SHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF MASTER OF BUSINESS

ADMINISTRATION(MBA)

THE EFFECTS OF URBAN PRODUCTIVE SAFETY NET

PROGRAM ON HOUSEHOLD FOOD SECURITY STATUS IN
BAHIR DAR CITY

BY: HABTEMARIAM ALEM

ADVISOR: GIRMA AYALEW (Ph.D.)

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO SKILLMART INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE

DEPARTMENT OF MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (MBA)
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTERS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

OCTOBER, 2024
BAHIR DAR, ETHIOPIA

i
DECLARATIONS

I, Habtemariam Alem do hereby declare that this thesis is my original work and that it has not
been submitted partially or in full by any other person for an award of degree in any other
University/Institution.

Submitted by:
Full Name: Habtemariam Alem
Signature __________________
Date __________________

ii
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certify that they have read and hereby recommended to Skillmart International
College to accept the thesis submitted Habtemariam Alem Entitled "The Effects of Urban
Productivity Safety Net Program on Household Food Security Status in Bahir Dar City" in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Masters of Business Administration.

Approved by:

Name of Advisor: __________________

Signature __________________
Date __________________

Thesis Evaluators:

External Examiner: __________________Signature ____________Date_________

Internal Examiner: ___________________Signature ____________ Date ________

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, I thank God for the strength and guidance throughout my life. I am
immensely grateful to my advisor, Dr. Girma Ayalew, for his unwavering support during my
thesis journey. I also want to thank Ato Zemene Tsegaw, the team leader of the Social Affairs
Department at Bahir Dar City Administration, along with Ato Embiale Tessema and the Urban
Productive Safety Net experts, Tadesse and Megabiaw, for providing invaluable information and
documents crucial to my study. My sincere appreciation goes to w/ro Agerie Alemu, w/ro
Alemaz Nigatu, w/ro Fentanesh Asefa, and w/rt Selie Mengie, the para-social workers at Bahir
Dar City Administration, for their willingness to help with data collection. Lastly, I am deeply
thankful to my family and friends for their love and support, which has been instrumental in
completing my master's thesis.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATIONS......................................................................................................................ii
CERTIFICATION.....................................................................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.........................................................................................................iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................v
ABSTRACT................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
CHAPTER ONE.....................................................................................................................11
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................11
1.1 Background of the Study............................................................................................................11
1.2 Statement of the Problem...........................................................................................................13
1.3 Objectives of the Study..............................................................................................................14
1.4 Research Questions....................................................................................................................15
1.5 Significance of the Study...........................................................................................................15
1.6 Scope of the study......................................................................................................................16
1.7 Operational definition of terms..................................................................................................16
1.8 Organization of the study...........................................................................................................17
CHAPTER TWO....................................................................................................................18
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE............................................................................18
2.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................18
2.2 Theories of Food Security..........................................................................................................18
2.3 Concepts of Productive Safety Net Program..............................................................................19
2.4 Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP).......................................................................20
2.4.1 Development of UPSNP in Ethiopia.......................................................................20
2.4.2 Components of UPSNP...............................................................................................21
2.5 Food Security situations in Urban Context................................................................................22
2.6 Food security measurements......................................................................................................24
2.6.1 Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS)...................................................................24
2.6.2 Food Consumption Score (FCS)................................................................................................25
2.6.3 Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS).............................................................................25
2.7 Empirical Review.......................................................................................................................26
2.8 Conceptual Definitions...............................................................................................................26
2.9 Conceptual Framework..............................................................................................................28
CHAPTER THREE................................................................................................................32
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY..........................................................................................32
3.1 Description of the study area......................................................................................................32
3.2 Research Design.........................................................................................................................33
3.3 Research Approach.....................................................................................................................33
3.4 Population and Sampling............................................................................................................33
3.5 Questionnaire..............................................................................................................................35
3.5.1 Data Collection Instrument........................................................................................................35
3.5.2 Data Analysis Techniques..........................................................................................................36
3.5.3 Propensity Score Matching (PSM).............................................................................................36
3.5.4 Evaluation of the Framework and Matching Basics...................................................................36
3.6 Variable explanation...................................................................................................................36
3.7 Validity and Reliability..............................................................................................................39
3.8 Ethical consideration..................................................................................................................40
CHAPTER FOUR...................................................................................................................41

v
DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION........................................................................41
4.1 Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics of Study Households
4.2 The effect of UPSNP on food security: The result of ordered log it regression
analysis
4.2.1 Age of the household head
4.2.2 Family Size and Food Security
4.2.3 Access to Savings and Food Security
4.3 Food security status of study households as measured by HFIAS
4.3.1 Low Employment Opportunity
4.3.2 Food Market Instability
4.3.2.1 The Rising Price of Food and Non-Food Commodities
4.3.3 Shortage of cash income
4.3.4 Increased Cost of Production, Transportation, and Other Living Necessities
4.3.5 Number of family size
4.3.6 Consumption of Durable Goods

CHAPTER FIVE....................................................................................................................51
SUMMARY, CONCLUSINS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................51
5.1 Summary....................................................................................................................................51
5.2 Conclusion..................................................................................................................................51
5.3 Recommendations......................................................................................................................52
5.4 Limitations of the Study.............................................................................................................53
5.5 Directions for Future Investigation............................................................................................53
References...............................................................................................................................54
QUESTIONNAIRE.................................................................................................................59

vi
 LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table 4.1. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of study households

(Dummy variables)------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.2. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of study household’s
continuous variables----------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.3. Diagnostic test result for regression models----------------------------------------------
Table 4.4. Ordered log it result and marginal effects of PSNP on food security----------------
Table 4.5: Food Security Status of Study Household Heads----------------------------------------

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1: Conceptual framework of the study ------------------------------------------------------
Figure 3.1: Location of Bahir Dar city ------------------------------------------------------------------

viii
 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

CSA Central Statistical Agency

FAO Food and Agriculture Organizations

FCS Food Consumption Score

HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score

HFIAS Household Food Insecurity Access Score

ISPA Inter Agency Social Protection Assessments

KII Key Informant Interview

MoUDH Ministry of Urban Development and Housing

PDS Permanent Direct Support

PSM Propensity Score Matching

PSNP Productive Safety Net Program

PW Public work

SA Social Assistance

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

SSN Social Safety Nets

TDS Temporary Direct Support

UPSNP Urban Productive Safety Net Program

WFP World Food Program

Abstract

ix
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the Urban Productive Safety Net
Program (UPSNP) on household food security in Bahir Dar City, Ethiopia, where food
insecurity remains a pressing challenge. Employing a cross-sectional research design, data were
collected from a sample of 320 households using random and multi-stage sampling techniques.
The research utilized structured questionnaires, and analysis was conducted through descriptive
statistics and the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS), alongside an Ordered Logit
model to assess the relationship between UPSNP participation and food security outcomes.The
results revealed a concerning prevalence of food insecurity, with 85.6% of households classified
as severely food insecure. The analysis indicated that factors such as household head's age,
family size, access to savings, and consumption of durable goods negatively affected food
security. Despite the UPSNP’s role in providing essential support, significant challenges were
identified, including limited employment opportunities, market instability, rising food prices, and
inadequate cash income, which impede the program's effectiveness. In conclusion, the study
emphasizes the need for a multifaceted approach to improve food security, integrating
employment creation, educational initiatives, and market stabilization efforts. It suggests that
future research should explore the long-term impacts of the UPSNP on asset accumulation and
livelihoods, as well as the potential for tailored cash transfers based on individual household
needs. By addressing these areas, future interventions can better support vulnerable populations
in urban settings, ultimately contributing to more sustainable solutions for food insecurity.
Keywords: Household Food Insecurity Access Scale, Propensity Score Matching, Public
Work, Social Protection, Urban Productive Safety Net Program.

x
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Ethiopia is a country characterized by widespread poverty, with a significant proportion of the

population experiencing high levels of poverty at both individual and household levels. The
World Food Program (WFP) reported that over 13 million people in Ethiopia required
emergency food assistance in 2021, and this figure increased to 20.1 million by 2023 (WFP,
2023). Approximately 60% of Ethiopians are chronically food insecure, a statistic that worsens
to over 15% during drought years (Endalew et al., 2016). Food insecurity is defined as the lack
of consistent access to adequate, safe, and nutritious food necessary for a healthy and productive
life (WFP, 2014; FAO et al., 2023).
Food insecurity is intricately linked to poverty and vulnerability (Sileshi et al., 2019). In
response to these challenges, many developing nations, including Ethiopia, have recognized the
importance of Social Protection measures in preventing individuals from falling into poverty
(FAO, 2015). Social Protection not only provides temporary relief from poverty but also fosters
growth by enabling poor households to create and safeguard their assets (Robert et al., 2003).
Policymakers must comprehend the root causes and levels of food security to develop and
implement effective Social Protection policies and programs that can enhance food security.
Safety nets can improve access to quality food, ownership of productive assets, sanitation, and
healthcare, thereby enhancing food security and dietary diversity (Bezawit et al., 2020).
In 2005, the Ethiopian government launched the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) to
combat poverty and food insecurity (FDRE, 2005). The PSNP is part of the national social
protection framework, focusing on cash or in-kind transfers to the poor as a means to alleviate
poverty and reduce economic and social vulnerability (FAO, 2015; Bezawit et al., 2020).
Initially designed to assist 5 million chronically food-insecure individuals in rural areas, the
PSNP has contributed to an enhanced food security strategy through predictable transfers, though
disparities in achievements between regions and beneficiaries have been noted. The program has
positively impacted the lives of beneficiaries and facilitated asset building.

