Birthal PS, Hazrana J. 2019 Crop diversification engine to assist patients with hospital selection.
(doi:10.5194/hess-16-4725-2012) and resilience of agriculture to climatic shocks: J. Med. Syst. 38, 1–8. (doi:10.1007/s10916-014-
53. Wubet FD, Seleshi Bekele Awulachew A, Moges evidence from India. Agric. Syst. 173, 345–354. 0059-4)
SA. 2009 Analysis of water use on a large river (doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2019.03.005) 77. Saaty TL. 1988 What is the analytic hierarchy
basin using MIKE BASIN model – a case study 65. García-Gutiérrez V, Stöckle C, Gil PM, Meza FJ. process? In Mathematical models for decision
of the Abbay River Basin, Ethiopia. In CP 19 2021 Evaluation of Penman–Monteith model support, pp. 109–121. Berlin, Germany:
Project Workshop Proc., Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, based on sentinel-2 data for the estimation Springer.
5–6 February. of actual evapotranspiration in vineyards. 78. Mu E, Pereyra-Rojas M. 2017 Understanding the
54. Worqlul AW, Dile YT, Jeong J, Adimassu Z, Remote Sens. 13, 478. (doi:10.3390/ analytic hierarchy process in practical decision
Lefore N, Gerik T, Srinivasan R, Clarke N. 2019 rs13030478) making. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Effect of climate change on land suitability for 66. Yang X, Xie X, Liu DL, Ji F, Wang L. 2015 Spatial 79. Kassie YA, Yimam AY, Assefa TT, Belay SA. 2022
surface irrigation and irrigation potential of the interpolation of daily rainfall data for local Data from: Evaluating land suitability and water
shallow groundwater in Ghana. Comput. climate impact assessment over Greater Sydney availability for surface irrigation in the Abbay
Electron. Agric. 157, 110–125. (doi:10.1016/j. Region. Adv. Meteorol. 2015, 563629. (doi:10. basin of Ethiopia. Dryad Digital Repository.
compag.2018.12.040) 1155/2015/563629) (doi:10.5061/dryad.zgmsbccds)