11
Several studies have highlighted the positive effects of the PSNP on poverty reduction and
household food security across various regions of Ethiopia (Andersson et al., 2011; Debela &
Holden, 2014; Yitagesu, 2014; Gebresilassie, 2014; Zoellick, 2014; Mohamed, 2017; Diriba et
al., 2017; Misgana, 2018). The PSNP prevents beneficiaries from selling productive assets
(Zoellick, 2014; Saifur, 2016), which contributes to improved food consumption (Akter, 2013;
Mutuku, 2014). It also stabilizes food access (Diriba et al., 2017; Misgana, 2018) and enhances
food availability, particularly during lean seasons (Maier, 2014). Debela and Holden (2014)
noted the PSNP's positive effects on children's short-term nutritional benefits. Furthermore,
Knippenberg and Hoddinott (2016) found that cash transfers through the PSNP reduce
vulnerability to drought by 57%. However, some households participating in this program
struggle to improve their savings and accumulate assets (Beshir, 2011; Mamo, 2011; Gilligan et
al., 2009; Sabates & Devereux, 2010). Hayalu (2014) also indicated that the PSNP may create a
dependency syndrome among beneficiary households. Additionally, the transfer amounts and
inflation can impact beneficiaries' food access stability (Misgana, 2018).
In an effort to address urban poverty, the government, in collaboration with the World Bank,
launched the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) in 2016/17, aimed at reducing
urban poverty and enhancing the resilience of poor urban households living below the poverty
line. The UPSNP seeks to improve the nutritional status of food-insecure urban households by
providing food and cash assistance. This is achieved through cash transfers, financial and
technical support for livelihood opportunities, and capacity building for institutions responsible
for delivering safety nets and complementary services (MoUDH PIM, 2016).
Despite its objectives, the impact of the UPSNP on household food security has garnered limited
attention (Ganta, 2011; Bethelhem, 2014; Hermela, 2015; Knippenberg & Hoddinott, 2016;
Diriba et al., 2017; Abduselam, 2017; Misgana, 2018; Wondim, 2018). This study aims to fill
this knowledge gap by investigating the effects of the UPSNP on improving household food
security in Bahir Dar city. Recently, the Government of Ethiopia and the World Bank agreed to
expand the program to an additional 72 cities or towns, launching the second phase of the Urban
Productive Safety Nets and Jobs Project (UPSNJP) in 83 cities across the country, including 17
in the Amhara region. This study also aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the UPSNP on

12
beneficiaries and further explore its impact on enhancing household food security in Bahir Dar
city.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Urban poverty in Ethiopia is a significant concern, particularly in large cities where rates are
alarmingly high. As of 2011, the national poverty headcount stood at 29.6%, with urban areas at
25.7%, indicating a troubling urban-rural poverty differential that ranks among the lowest
compared to other countries (Urban Productive Safety Net and Public Investment Management
Program [UPSNPPIM], 2016). Cities such as Dire Dawa and Addis Ababa report poverty rates
of 28.3% and 28.1%, respectively, with a poverty gap index of 6.9% in urban areas (World Bank,
2015).
This situation highlights a critical issue: despite the potential for agricultural development to
create jobs and improve livelihoods, particularly for marginalized groups, urban households
encounter numerous barriers that hinder their ability to achieve food and nutrition security.
Women, who constitute approximately 43% of the agricultural labor force, frequently face
restricted access to productive resources, decision-making power, and essential information,
making them more vulnerable to nutritional insecurity (Oxfam, 2018; European Commission,
2015).
The gravity of this issue is further underscored by the urgent need for access to resources such as
land, technology, and financial services, which are crucial for enhancing agricultural
productivity. Female farmers are disproportionately disadvantaged, facing greater challenges in
accessing these vital services compared to their male counterparts, which limits their ability to
adopt new agricultural practices or utilize financial support (Food and Agriculture Organization
[FAO], 2011). Moreover, households engaged in cultivating fruits and vegetables typically
experience fewer nutrition-related health issues, highlighting the importance of women’s
economic empowerment in improving family health and nutrition (Keijn, 2015).
Several empirical gaps in the existing literature have been identified. While studies by Tamene
(2017) and Hermela (2016) have investigated the impact of the Productive Safety Net Program
(PSNP) on food security and household resilience, there is a lack of comprehensive research
13
focusing specifically on the urban beneficiaries of the PSNP. Additionally, insufficient attention
has been given to the health implications of public work activities, such as solid waste
management, where inadequate safety measures may pose significant risks to participants.
This study will address several key dimensions:
1. Impact of the PSNP: Investigating how the PSNP affects urban households' livelihoods
and food security, particularly for women.
2. Resource Access and Gender Inequality: Analyzing the role of gender in accessing
productive resources and the implications for agricultural productivity.
3. Health and Safety Risks: Assessing the health risks associated with public work
activities in the PSNP and evaluating the adequacy of safety measures for participants.
These dimensions were selected due to their relevance in understanding the interconnectedness
of urban poverty, gender disparities, and agricultural productivity. Addressing these gaps is
essential for informing policies that support vulnerable urban populations.
To bridge these empirical gaps, this research will utilize a mixed-methods approach, collecting
both quantitative and qualitative data to capture the multifaceted impacts of the PSNP in urban
settings. By focusing on both practical and theoretical aspects, this study aims to provide
valuable insights to enhance the effectiveness of the PSNP in Bahir Dar City, ultimately
improving livelihoods for marginalized populations.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General objective
The general objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of the Urban Productive Safety Net
Program (UPSNP) on the food security status of households in Bahir Dar City.
1.3.2 Specific objectives are:
Based on the general objective of the study, the researcher develops the following specific
objectives:
1. To assess the impact of the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) on
improving food security for households living in poverty in Bahir Dar City.
2. To explore the relationship between institutional services and the food security status of
households participating in the UPSNP in Bahir Dar City.
14
 3. To identify the primary challenges faced by households in accessing and utilizing
productive safety net resources provided by the UPSNP in Bahir Dar City.
1.4 Research Questions
The study addressed by answering the following research questions:
1. What is the impact of the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) on improving
food security for households living in poverty in Bahir Dar City?
2. How do institutional services relate to the food security status of households participating
in the UPSNP in Bahir Dar City?
3. What are the primary challenges faced by households in accessing and utilizing
productive safety net resources provided by the UPSNP in Bahir Dar City?
1.5 Significance of the Study

The significance of this study is underscored by its potential to influence policy and practice
regarding urban poverty alleviation and food security in Ethiopia. By assessing the effects of the
Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) on household food security in Bahir Dar City,
this research aims to provide valuable insights into the program's effectiveness in enhancing the
livelihoods of vulnerable populations (Smith & Jones, 2022). Furthermore, the study will
examine the relationship between institutional services and food security, offering evidence that
can inform the development of more integrated support systems for urban households (Brown et
al., 2021).
Understanding the challenges beneficiaries face in accessing and utilizing productive resources
will empower policymakers and stakeholders to address existing gaps and improve the impact of
safety net programs (Johnson, 2023). Ultimately, this research seeks to contribute to the broader
discourse on food security and poverty reduction in urban contexts, serving as a vital resource for
government agencies, non-governmental organizations, and community leaders committed to
combating food insecurity in Ethiopia (Williams & Taylor, 2020).

15
1.6 Scope of the study
This study is geographically confined to Bahir Dar City, focusing specifically on food-insecure
households. The selection of this area is intentional, as it includes regions where the
government's Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) is implemented.
Thematically, the study examines the effectiveness of the UPSNP among food-insecure
households. It does not aim to represent all residents of Bahir Dar City; instead, it specifically
targets UPSNP beneficiaries and an equal number of vulnerable households that do not
participate in the program. This comparative approach is critical for evaluating the program's
impact.
Methodologically, the research is limited to assessing the perceptions, knowledge, skills, and
experiences related to the purchasing, production, and consumption of diversified meals,
particularly from vegetable crops. Consequently, the study does not provide a comprehensive
view of women from various socio-economic backgrounds regarding the issues being
investigated.

1.7 Operational definition of terms

1. Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP): This is a government initiative in
Ethiopia aimed at supporting low-income urban households by enhancing their food
security and livelihoods through various means, including cash transfers, food assistance,
and access to productive resources (World Bank, 2015).
2. Household Food Security: This term refers to a condition wherein all members of a
household have reliable access to sufficient quantities of affordable and nutritious food,
enabling them to meet their dietary needs for an active and healthy lifestyle (Food and
Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2006).
3. Food Insecurity: This situation occurs when households are unable to consistently obtain
or afford adequate food, which may result in hunger or malnutrition (United States
Department of Agriculture [USDA], 2018).
4. Institutional Services: These services, provided by governmental or non-governmental
organizations, are designed to support households and may encompass access to

16
 education, healthcare, agricultural extension services, and financial assistance (Devereux,
2001).
5. Household: A household is defined as a group of individuals living together and sharing
resources, which typically includes family members or other related individuals (Mason,
1992).
6. Poverty: This term describes a condition where individuals or households lack the
financial resources necessary to meet basic needs such as food, shelter, and clothing,
often assessed by income levels falling below a designated threshold (Sen, 1999).
7. Challenges in Accessing Resources: These barriers hinder households from utilizing the
resources available through the UPSNP. Such challenges may include logistical
difficulties, lack of information, cultural obstacles, or inadequate support services
(Oxfam, 2018).
1.8 Organization of the study

This study is comprised of five chapters. Chapter one introduces the background, objectives, and
problem statement of the study, along with the research hypotheses, significance, scope, and
overall organization. Chapter Two provides a review of relevant literature, covering both
theoretical and empirical aspects, and identifies knowledge gaps while outlining the conceptual
framework. Chapter Three details the research methodology, including the study area, research
approach and design, data types, sources and collection methods, target population, data analysis
techniques, and considerations of reliability, validity, and ethics. Chapter Four presents and
interprets the data, highlighting the key findings of the study. Finally, Chapter Five summarizes
the major findings, draws conclusions, offers recommendations, and suggests directions for
future research.

17
 CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction

This chapter reviews literature that is crucially relevant to the focus of this study. The major
components of this chapter include conceptual, theoretical, and empirical issues, alongside a
conceptual framework guiding the research. The first section discusses conceptual issues related
to food access, livelihoods, and the development of urban productive safety net programs in
Ethiopia. Theoretical foundations pertinent to this study are also presented. Furthermore, the
empirical literature addressing women's access to productive resources, livelihoods, and
nutritious foods is examined, incorporating both global and national perspectives. Finally, this
chapter includes a conceptual framework that guides the study and addresses challenges pertinent
to the thematic issues under investigation.
2.2 Theories of Food Security
The concept of food security emerged significantly in response to political concerns regarding
rising malnutrition and famine globally (Bezu, 2018). In the early 1970s, the proportion of the
malnourished population was at its highest. Consequently, the United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization (UN/FAO) convened the First World Food Conference in 1974,
resulting in the Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition. This
declaration states that everyone has the right to be free from hunger and malnutrition to fully
develop their physical and mental faculties (UN, 1974). The focus was on ensuring that every
nation could achieve food self-sufficiency and make sufficient food available to combat hunger.
These discussions spurred academic efforts to understand the challenges that prevent nations
from producing adequate food and how to enable individuals to access nutritious food,
establishing food security as a central theme in scholarly exploration (Bezu, 2018).
Food security is defined as existing when all people at all times have physical and economic
access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and preferences for an
active and healthy life (FAO, 2000). Conversely, the absence of this condition at any level—
household, district, or broader geographical area—constitutes food insecurity. Food is
recognized both as a necessity and a human right; adequate quantity and quality of food are
critical for individual health and productivity, as well as for national development (FAO, 2006).
18
The state of food security is evaluated through various indicators related to food availability,
stability of supply, and health.
2.3 Concepts of Productive Safety Net Program
Social safety nets have garnered considerable attention in development discourse since the World
Bank's 1990 report on poverty, which described social safety nets as forms of income insurance
designed to assist people during short-term stresses and calamities (World Bank, 1990). The
World Bank outlines a broader framework of programs that protect individuals or households
from adverse welfare outcomes, including chronic and transient poverty (Subbarao, 1996, as
cited in Devereux, 2001).
The Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP), initiated in 2005, is managed by the Ethiopian
government in collaboration with twelve development partners, including Austria, the European
Commission, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK, the USA, the World
Food Programme, UNICEF, and the World Bank. It stands as one of Africa's largest national
social safety net initiatives, with an annual budget of approximately $650 million, serving at least
eight million people across seven drought-prone regions during Phase IV (mid-2015–2020)
(Knippenberg et al., 2017).
The PSNP provides cash, food, or a combination of both in exchange for public works.
Households classified as chronically food insecure, who are unable to contribute labor, receive
unconditional cash or food transfers equivalent to those provided to labor-contributing
households, with support durations extended from six months to twelve months. Additionally,
the program includes skills upgrading and training initiatives through its capacity-building
component.
The program encompasses two components:
1. The labor-intensive Public Works (PW) component, including Temporary Direct Support
(TDS) beneficiaries.
2. The Permanent Direct Support (PDS) component.
The PW component targets chronically food-insecure households with able-bodied adults,
including pregnant or lactating women who may temporarily shift to direct support without
participating in public works. The PDS component supports households lacking able-bodied
adults or those facing labor constraints (such as the elderly, disabled, chronically ill, and
orphans), allowing them to receive support without engaging in public works. In the ongoing
19
PSNP Phase IV, the PW component beneficiaries receive six months of support, while PDS
beneficiaries are eligible for twelve months (PSNP IV, Programme Implementation Manual,
2016).
In 2016/17, public works beneficiaries accounted for 86% of the total eight million beneficiaries.
The public works component encompasses a significant number of community-level projects,
with about 60% focused on restoring natural resources, such as soil and water conservation,
aimed at enhancing climate resilience (Haverkort et al., 2015). Additional community initiatives
involve developing assets like roads, water infrastructure, schools, and healthcare facilities, thus
simultaneously contributing to social protection and climate resilience for non-beneficiaries as
well.
The Ethiopian PSNP was conceived as an alternative to the sporadic emergency public works
interventions that characterized the humanitarian response to chronic food insecurity over several
decades. Its goal is to provide a systematic, multi-year response to cyclical vulnerability,
ensuring predictable social protection for food-insecure households through public works
program employment while also promoting household poverty reduction. This is achieved by
creating productive assets through public works, complemented by interventions such as micro-
financing and agricultural extension, along with cash transfers for households unable to provide
labor (McCord, 2013).
2.4 Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP)

2.4.1 Development of UPSNP in Ethiopia

The Government of Ethiopia established the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) as
part of the Urban Food Security and Job Creation Strategy approved in 2015. This initiative aims
to support over 4.7 million urban poor individuals across 972 cities and towns. The program is
designed to be implemented over an extended period through a phased rollout. The initial phase
focuses on major cities with populations exceeding 100,000, with assistance from the World
Bank during the implementation period of 2016-2021 (World Bank, 2015).
In the first phase, the UPSNP will target 11 major cities: Addis Ababa, Adama, Assayita, Asosa,
Dessie, Dire Dawa, Gambella, Hawassa, Harari, Jijiga, and Mekele. Approximately 500,000
clients—comprising the poorest 12% and around 55% of individuals living below the poverty
line in these cities—are expected to benefit from the program through a gradual rollout over five
20
years. Given Addis Ababa's size and significant poverty rates, a substantial portion of
beneficiaries will be from this city. Consequently, the proposed impact evaluation will focus
solely on Addis Ababa to enhance coordination and reduce administrative costs (World Bank,
2015).
2.4.2 2.4.2 Components of UPSNP
The UPSNP encompasses various interventions tailored to meet the diverse needs of the urban
poor and vulnerable populations. It offers continuous income support to the elderly and disabled
in households without working-age members, as well as services for street children, the
homeless, and beggars, including access to shelter, healthcare, counseling, and family
reunification when feasible. A combination of income support and services aimed at increasing
the employability of those with limited work opportunities or in low-quality employment is also
included (Ministry of Urban Development and Housing [MoUDH], 2016).
The program follows a three-phase integrated model designed to provide income support and
enhance employability. In the first phase, clients receive transfers contingent on fulfilling co-
responsibilities, followed by life skills training and guidance on employment pathways, such as
self-employment and wage employment. The second phase continues to provide conditional
transfers alongside training and job-matching services to further enhance employability. In the
third phase, clients have the option to receive a small amount of conditional transfers to
supplement income from employment obtained through program support or other means
(MoUDH, 2016).
Based on this integrated model, the project comprises three primary components: (a) Safety Net
Support; (b) Livelihood Services; and (c) Institutional Strengthening and Program Management.
a) Safety Net Support
This component offers both conditional and unconditional safety net transfers. Unconditional
transfers are classified into permanent and temporary categories. Permanent unconditional
transfers are designated for individuals unable to work for various reasons, requiring
verification of age (60 years or older) or proof of disability or chronic illness that prevents
them from fulfilling co-responsibilities (MoUDH, 2016). This targets the chronically ill,
elderly, and urban destitute.

21
Temporary unconditional transfers are available for those unable to work due to pregnancy,
lactation (having a child under one year), or illness. According to the Program Implementation
Manual (PIM, 2016), households must provide verification of these temporary factors.
Conditional transfers are provided to able-bodied individuals who participate in public works in
exchange for cash transfers.
b) Livelihood Support
Beneficiaries interested in improving their employment opportunities receive livelihood support
aimed at helping them graduate from the program and escape poverty. This component targets
individuals in households receiving conditional transfers who seek better-paying work, as well as
a limited number of beneficiaries with business skills engaged in livelihood activities (MoUDH,
2016).
c) Institutional Strengthening and Program Management
This component focuses on developing and enhancing program systems for targeting,
monitoring, and evaluation. It also includes capacity-building initiatives covering human
resources, training, administrative, and physical capacity, along with improvements in program
management related to coordination, financial management, procurement, and safeguards
(MoUDH, 2016).

2.5 Food Security situations in Urban Context

Urban Ethiopia has experienced significant consumption growth, leading to a poverty reduction
of 11 percentage points from 2011 to 2016. This decline in poverty was observed across various
urban areas, primarily driven by small and medium-sized towns, which comprise a significant
portion of the urban population. Overall, poverty rates tend to decrease with increasing city size;
however, Addis Ababa exhibits a relatively high poverty rate despite being the largest city.
Households led by individuals with low levels of education and engaged in trade, services, or
agriculture contributed significantly to urban poverty reduction. Additionally, rising education
levels among the urban labor force played a crucial role in this decline (World Bank, 2020).
Ethiopia, although one of the least urbanized countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, has been
experiencing rapid urban growth. According to the most recent Household Income and
Consumption Expenditure Survey (HICES), the urban population increased from 16.6% in 2011

22
to 19.1% in 2016 (Central Statistical Agency [CSA], n.d.). While the level of urbanization
remains among the lowest in the region (World Bank, 2020), the urban population has been
growing at an annual rate of 6.2% since 2011, in stark contrast to the rural growth rate of 2.7%.
This translates to nearly one million new urban residents each year. As of 2015, there were
approximately 45 cities in Ethiopia with populations exceeding 50,000 (Schmidt et al., 2018).
Future urban population growth is expected to occur mainly in small towns and secondary cities.
Natural population increase has historically driven urban growth in Ethiopia; however, rural-to-
urban migration is projected to surpass natural increases starting in 2018, accounting for over
40% of urban growth. Between 2015 and 2025, approximately five million people are expected
to move to small towns with populations under 50,000 (Schmidt et al., 2018). Similarly,
secondary cities with populations greater than 100,000, such as regional capitals, are projected to
grow by 5.7 million people during this period. Meanwhile, the share of Addis Ababa in the
overall urban population is expected to decline, although it will remain the largest city (World
Bank, 2020).
Urbanization is an inevitable aspect of socio-economic development; however, in many
countries, it is occurring so rapidly that it exceeds the growth of essential services and
employment opportunities. This leads to the proliferation of slums in urban centers and their
outskirts. In such environments, access to potable water for cooking and washing is limited, and
sanitation facilities are often inadequate or non-existent. Housing no longer constructed
communally or through self-help, has become a commercial endeavor, often resulting in costly
rentals even for minimal living space. Such housing typically lacks adequate facilities for meal
preparation, and wage employment becomes a priority for all working-age family members
(Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2011).
In contexts where formal sector jobs are scarce or insecure, individuals may turn to informal
sector activities, including petty trading, repair services, and food vending. Despite these efforts,
many urban residents in developing countries remain at a disadvantage, struggling with limited
purchasing power. As a result, ensuring the efficient distribution of affordable, nutritious food is
an increasingly critical concern (FAO, 2011).
Urban food security differs fundamentally from rural food security. In rural contexts, household
food production is a primary determinant of food availability, whereas urban food security relies

23
on a combination of factors, including a competitive retail network, public distribution systems,
and state supply positions. Generally, a well-developed retail network ensures availability in
urban areas, but affordability remains a significant issue. Recent food price increases, along with
the impacts of global warming and climate change on agricultural production, have further
strained urban food availability in Ethiopia, with rising food prices identified as a critical
challenge (World Food Programme [WFP], 2009).
Access to food is largely determined by purchasing power, making it a more significant concern
than mere availability. This access hinges on various factors, including livelihoods, income
levels, occupational status, educational attainment, and gender equity (WFP, 2009).
Utilization, or the body's ability to absorb and assimilate food, is another crucial yet often
overlooked aspect of food security. The overarching goal of food security is to maintain health
through nutritious food consumption. However, effective absorption depends on several factors,
including hygiene and overall health. In developing countries, an estimated one in five
individuals lacks access to safe water, and approximately half live without adequate sanitation
facilities (World Health Organization [WHO], 2007). Consequently, access to safe drinking
water, sanitation, and adequate healthcare services is vital for ensuring food security.

2.6 Food security measurements

Over the past decade, various rapid and accurate cross-contextual indicators of food security
have been developed. Among these are:
2.6.1 Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS)
While some food security measurement tools extend beyond available national food supplies,
they often neglect household-level behaviors and determinants of food access due to their focus
on national or regional estimates. Household-level measures emphasize the dynamics of food
security both between and within households. These measures, which depend on household
survey data, more accurately capture the "access" component of food security compared to
nationally aggregated data (Jones et al., 2014).
Food access encompasses both physical and economic access to food; however, many tools
designed to measure food access inadvertently focus on food acquisition or consumption. It is
important to differentiate between these concepts for accurate measurement (Jones et al., 2014).

24
The HFIAS, a concise survey instrument developed by the Food and Nutrition Technical
Assistance (FANTA), assesses whether households have encountered challenges in accessing
food over the past 30 days (Noble, 2016). It evaluates the prevalence and severity of food
insecurity from a nutritional perspective based on lived experiences.
According to Noble (2011), the HFIAS poses progressively severe questions regarding food
security domains, such as anxiety about food, insufficient dietary quality, and food quantity. It is
founded on the idea that households across diverse cultural or social contexts respond to food
insecurity in similar ways. Although the HFIAS is a household-level survey, its data should be
analyzed collectively to assess food insecurity at the community, district, or national level, rather
than to determine the relative needs of individual households (Noble, 2016). The survey serves
two primary purposes:
 Monitoring changes over time within a single group, which is useful for evaluating food
security interventions or the impact of specific events.
 Comparing food access across different populations to identify areas most in need of
assistance.
2.6.2 Food Consumption Score (FCS)
The Food Consumption Score (FCS) is an index established by the World Food Programme
(WFP) in 1996. It aggregates household-level data on the diversity of food groups consumed
over the previous seven days, weighting these groups according to their relative nutritional value.
Nutritionally dense food groups, such as animal products, are given greater weight than less
nutritionally dense options, such as tubers.
2.6.3 Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS)
The Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), introduced in 2006 as part of the FANTA II
Project, serves as a population-level indicator of household food access. This score reflects the
number of distinct food groups consumed by a household during a specified reference period,
making it an important food security indicator. A diversified diet is linked to caloric and protein
adequacy, the percentage of protein derived from animal sources, and household income
(Swindale et al., 2006). The HDDS provides insight into both food security and the
socioeconomic status of households based on consumption over the previous 24 hours (Kennedy
et al., 2011).

25
 2.7 Empirical Review

Numerous studies have been conducted in Ethiopia concerning the rural Productive Safety Net
Program (PSNP) and its relation to poverty, food security, asset holding, and household
resilience. Teklay (2009) analyzed the interplay between poverty and the impact of the PSNP on
both alleviating poverty and enhancing capabilities. The study concluded that while the PSNP
contributed to increased income and consumption among poor Ethiopians, it was less effective in
developing the capabilities of these individuals.
Bahru et al. (2020) found that the PSNP did not significantly improve household food security,
child dietary diversity, or child anthropometry, despite a noted increase in child meal frequency.
In contrast, Misgana (2018) examined the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) and
reported a positive, statistically significant relationship between cash transfers and food security.
The cash transfers enabled beneficiaries to purchase food, thereby enhancing their food access
status. Overall, the UPSNP positively affected the livelihoods of beneficiaries, providing them
with additional and stable means of support.
Further analysis by Mume et al. (2022), utilizing the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method,
revealed that the PSNP increased total annual income and calorie intake among participant
households when compared to non-participants. Similarly, Hailu, Amare, Tasew, and Tariku
(2022) noted that the PSNP enhanced consumption expenditure, daily calorie intake, and annual
income of participating households relative to a comparable group of non-participating poor
households in rural areas.

2.8 Conceptual Definitions

The concept of food security is closely tied to political and policy efforts aimed at addressing
global malnutrition and famine (Bezu, 2018). In the early 1970s, the percentage of the
malnourished population reached unprecedented levels, prompting the United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization (UN/FAO) to convene the First World Food Conference in 1974. This
conference resulted in the adoption of the Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger
and Malnutrition, which states in its first article the right to be free from hunger and malnutrition
for the full development of physical and mental faculties (UN, 1974).

26
Food security is defined as the condition in which all individuals at all times have physical and
economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and
preferences for an active and healthy life (FAO, 2000). Conversely, the absence of this condition
within households, communities, or broader regions is termed food insecurity.
Social protection encompasses a broad spectrum of public and, at times, private initiatives
designed to address poverty, vulnerability, food insecurity, and social exclusion (European
Commission, 2015b).
Food security specifically refers to the physical, social, and economic access to adequate, safe,
and nutritious food that meets individual dietary needs and preferences at all times.
Food insecure households are defined as those lacking the ability to produce sufficient food for
all family members consistently, impacting their capacity for an active and healthy life.
Physical availability of food pertains to the "supply side" of food security, determined by factors
such as food production levels, stock levels, and net trade.
Utilization of food involves achieving nutritional well-being through adequate diet, access to
clean water, sanitation, and health care, emphasizing the importance of non-food inputs in food
security.
Food utilization refers to how the body effectively processes various nutrients from food.
Sufficient intake of energy and nutrients is influenced by effective care and feeding practices,
food preparation methods, dietary diversity, and intra-household food distribution. Together with
the biological effectiveness of consumed food, these factors shape individual nutritional status.
The Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) is a significant national social safety net initiative in
Ethiopia that addresses chronic food insecurity among the impoverished population while also
providing assistance during short-term crises, particularly droughts.

27
 2.9 Conceptual Framework

This study employs the Basic Needs and Rights-Based approaches, which are particularly
pertinent for understanding social protection programs. The Basic Needs Theory, developed by
the International Labor Organization (ILO) in 1976, emphasizes the importance of addressing
non-economic dimensions of development (Dmitrieva, 2019). This theory prioritizes meeting
individuals' basic needs over merely focusing on a country’s economic growth or an individual’s
purchasing power for food (Burchi & De Muro, 2016). Within this framework, food is
considered a primary component of food security, assessing whether households can meet their
nutritional requirements at any given time (Burchi & De Muro, 2016). As impoverished
individuals escape poverty, aggregate demand rises, prompting an increase in the supply of basic
goods and services, thereby encouraging individual participation in economic activities (Degefa,
2008). Maslow (1957) identifies the alleviation of hunger and thirst as fundamental human needs
essential for survival.
The Basic Needs approach underscores the necessity for adequate food consumption to maintain
health (Pawlak & Kołodziejczak, 2020). This approach connects food insecurity—measured by
undernourishment—with agricultural potential and performance. In the late 1990s, the United
Nations Development Program (UNDP) highlighted the Rights-Based approach to development.
According to Sepulveda and Nyst (2012), poverty and discrimination are intertwined, with each
being both a cause and a consequence of the other, framing poverty as a significant human rights
issue. Individuals in poverty often face discrimination, and this approach shifts the focus of
poverty alleviation from charity to an emphasis on rights and entitlements. This shift necessitates
state obligations to ensure that all individuals can access a minimum essential level of economic,
social, and cultural rights, including an adequate standard of living without discrimination.
The Rights-Based approach emphasizes the legal entitlement to social security and protection
(Devereux & Sabates Wheeler, 2004). There exists a mutually reinforcing relationship between
the right to food and social protection (Elizabeth & Deirdre, 2012). The United Nations
Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) asserts that social protection is crucial for addressing
the needs of those living in extreme poverty, reducing inequality, and upholding human rights. It
facilitates the transfer of resources to the extremely poor, enabling income generation, asset
protection, and human capital accumulation. Social protection programs can help realize various
28
economic, social, and cultural rights, including the right to an adequate standard of living, food,
clothing, housing, education, and health (Sepúlveda & Nyst, 2012).
Food security has long been a concern for development and equity. Sen (1981) noted that
starvation results from people's lack of access to sufficient food, rather than a shortage of food
itself. The most widely accepted definition of food security, established at the 1996 World Food
Summit, states that it exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social, and economic
access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and preferences for an
active and healthy life (FAO, 2006). Conversely, food insecurity refers to the inability to
consistently obtain adequate nutrition, creating a cycle of impoverishment that challenges
sustainable development if not addressed (IFAD, 2014). It occurs when individuals lack access
to sufficient safe and nutritious food essential for normal growth and an active lifestyle (WFP,
2014). Despite some successes in reducing hunger and poverty in parts of South Asia and Sub-
Saharan Africa, overall rates of hunger and poverty remain stubbornly high.
The conceptual framework builds upon the theoretical framework by integrating specific
concepts, theories, and models that enhance its clarity and applicability. As illustrated in Figure
1, this framework seeks to understand the factors influencing food security among households,
focusing on three primary categories:
1. Demographic Factors: Characteristics such as the sex of household heads, age, marital
status, and family size significantly impact household food security. Households headed
by women may experience higher food insecurity due to gender disparities in access to
resources. Additionally, older household heads may face challenges due to declining
health and reduced income-generating opportunities. Marital status can influence access
to shared resources and support networks, while family size can affect a household's
ability to meet nutritional needs. Understanding these factors is vital for developing
targeted interventions and programs that ensure equitable access to sufficient and healthy
food.
2. Socioeconomic Factors: Variables such as the dependent ratio, education level,
household health status, annual income, consumer spending, and durable goods
consumption can substantially affect food security. These factors influence access to
financial resources, employment opportunities, and nutritional knowledge, shaping

29
 households' ability to allocate resources for food. Policymakers and researchers must
recognize these determinants to create interventions that address the root causes of food
insecurity while promoting equitable access to nutritious food.
3. Institutional and Policy Factors: Elements like cash transfers from safety net programs,
access to credit, training opportunities, and participation in social networks significantly
impact food security. These factors can enhance purchasing power, coping strategies,
knowledge, and access to resources. Recognizing the importance of these determinants
allows policymakers to design interventions that improve their accessibility and
effectiveness in bolstering household food security.
The Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) has been implemented to mitigate urban
food insecurity and enhance livelihoods through food security, nutrition, and resilience to
shocks. As depicted in Figure 1, the UPSNP comprises two components: public works transfers
(cash-for-work) and direct support for non-able-bodied beneficiaries (e.g., the chronically ill,
disabled, or elderly). This program influences household food security by improving access to
food and dietary diversity through enhanced income generation, job opportunities, savings
habits, and a more resilient environment. Consequently, participation in the UPSNP is expected
to lead to improved household food security.

30
 Figure 2.1: Conceptual framework of the study

Demographic factor Improved food

Sex of HHH security access
Age of HHH Dietary
Marital status diversity/utilizati
on
Family size
Resilience
Socio Economic factor
More income
Dependent status

Education level Saving habit

UPSNP
Health status of HHH Food Social interaction
Total monthly income of
public work
Job opportunity
HHH
Insecurity Direct
Enhanced
Consumption expenditure support
environment
Consumption of durable
goods

Institutional & policy

factors

Monthly cash transfer

Access to credit

Access to saving

Training

Participation in social
network

Source: Authors own construction based on the reviewed literature

31
 CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Description of the study area

Bahir Dar, the capital of the Amhara National Regional State and Ethiopia's seventh-largest city,
translates to "A Town by the Seashore" (Kindu et al., 2020). Located at coordinates 11°37′ N and
37°25′ E, Bahir Dar has a population of approximately 332,865, with women comprising 50.2%
of this total (Central Statistical Agency [CSA], 2021). The city is organized into 40 kebeles,
which include 3 satellite, 11 rural, and 26 urban areas, as well as six sub-cities: Belay-zeleke,
Atse-Tewodrose, Dagmawi-Minilik, Fasilo, Tana, and Geshe Abay. Situated at an average
elevation of 1,830 meters, Bahir Dar is located 565 km from Addis Ababa, the capital of
Ethiopia. In recognition of its efforts to address challenges related to urbanization, Bahir Dar was
awarded the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Cities
Prize in 2002 (Achenef, 2020). As the third-largest city in Ethiopia, Bahir Dar is positioned on
the southern shore of Lake Tana, the largest lake in the country. Known as the "Ethiopian
Riviera," the area boasts well-maintained surroundings, affordable accommodations, excellent
dining options, and a variety of activities that highlight the city’s stunning natural beauty.
Figure 3.1: Location of Bahir Dar city

Source: Kindu et al., 2020

32
 3.2 Research Design

This study adopted a mixed-method research design to analyze both qualitative and quantitative
data, facilitating a comprehensive understanding of the impact of Urban Productive Safety Net
Programs on households. This approach allows for triangulation, leveraging insights from
multiple data sources (Cohen et al., 2007). By integrating qualitative and quantitative research
designs, the study captures the richness and complexity of participants' experiences, using a
combination of open and closed-ended questions, along with emerging and predetermined
analytical frameworks (Caruth, 2013).

3.3 Research Approach

The primary focus of the study is on quantitative methods, employing a structured household
survey questionnaire administered to households who are food in secured Data collected through
this survey were analyzed using statistical software, generating numerical data suitable for
statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) and inferential statistics
were employed to meet research objectives and assess the contribution of public work projects in
enhancing food access.
An explanatory (causal) research method was utilized to examine the relationship between
UPSNP public work wages and household food security. This method focuses on analyzing
specific situations or problems to elucidate patterns of relationships between variables, assessing
the impacts of changes on existing conditions and processes.
Additionally, an exploratory research design was employed through Key Informant Interviews
(KII) with subject matter experts at households, Kebeles, and sub-cities levels. These interviews,
conducted in person using open-ended questions, aimed to provide meaningful insights into the
program's impact relative to its intended purpose.
Do you select from those HH who are food in secured or secured, please make it clear????

3.4 Population and Sampling

3.4.1 Population
Kothari (2004) defines population as a larger group of individuals who share common
observable characteristics, to which research findings are intended to be generalized. The target

33
population for this study consists of food-insecure households residing in Bahir-Dar city.
According to a report dated June 30, 2024, there are currently 14,953 beneficiaries, including
4,752 food-insecure households, with 3,935 beneficiaries and 994 food-insecure households
identified in the first round.
3.4.2 Sampling Technique
Zikmund (2003) states that a sample is a systematic selection of items from a target population
that ensures fair representation of that population. The primary objective of sampling is to allow
researchers to draw conclusions about the entire population based on a selected subset.
For this study, the researcher employed a simple random sampling method to select respondents
among food-insecure households. The total population includes both men and women
beneficiaries of the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) living in the area of study,
while non-beneficiaries are included as a comparison group.
A multi-stage sampling technique was utilized to select households for the study. In the first
stage, four sub-cities were purposively selected due to their dense populations, which may
impact household food security. The rapid urban population growth places significant pressure
on public utilities, such as housing, sanitation, transport, water, electricity, health, and education
in these areas. In the second stage, four food-insecure sub-cities in Bahir-Dar—GeshAbay, Belay
Zeleke, Fasilo, and Atse Thewodrose—were selected based on the intensity of UPSNP
implementation. In the third stage, eight kebeles from these sub-cities were randomly selected, as
populations within these kebeles were similar in socio-economic and geographical
characteristics. A stratified random sampling technique was then applied to categorize
individuals living in the selected kebeles. Ultimately, the sample consisted of 320 participant
households, including 236 public workers, 45 direct supporters, and 10 key informants, with a
10% adjustment for expected non-responses. The sample size was calculated using Yamane's
(1967) formula, n=N/1+N (e2). Where, n = required number of sample size, N= the total
population size, and e= level of precision.

34
 3.4.3 Sample Size Determination
Williams (1997) emphasizes the importance of selecting a subsection of the population to make
research more manageable. When chosen according to appropriate principles, this subsection can
provide valuable inferences about the population (Brannick, 1997).
The study utilizes Yamane's (1967) sample size formula for determination, as both the
population and the required precision level are known. The formula, applied at a 95% confidence
level, is as follows:
n= N = 994 =283------------ 285
1+ N (e) 2 1+ 994 (.05) 2
Where n is the sample size, N is the population size, and e is the level of precision. Therefore,
283 respondents were approached using a simple random sampling technique. Additionally, a
10% contingency for non-response was added, following recommendations from various
scholars (Donald, 1967; Hagbert, 1968; Johnson, 1959; Miller & Smith, 1983), leading to a final
sample size of 312 beneficiary households.
3.4.4 Sources and Data Collection Tools
To achieve the study's objectives, primary data was collected to provide a suitable basis for
generalizing results from the sample to the broader population (Creswell, 2009). Primary data
was gathered primarily from UPSNP beneficiaries living in Bahir-Dar. A field survey research
method was employed to obtain consistent responses from respondents.
In addition, secondary data sources were utilized for literature review purposes, drawing from a
variety of written documents, including articles, books, annual reports, websites, and other
published and unpublished materials.
3.5 Questionnaire
3.5.1 Data Collection Instrument
One of the primary data collection instruments utilized in this study is a questionnaire. The
questionnaire includes both structured (closed and open-ended) items developed by the
researcher. The structured questions are designed to gauge subjective responses, thereby
clarifying objective responses and enhancing the formulation of study recommendations. This
questionnaire aims to gather essential information regarding the authenticity of the respondents’
answers.

35
 3.5.2 Data Analysis Techniques
To achieve the study’s objectives, the data collected from respondents is analyzed through
descriptive statistics. The quantitative data obtained via questionnaires is sorted, classified, and
coded before being tabulated. Data analysis is conducted using the Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences (SPSS, Version 27). Descriptive statistical methods are employed to present the
results using tables, frequency distributions, and percentages. Additionally, mean scores and
standard deviations are utilized to assess the distribution of observations and to evaluate the
degree of consistency and similarity among the respondents’ answers to each question.
Can you compute the PSM with SPSS?, check it… STATA is preferable tools…
3.5.3 Propensity Score Matching (PSM)
In cases where individuals in a group cannot be matched on every characteristic, propensity
score matching (PSM) is employed to account for observable characteristics. PSM matches
individuals from treatment and control groups to calculate average differences in indicators of
interest, thereby yielding unbiased impact estimates. Propensity scores are constructed using a
participation equation, typically through logistic regression, where program participation serves
as the dependent variable (1 = in the program; 0 = not in the program). Characteristics
influencing participation are carefully considered, and baseline data is preferred to estimate the
propensity scores (Panhansy, 2015).
3.5.4 Evaluation of the Framework and Matching Basics
Roy-Rubin Model: The Roy-Rubin Model is a framework used to evaluate and analyze the
impact and outcomes of treatment groups compared to those that have not received treatment.
The primary objective of this model is to assess individuals who received treatment and the
potential outcomes resulting from the specific support they received. In this context, individuals
who received treatment are denoted as one (Di), while those who did not receive support are
marked as zero. The potential outcomes for each individual, represented as Yi(Di), are defined
for each individual i, where i ranges from 1 to N, with N representing the total population.
Consequently, the treatment effect for individual i can be expressed as:
Ti=Yi(1)−Yi(0)T_i = Y_i(1) - Y_i(0)Ti=Yi(1)−Yi(0)
Kernel and Local Linear Matching: When there are limited observations from a comparison
group for matching purposes, constructing a counterfactual for the treatment group becomes

36
necessary for evaluating outcomes. In such cases, a Kernel Local Linear matching/non-
parametric matching estimator is utilized to weigh the averages of individuals in the treatment
group for outcome comparisons (Panhansy, 2015).
Data for this study were collected through a questionnaire survey targeting UPSNP beneficiaries
in each kebele. The collected data were subsequently edited, coded, and entered into a database
for analysis using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS version 27) software. Descriptive
statistics were employed to analyze the quantitative data, encompassing essential information
such as frequency counts, percentages, cross-tabulations, bar graphs, pie charts, means
(averages), chi-square tests, and other relevant results identified during the analysis.
Overall, data were analyzed using SPSS software after editing and coding the completed
responses to ensure accurate interpretation of the findings.

3.6 Variable explanation

3.6.1 Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in this study is hypothesized as "households' food security." This
variable is influenced by various factors in the study area. Access to food security is treated as a
dummy variable, where a value of 1 indicates affirmative responses regarding access, and 0
indicates negative responses.

3.6.2 Independent Variables

This study examines several independent variables hypothesized to affect access to nutritious
food security among households in the study areas. The selection of these variables was
systematic, informed by prior research findings, discussions with community members and
experts, and the researcher’s personal experience. The identified independent variables include:
 Age of the Household Head: This variable is treated as continuous and reflects the age of
the household head, which can provide insights into technology adoption behaviors. Older
farmers may possess more experience and resources that facilitate the adoption of new
technologies, whereas younger farmers, who generally have more formal education, may be
more inclined to adopt innovations (Doss et al., 2008).
 Family Size: Measured as a continuous variable, family size indicates the total number of
household members. Larger household sizes are expected to enhance labor availability for
37
 agricultural activities, potentially alleviating labor constraints. Additionally, a larger family
may provide multiple sources of information, positively influencing agricultural yield
(Udry, 1996).
 Household Education Level: This variable represents the number of years of formal
schooling attained by household members, with illiterates assigned 0 years. Higher
educational attainment is hypothesized to correlate with lower loan default rates, as
education equips households with the ability to manage financial records and make
informed business decisions (Duflo, 2012).
 Income Amount: Household income, defined as the annual collective earnings of the
family, varies according to wealth status and influences households' access to resources for
producing micronutrient-rich vegetables. This continuous variable is critical in
understanding financial constraints that may impede households, particularly urban women,
in purchasing inputs for agricultural production (Keijn, 2015).
 Access to Credit Services: This variable reflects the ability of individuals or enterprises to
obtain financial services, including credit, deposits, and insurance (Porteous, 2005).
Agricultural credit, in particular, pertains to funds borrowed by farm businesses for
production, storage, processing, and marketing of crops (International Encyclopedia of the
Social Sciences, 1968). Access to credit is treated as a continuous variable, with
respondents indicating access assigned a value of 1, while those without access are assigned
a value of 0 (Adegeye & Dittoh, 1985).

38
 3.7 Validity and Reliability

3.7.1 Reliability
According to Zikmund (2003), validity is the capacity of a scale to measure the planning to be
strong-minded and considered. There might be a better measurement of validity if there is an
improved fit between the conceptual and operational definitions. It shows the relationship
between the construct and its indicators.
In the same way, Karpf D. (2012) stated that external and internal validity shows the accuracy of
a measure or the extent to which a score truthfully represents a concept. The external validity of
research findings refers to whether the observed associations can be generalized from the sample
while internal validity examines whether the observed change in a dependent variable is indeed
caused by a corresponding change in a hypothesized independent variable, and not by variables
extraneous to the research context.
Since items were distributed and were prepared by adopting previous scholars in the area and
data collected from reliable sources of respondents who are working in selected kebeles. This
indicated the strengths and weaknesses of the questionnaires.
The investigator conducted a field pilot test to assure the question format, relevance, wording,
clarity, and order. The survey questionnaires were administered to 25 respondents who work in
selected kebeles. Based on the pre-test feedback, the investigator revised important amendments,
such as order, clarity, and sentence structure, edited repetitive questions, and avoided
worthlessness questions.
3.7.2 Reliability
Cronbach‘s alpha is a coefficient of reliability used by Cronbach Alpha (1951). It is commonly
used as a measure of the internal consistency or reliability of a psychometric test score for a
sample of examinees.
Several authors such as Alwadaei (2010), Filed (2005), and Kothari (2004), state that an
instrument that provides a reliability coefficient of 0.70 is usually considered a reliable
instrument. Hence, in this study, the internal consistency for all items of the instrument was
tested using Cronbach‘s alpha method. The average coefficient of Cronbach Alpha value of all
items is 0.802, which is acceptable.

39
 3.8 Ethical consideration

Ethical conduct in research emphasizes the researcher’s responsibility to carefully evaluate the
potential harm to participants and to minimize such risks whenever possible (Bryman & Bell,
2007). It is crucial for participants to understand the purpose of the research and how their
information will be utilized; failure to provide this clarity may result in incomplete or inaccurate
data (Burns et al., 1993). Additionally, it is essential to assure participants that their identities
will remain confidential, thereby fostering trust in the research process. In quantitative studies,
researchers must strive for objectivity and refrain from allowing their personal values and
perceptions to influence the findings.
To conduct the research, a supporting letter from Skill Mart International College was obtained,
granting permission from the relevant offices to carry out the study and distribute the
questionnaire. Each questionnaire included a cover letter detailing the survey's purpose.
Importantly, the questionnaires did not require participants to provide their names, ensuring their
anonymity. Consequently, participants were informed from the outset about the research
objectives, the use of the information collected, and the reasons behind the data gathering.

40
 CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION

4.1 Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics of Study Households

In the sample of households participating in the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP),
a significant majority, 209 (67%), were headed by females, while 103 (33%) were male-headed.
The analysis revealed that 141 (45.2%) of the households were married, 114 (36.6%) were
divorced, 48 (15.4%) were widowed, and 9 (2.9%) were single. Regarding health status, 65
(20.9%) of the household heads reported health problems, whereas 247 (79.2%) did not
experience any health issues.
In terms of employment, most participants, 153 (49.1%), were daily laborers, followed by 114
(36.5%) who were engaged in their own small businesses, and 45 (14.4%) who participated in
other activities. Regarding housing arrangements, the majority, 226 (72.5%), rented from private
landlords, while 67 (21.5%) rented from the government, 16 (5.1%) owned their homes, and 3
(1%) rented from other sources.
Access to credit services was limited, with only 53 (17%) of households reporting access, while
the majority, 259 (83%), did not. Furthermore, 236 (76.6%) of the households had access to free
health services, in contrast to 76 (24.4%) who did not.
The chi-square analysis revealed a significant result at the 1% level (Table 4.1). This outcome
may be attributed to the health status of the household head being a criterion for inclusion in the
Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP), thereby influencing households' decisions to
participate. The findings indicate that female-headed households (n = 209, 67%) were more food
insecure compared to male-headed households (n = 103, 33%), leading to greater participation in
the UPSNP among female-headed households. This is consistent with Girma's (2012) research,
which demonstrated that the food security status of female-headed households was poorer than
that of their male counterparts, possibly due to males' greater engagement in income-generating
activities.

41
Table 4.1: Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of study households
(Dummy variables)
Total value Chi2 – value
Variables (N=312) (probability)
N %
Sex of household head Male 103 33 0.637
Female 209 67
Marital status Married 141 45,2
Divorced 114 36.6
Widowed 48 15,4

Education of household Yes 92 29.5

head(read/write) No 220 70.5
Health status of Yes 65 20.9 0.000***
household head
No 247 79.1

Occupation Daily laborer 153 49.1

Private 114 36.5
Ownership of the house Rental from Private 226 72.5
Rental from Government 67 21.5
Owen house 16 5.1
Others 3 1
Credit access Yes 58 18.14 0.214

No 262 81.86
Access to free health Yes 236 76.6 0.838
service No 76 24.4
Food secured Yes 21 .6.7
No 291 93.3
Note: *** show significance at 1%
Source: Field surveys, 2024

42
Table 4.2: Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of study household’s
continuous variables
Participant T-value P-value
Variables (N=312)
Mean Std.
Dev.
Age 45.835 17.33 -0.5 0.087
Family size 4.05 1.79 -1.2 0.815
Education (grade completed) 3.39 1.29 6.2 0.000
Dependency ratio 1.65 1.23 -3.7 0.001

Cash transfer 628.43 235.47 -15.2 0.000

Total annual income 38,917.26 11207.2 11.1 0.000
Consumption of durable Goods 4,444.17 619.98 11.7 0.000
Source: Field surveys, 2024

Table 4.2 presents the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the study households,
focusing on continuous variables among 312 participants. The mean age of participants is 45.83
years, but age does not show a significant impact (T-value = -0.5, P-value = 0.087). Family size
averages 4.05, also yielding no significant relationship (T-value = -1.2, P-value = 0.815). In
contrast, education level is significant, with a mean grade completed of 3.39 (T-value = 6.2, P-
value = 0.000), indicating a strong correlation with the outcomes. The dependency ratio,
averaging 1.65, also proves significant (T-value = -3.7, P-value = 0.001). Cash transfers average
628.43, significantly impacting food security (T-value = -15.2, P-value = 0.000), as does the total
annual income of 38,917.26 (T-value = 11.1, P-value = 0.000). Additionally, consumption of
durable goods averages 4,444.17, showing a significant relationship (T-value = 11.7, P-value =
0.000). Overall, education, dependency ratio, cash transfer, total annual income, and
consumption of durable goods are significant factors influencing food security status, while age
and family size do not demonstrate substantial effects.

43
 4.2 The effect of UPSNP on food security: The result of ordered log it regression
analysis
This study conducted several diagnostic tests to assess model adequacy, including tests for
overall model fit (goodness of fit), multi-co-linearity, and model specification errors (link tests).
To evaluate the impact of the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) on household food
security, the explanatory variables were analyzed for multi-co-linearity with respect to the
dependent variable. Following the guideline that a variance inflation factor (VIF) of 1 indicates
no correlation, a VIF betweenn1-5 indicates moderate correlation, and a VIF greater than 5
indicates high correlation (Education, 2010), the mean VIF of 2.40 suggests medium co-linearity
among the variables. The model analysis showed no significant multi-co-linearity issues, as the
tolerance levels across the explanatory variables exceeded 24%.
Table 4.3: Diagnostic test result for regression models
Tests Test name Factors of participation
estat gof Pearson>chi2 1
Hat 0.00
Link test Hatsq 0.42
VIF Multi-collinearity 2.40
Source: Own competition result using STATA 2024
According to Gujarati (2004), model diagnostics should be conducted prior to logistic regression,
with the model specification error test (link test) performed post-regression. In this case, Table
4.3, the diagnostic tests for the ordered log it regression analysis assessing the impact of the
Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) on household food security demonstrate strong
model performance. The Pearson chi-square statistic of 1 indicates a good fit, while the link test
results, with a Hat value of 0.00 and a non-significant Hatsq value of 0.42, confirm correct model
specification and absence of omitted variables. Additionally, a variance inflation factor (VIF) of
2.40 suggests moderate co-linearity among explanatory variables, well below the critical
threshold of 5, and tolerance levels above 24% further reinforce the stability of the regression
coefficients. Overall, these findings support the validity of the regression results and suggest that
the UPSNP effectively enhances household food security.

44
 4.2.1 Age of the household head
The results from the ordered log it regression model, Table 4.4, indicate a statistically significant
positive relationship between the age of the household head and family food security at the 1%
significance level. Specifically, the marginal effects reveal that a one-year increase in the age of
the household head, holding all other variables constant, decreases the probability of being food
secure and mildly food insecure by 1% and 5%, respectively. This trend suggests that as the age
of households experiencing moderate and severe food insecurity increases, their likelihood of
participating in the UPSNP also rises. Additionally, the coefficient of variation shows that
UPSNP membership enhances the likelihood of achieving food security by 31%.
Table 4.4: Ordered log it result and marginal effects of PSNP on food security
Variables Coef. Std. Z P>z MEdy/ ME MEdy/ MEdy/
Err. dx FS dy/dx dx dx SFIs
MFIs MoFIs
Family size -0.634 0.119 -5.34 .000 0.000** 0.112 -0.049* -0.063
Heath status 0.484 0.296 1.64 .101 -0.000** -0.085 0.035* 0.049*
Educational level -0.044 0.121 -0.37 .712 0.000** 0.008** -0.003** -0.004**
Dependency ratio 0.272 0.159 1.71 .087 -0.000** -0.048* 0.021* 0.027*
Credit 0.393 0.373 1.05 .292 -0.000** -0.064 0.021* 0.044*
Saving -0.933 0.377 -2.47 .013 0.001** 0.155 -0.052 -0.103
Monthly cash transfer -0.000 0.000 -9.72 .470 0.000** 0.000** -0.000** - 0.000***
Consumption of -0.000 0.000 -5.17 .000 0.000** 0.000** -0.000** -0.000**
durable goods
/Cut1 -8.836 1.583 -11.939 -5.735
/Cut2 -2.729 0.902 -4.497 -.961
/Cut3 0.537 0.894 -1.215 2.288

Note: **, *show significance at 1% and 5%, respectively and the dy/dx /marginal effects
results in household food security categories. FS: Food secured; MFIs: Mildly food
insecure; MoFIs: Moderate food insecure and SFIs: and severely food insecure
Source: Field surveys, 2024

45
 4.2.2 Family Size and Food Security
The analysis indicates that family size has a statistically significant negative impact on
household food security at the 1% significance level. Specifically, larger family sizes are
associated with a greater likelihood of being classified as food secure or mildly food insecure,
while the probability of being moderately or severely food insecure decreases. The marginal
effects suggest that for each additional family member, the likelihood of being food secure
increases by 6%, and the likelihood of being mildly food insecure increases by 15.49% (see
Table 4.4). This implies that food-insecure urban households with larger family sizes experience
greater food insecurity compared to their food-secure or mildly food-insecure counterparts.
Consistent with this finding, Mekuanent (2014) reported that households with a majority of
members in the inactive age category tend to have lower contributions to income generation,
which adversely affects food security. This phenomenon may arise from the increased strain that
larger household sizes place on food resources and heightened expenditures on non-food
necessities. Furthermore, Muluken (2019) found a significant positive correlation between family
size and household food insecurity at the 5% significance level, highlighting that larger urban
households tend to be more food insecure than those with smaller family sizes.
4.2.3 Access to Savings and Food Security
Access to savings also significantly influences household food security, exhibiting a negative
effect at the 5% level (p = 0.013), as shown in Table 4.4. The findings indicate that household
heads with savings access are more likely to fall within the food secure or moderately food
insecure categories, while being less likely to be classified as moderately or severely food
insecure. The marginal effects reveal that for each additional Birr saved, the probability of being
food secure increases by 0.06% and that of being mildly food insecure increases by 15.49%.
Conversely, the probability of being moderately or severely food insecure decreases by 5.25% ,
and 10.29%, respectively. These results suggest that improved access to savings in households
facing moderate to severe food insecurity correlates with a heightened risk of food insecurity,
highlighting the dependency on overall increases in cash income.

46
 4.3 Food security status of study households as measured by HFIAS
The Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) results, as shown in Table 4.5, indicate
that 267 (85.6%) of the study households were classified as severely food insecure. Additionally,
25 (8%) were moderately food insecure, and 20 (6.4%) were mildly food insecure, suggesting
that no households in the study area were found to be food secure.
Table 4.5: Food Security Status of Study Household Heads
Total (N=312)
Food security status
N %
Mildly Food Insecure (MFI) 20 6.4
Moderately Food Insecure (MoFI) 25 8
Severely Food Insecure (SFI) 267 85.6
Totally 312 100

4.4 Descriptions for Open Ended Questions

4.4.1 Low Employment Opportunity
The study results indicated that food insecurity was widespread and closely associated with low
income, unemployment, and unstable employment. A notable 21% of households identified
limited job opportunities as a primary contributor to food insecurity in the study region. Factors
contributing to unemployment included a lack of available jobs, insufficient demand for products
and services, inadequate skills, and the inability to work due to old age or illness (Yared, 2010).
Urban unemployment in Ethiopia is particularly high among the educated youth. Many young
adults who completed 12 years of schooling but did not pursue further studies remain
unemployed. This situation may partially reflect the tendency of relatively well-educated
individuals to consider them unemployed. Underemployment, exacerbated by the casualization
of labor, is also prevalent; for many, the only available work is unstable, casual employment that
pays daily.

47
 4.4.2 Food Market Instability
The urban agricultural marketing system is underdeveloped, hindering industrial growth and
limiting employment opportunities. Although linkages with rural areas are improving, they
remain at an early stage due to slow infrastructure and service expansion (FAO, 2017). The study
findings revealed that 20% of respondents perceived food market instability as a major cause of
food insecurity in the area. This dependency on the food market for purchasing sustenance,
coupled with a lack of monitoring, policy support, and inflation, contributes to this issue.
Farrington (2002) emphasizes that finance is a critical determinant of food security in urban
areas; therefore, the income status of urban residents is a more significant factor influencing their
food access than production levels.

4.4.2.1 The Rising Price of Food and Non-Food Commodities

Approximately 15% of study households identified the rising prices of food and non-food
commodities as a significant cause of food insecurity in the area. On average, only 65% of
households were able to purchase between 10 to 25 kilograms of teff or other cereals such as
maize per month. Unusual food price fluctuations have adversely impacted households
throughout the city. According to the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED,
2013), the global food price crisis has caused inflationary pressures in many countries, including
Ethiopia. Urban areas have been particularly affected by price hikes resulting from reduced
production due to drought and other natural disasters (Yared, 2010). This observation was
corroborated by focus group discussions, which revealed:
“The price of 100 kg of teff has increased threefold since mid-2023, reaching an average of
11,500 Birr by mid-2022. Food prices have also increased two to threefold this year. The main
reasons for these price increases include internal displacement, opportunistic price hikes by
traders and farmers, rising commodity prices, increased food demand, fuel price hikes, and a
shortage of foreign currency.” (FGD, August 8, 2024, Bahir Dar).

48
 4.4.3 Shortage of cash income

Approximately 15.5% of respondents identified a shortage of cash income as the primary cause
of food insecurity in the study area. This suggests that cash transfers from the Urban Productive
Safety Net Program (UPSNP) were inadequate, particularly for direct support beneficiaries
receiving only 435 ETB per month. Many beneficiaries relied on support from neighbors rather
than solely on program assistance. This qualitative finding aligns with the descriptive statistics
presented in Table 4.2, which indicate that more than half of the respondents reported an
estimated monthly income ranging from 1,000 to 1,500 ETB derived from various livelihood
activities.

4.4.4 Increased Cost of Production, Transportation, and Other Living Necessities

Around 8.5% of respondents reported that the rising costs of raw materials and production, as
well as crude oil prices in international markets, have significantly increased over the past 18
months. Focus Group Discussion (FGD) participants also highlighted fuel price increases as a
key factor driving up transportation costs, which further exacerbated food price inflation. As of
2023, the price of gasoline in Addis Ababa was 65 Birr per liter, while diesel and kerosene were
priced at 22 and 21 Birr, respectively. These prices have since risen to 82, 35, and 27 Birr,
respectively, amid limited fuel availability and escalating transportation costs. Despite these high
prices, there have been reports of certain goods being in short supply and the recent production
and transportation strikes in Bahir Dar city contributing to uncertainties. Participants perceived
the fuel price adjustments to be insufficient compared to international market trends, largely due
to a lack of foreign currency in the country.

4.4.5 Number of family size

Approximately 38 households (12.2%) in the study reported that family size contributes to food
insecurity. In the study area, there appears to be a general tendency to minimize disparities in
food distribution among family members, with the exception of special considerations given to
children. A significant number of respondents noted that family members often consumed the
same types and amounts of food, typically from a single plate. This practice is particularly
pronounced in impoverished families, where the limited food available is insufficient to be
49
divided among all members. One female-headed household with a large family size articulated
her struggles:
“I have five children; the oldest is 16 years old. I lost my husband two years ago. My life with
them is difficult due to their lack of understanding and resentment. The children often complain
about not having enough food, and I work as a daily laborer, but the wage is not enough to feed
my family. I struggle to provide food for my family. As a result, I rely on support from
relatives…” (Interview 02 beneficiary, 08, 2024, Bahir Dar).

4.4.6 Consumption of Durable Goods

As indicated in Table 4.5, the consumption of durable goods has a statistically significant
negative impact on food security status at the 0.1% level (p = 0.000). The results demonstrate
that household heads with higher consumption of durable goods are less likely to experience
food security in food-secured and moderately food-insecure households, while they are more
likely to be classified within moderate and severely food-insecure households. Additionally, the
marginal effects indicate that an increase in the proportion of durable goods consumption by one
unit results in a negligible change in the food security status of food-secure and mildly food-
insecure households (0.00% each), while the likelihood of being in moderate and severely food-
insecure categories rises by 0.00% (each). This implies that urban households categorized as
moderately and severely food insecure, despite higher consumption of durable goods, exhibit
greater food security than those deemed food secure and mildly food insecure.
The explanatory factors included in this study effectively elucidate the relationship between the
urban household characteristics and the impact of the Urban Productive Safety Net Program
(UPSNP) on food security within the study area. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected, indicating
a significant correlation between the identified explanatory variables and the food security
outcomes for UPSNP beneficiaries.

50
 CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSINS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary
This study examined the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) and its effects on food
security among low-income households in Bahir Dar City, Ethiopia. The objectives included
evaluating the program’s impact, analyzing the link between institutional services and food
security, and identifying challenges faced by beneficiaries.
Research Methodology: A cross-sectional design was utilized, blending qualitative and
quantitative methods. Data were collected from a sample of 320 households selected through
random and multi-stage sampling within food-insecure communities, using structured
questionnaires. Demographic findings indicated a predominance of female-headed households,
alongside significant employment and resource access challenges.
Key Findings:
1. Demographics: The sample largely consisted of female-headed households, many of
whom faced health issues and limited job opportunities.
2. Food Security Status: The Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) revealed
that 85.6% of households experienced severe food insecurity. Regression analysis
showed a significant correlation between household characteristics, including age and
family size, and food security status.
3. Contributing Factors: Key factors influencing food insecurity included inadequate
employment opportunities, market instability, rising food prices, and insufficient cash
income. The findings indicated that UPSNP support was insufficient to meet household
needs.
These results suggest that while the UPSNP contributes to addressing food insecurity, significant
challenges remain, necessitating more comprehensive strategies for improvement.
5.2 Conclusion
The investigation concluded that the Urban Productive Safety Net Program (UPSNP) has a
limited yet meaningful impact on enhancing food security for households in Bahir Dar City. The

51
high rates of food insecurity reflect ongoing difficulties faced by low-income families, especially
those led by women.
Key Takeaways:
 Household Characteristics Impact: Variables like family size and the age of the
household head were significantly linked to food security, with older heads and larger
families being more vulnerable. This points to the need for targeted interventions.
 Institutional Support: While essential, institutional services are often not fully
accessible or effectively utilized by beneficiaries. This gap emphasizes the need for
improved implementation and support mechanisms.
 Economic Context: The surrounding economic conditions, marked by rising prices and
market instability, greatly affect food security outcomes. Strategies must address
systemic challenges alongside direct aid.
In summary, while the UPSNP shows promise in tackling food insecurity, strategic
enhancements are required to better serve vulnerable populations.
5.3 Recommendations
1. Enhance Employment Opportunities: The government should prioritize job creation
initiatives tailored to low-income groups, focusing on youth and women to broaden
income sources.
2. Strengthen Program Support: Improve the implementation of UPSNP by enhancing
the accessibility and effectiveness of services, ensuring beneficiaries can fully utilize
available resources.
3. Market Stabilization Measures: Implement strategies to stabilize food markets, such as
boosting agricultural infrastructure and supporting local producers to lessen the impact of
price fluctuations.
4. Education and Training: Offer financial literacy and skills training to help beneficiaries
manage their resources and make informed food and financial decisions.
5. Regular Monitoring and Evaluation: Establish a robust monitoring framework to
continuously evaluate the UPSNP’s effectiveness and adapt strategies in response to
emerging challenges and successes.

52
 5.4 Limitations of the Study
This research faced several limitations:
1. Sample Size and Representation: While 320 households were surveyed, this sample
may not capture the full diversity of socioeconomic conditions in Bahir Dar, affecting the
generalizability of the results.
2. Cross-Sectional Design: The study's cross-sectional nature limits the ability to analyze
trends or causal relationships over time.
3. Self-Reported Data: The reliance on self-reported information may introduce biases, as
respondents might underreport food insecurity or exaggerate their use of UPSNP
resources.
4. External Factors: Influences outside the study's scope, such as climate change and
political instability, may significantly impact food security but were not extensively
examined.
5. Limited Qualitative Insights: Although a mixed-methods approach was employed,
expanding the qualitative component could provide deeper insights into beneficiary
experiences.
5.5 Directions for Future Investigation
Future research should consider:
1. Longitudinal Studies: Conduct studies over time to track the impact of UPSNP,
identifying trends in food security and intervention effectiveness.
2. Qualitative Research: Utilize qualitative methods to capture richer insights into
beneficiaries’ experiences and their interactions with the UPSNP.
3. Comparative Studies: Examine food security outcomes in different urban environments
or compare UPSNP with similar programs in other areas to identify effective practices.
4. Impact of External Factors: Investigate how external variables, such as climate
variability and market dynamics, influence the efficacy of safety net programs.
5. Holistic Approaches: Explore integrated strategies that combine safety net programs
with education, health services, and community development efforts to address the
complex nature of food security.

53
References

Achenef, M. (2020). Bahir Dar: A city of opportunities. Addis Ababa: Ethiopia Press.

Akter, S. (2013). The role of social safety nets in food security: Evidence from Ethiopia. Food

Security, 5(3), 395-410.

Andersson, C., Berhane, G., & Hoddinott, J. (2011). The impact of the Productive Safety Net

Program on food security in Ethiopia. Journal of Development Studies, 47(4), 600-620.

Bahru, A., Bacha, D., & Bafato, A. (2020). Impact of the Productive Safety Net Program on food

security and nutrition in rural Ethiopia. Journal of Development Studies, 56(9), 1684-1700.

Beshir, A. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of the PSNP in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of

Development Research, 33(1), 37-56.

Bethelhem, K. (2014). Urban Productive Safety Net Program and its impact on urban poverty in

Ethiopia. Development Studies Review, 6(2), 45-61.

Bezawit, S., et al. (2020). Food security and social protection: Lessons from Ethiopia’s safety

nets. Food Policy, 93, 101864.

Brown, A., Green, B., & White, C. (2021). Institutional services and urban food security:

A comparative analysis. Journal of Urban Studies, 45(3), 215-234.

Burchi, F., & De Muro, P. (2016). Food security: The role of the basic needs approach.

Debela, J., & Holden, S. (2014). The impact of PSNP on food security and nutrition in Ethiopia.

Food Security, 6(1), 43-58.

Degefa, T. (2008). Poverty alleviation and social protection programs in Ethiopia.

Devereux, S. (2001). Social protection in the context of economic reform: The case of the Urban

Productive Safety Net Program in Ethiopia.

Dmitrieva, A. (2019). Basic needs theory and its applications in development.

54
Duflo, E. (2012). Education and economic development. In B. A. B. Jones & J. A. S. Naylor

(Eds.), Education and development: Perspectives and issues (pp. 11-30). New York:

Routledge.

Elizabeth, R., & Deirdre, W. (2012). Rights-based approaches to food security and social

protection.

Endalew, A., et al. (2016). Chronic food insecurity in Ethiopia: A review of policies and

programs. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(24), 2154-2161.

European Commission. (2015). The role of women in agriculture: Insights from Ethiopia. ECA

Working Paper.

European Commission. (2015b). Social protection in the EU: Key facts and figures. Brussels,

Belgium.

FAO. (2011). The state of food and agriculture 2010-2011: Women in agriculture: Closing the

gender gap for development.

FAO. (2015). Social protection and food security: Lessons from Ethiopia. Food and Agriculture

Organization.

FAO et al. (2023). Food insecurity in Ethiopia: A multi-dimensional approach. Food and

Agriculture Organization.

Farrington, J. (2002). Finance and food security in urban areas. Urban Agriculture Magazine,

8, 12-15.

Frederiksen, N., & Collins, A. (1989). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational

Researcher, 18(9), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018009010

Ganta, A. (2011). Urban safety nets in Ethiopia: Challenges and prospects. Urban Studies, 48(7),

55
 1411-1425.

Girma, S. (2012). Food security status of households in urban areas: A comparative study of

male and female-headed households.

Hailu, A., Amare, M., Tasew, H., & Tariku, A. (2022). Assessing the effects of the Productive

Safety Net Program on household consumption and income in rural Ethiopia. Food Policy,

105, 102116.

Hayalu, G. (2014). Dependency syndrome in PSNP beneficiaries: An empirical study. Journal of

Development Studies, 50(3), 420-437.

Hermela, W. (2015). Evaluating the UPSNP: A case study from urban Ethiopia. International

Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 7(1), 66-79.

Johnson, R. (2023). Challenges in resource accessibility for safety net program beneficiaries.

International Journal of Social Policy, 12(2), 78-95.

Jones, A. D., Ngure, F. M., Pelto, G., & Torheim, L. E. (2014). What are we assessing when we

measure food security? A compendium and review of food security assessment tools.

Nutrition Reviews, 72(1), 7-25.

Kennedy, G., Ballard, T., & Dop, M. C. (2011). Guidelines for measuring household and

individual dietary diversity. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Knippenberg, E., & Hoddinott, J. (2016). Cash transfers and vulnerability in Ethiopia: Evidence

from the UPSNP. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 8(4), 520-543.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques (2nd ed.). New Age

International.

Mamo, T. (2011). Asset accumulation and social safety nets in Ethiopia: A critical analysis

Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 25-39.

56
Maier, C. (2014). Food availability and consumption patterns in Ethiopia during lean seasons.

Nutritional Studies, 16(2), 102-118.

Mason, K. O. (1992). Household composition and family formation. In Family Demography:

Methods and Their Application (pp. 17-30). Springer.

McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry

(6th ed.). Pearson.

Misgana, S. (2018). The impact of cash transfers on food security in Ethiopia: Evidence from

UPSNP. Journal of African Studies, 43(1), 88-105.

Mume, E., Dube, L., & Ayalew, A. (2022). The impact of the Productive Safety Net Program on

income and calorie intake: Evidence from a propensity score matching analysis in

Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Economics, 31(2), 112-130.

Mutuku, S. (2014). The role of PSNP in improving food security: A review of the literature.

African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 14(4), 1881-1898.

Noble, C. (2016). Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) for Measurement of Food

Access: Indicator Guide. Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance (FANTA).

Oxfam. (2018). Women’s rights in agriculture: The importance of women’s participation in food

production.

Pawlak, M., & Kołodziejczak, M. (2020). The importance of the basic needs approach in food

security.

Robert, A., et al. (2003). Social protection for the poor: A review of the Ethiopian PSNP.

International Social Work, 46(3), 317-333.

Sabates, R., & Devereux, S. (2010). The effects of cash transfers on asset accumulation in

Ethiopia. Journal of Development Studies, 46(8), 1530-1549.

57
Schmidt, E., et al. (2018). Ethiopia: Rapid urbanization and its impact on development.

Tamene, M. (2017). Impact of the Productive Safety Net Program on food security in urban

Ethiopia.

Teklay, A. (2009). An analysis of the Productive Safety Net Program in Ethiopia: The links

between poverty and capability. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,

3(2), 21-35.

United States Department of Agriculture. (2018). Definitions of food security.

Urban Productive Safety Net and Public Investment Management Program. (2016). Annual

report on urban poverty in Ethiopia.

Williams, T., & Taylor, S. (2020). Addressing food insecurity in urban Ethiopia

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

58
Appendix-1

QUESTIONNAIRE

Skillmart International College

General Introduction

Dear respondent, my name is Habtmarim Alem. I am a student from Skill Mart International
College.With a prospective graduates of Masters of Business Administration. By now, I am
contributing a research to assess the effectiveness of urban productive Safety Net Among food
insecure Households in Bahir Dar City.
Your answer will be kept privately and only used for the purpose of this research. The
researcher also trusts that real answers from all the respondents have very high importance that
might be used for policy makers, planners, Program implementers and NGO that work on
UPSNP as poverty reduction program of the country. Hence, I ask you to be honest and real in
your response. Furthermore, any information that you provide is very important to this
Household survey. Finally, I would like to extend my appreciation and thanks for your
cooperation and scarifying of your valuable time.
Consent from participants of the study/Respondent’s willingness/
Hereafter getting information about the objectives of the study from a person who needs
information from me about the opinions, I do confirm my willingness/non-willingness/ here by
saying:
Address:0913964035
Email:

59
 Part I: Socio-demographic characteristics
S.N Questions Answer Option Skip

101 Sex of household head Male Female

102
1 -------Years
Age of the household head (in
years)
103 Single Married Divorced
Marital status of the household
Separated Widowed
head
104 Yes No
Educational status of the household
head (Can they read and write?)
105 -----years
106 Male Female Total
Total number of household
107 members Male Female Total
Number of individuals under 18
108 years old Male Female Total
Number of children currently
enrolled in school
109 Male Female Total
Number of children not enrolled in
school
110 Due to economic problems
Reasons for not attending school
Health problem
Taking care of others
Taking care of sick ones
To work
Others specify______
111 Specify the No----------
How many household members are
benefiting from the UPSNP?
112 Yes No
History of any chronic medical
60
 conditions diagnosed by a
physician
113 Daily labor/informal activities
Employment status of the
Private work/small business
household head (multiple options
allowed)
114 Rental from private
Homeownership status
Rental from government
Own house
Other specify ___
115 Brick house
Type/condition of the house
Mud house
Plastic made
Rooms in shared house
Part II. Economic Characteristics
201 Estimated monthly income of the ETB___________
household prior to joining the
UPSNP
202 Estimated monthly expenditure of ETB___________
the household prior to joining the
UPSNP

203 Estimated monthly income of the ETB___________

household after joining the UPSNP

204 Estimated monthly expenditure of ETB___________

the household after joining the
UPSNP

61
205 What percentage of your monthly It covers all
expenditure is covered by the Half of the monthly expenditure
UPSNP wage? Small portion

206 Monthly spending on food ETB___________

207 Monthly spending on meals ETB___________

208 Do you receive financial support Yes No Skip 209

from other sources?
209 If yes, what is your source of Relatives
financial support? Remittance
Neighbors
Others specify
210 Do you have access to savings? Yes No

211 How much do you save each month? -----------ETB

212 Access to credit services Yes No

213 Access to free healthcare services Yes No

Part III Perceptions of Beneficiary HH towards the program

301 Do you believe the process for Strongly agree
selecting beneficiaries was fair? Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
302 The institute has a well- Strongly agree
established compliance Agree
management system. Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree

62
303 Is the wage rate adequate to Strongly agree
meet the household's food Agree
needs? Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
304 Do you find the transfer Strongly agree
process timely? Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
305 Is the program positively Strongly agree
impacting urban agriculture? Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
306 Do you feel that the public Strongly agree
works project is enhancing Agree
urban beautification? Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
307 Do you think the waste disposal Strongly agree
and management activities are Agree
improving your physical Neutral
environment? Disagree
Strongly disagree
308 Are there enough appropriate Strongly agree
safety materials provided for Agree
public works activities? Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree

63
309 Have you or any team members Yes No
experienced illness or injury
due to insufficient safety
materials?

64
Part IV: Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) Questions

S/N Question Option Skip

401 Yes No If no, skip
Did you worry that your
to 402
household might not have
enough food?
How often did this concern
402 arise? Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Were you or anyone in your
weeks)
household unable to eat your
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
preferred foods due to a lack of
weeks)
resources?
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
How often did this occur?
403 Yes No If no, skip
Did you or anyone in your
to 404
household have to eat a limited
variety of foods because of
resource constraints?
How often did this happen?
404 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Were you or anyone in your
weeks)
household forced to eat foods
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
you did not want because of
weeks)
insufficient resources to acquire
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
other options?
405 How often did this happen? Yes No If no, skip
Did you or anyone in your
to 406
household have to eat smaller
meals than you felt were
necessary due to insufficient
65
 food?
How often did this occur?
406 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Were you or anyone in your
weeks)
household unable to have
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
enough meals in a day because
weeks)
of a lack of food?
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
How often did this happen?
407 Yes No If no, skip
Was there ever a time in the
to 408
past four weeks when there was
no food of any kind available in
your household due to a lack of
resources?
How often did this occur?
408 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Did you or anyone in your
weeks)
household go to bed hungry
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
because there wasn’t enough
weeks)
food?
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
How often did this happen?
409 Yes No If no, skip
Did you or anyone in your
to 410
household go an entire day and
night without eating anything
due to a lack of food?
If yes, how often did this
occur?

66
410 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Did you worry that your
weeks)
household might not have
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
enough food?
weeks)
How often did this concern
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
arise?
411 Yes No If no, skip
Were you or anyone in your
to 412
household unable to eat your
preferred foods due to a lack of
resources?
How often did this occur?
412 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Did you or anyone in your
weeks)
household have to eat a limited
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
variety of foods because of
weeks)
resource constraints?
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
How often did this happen?
413 Yes No If no, skip
Were you or anyone in your
to 414
household forced to eat foods
you did not want because of
414 insufficient resources to acquire Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Did you or anyone in your
weeks)
household have to eat smaller
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
meals than you felt were
weeks)
necessary due to insufficient
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
food?
415 How often did this occur? Yes No If no, skip
Were you or anyone in your
to 416
household unable to have
enough meals in a day because

67
 of a lack of food?
How often did this happen?
416 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Was there ever a time in the
weeks)
past four weeks when there was
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
no food of any kind available in
weeks)
your household due to a lack of
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
resources?
417 How often did this occur? Yes No
Did you or anyone in your
household go to bed hungry
because there wasn’t enough
food?
How often did this happen?
418 Rarely (once or twice in the past 4
Did you or anyone in your
weeks)
household go an entire day and
Sometimes (3-10 times in the past 4
night without eating anything
weeks)
due to a lack of food?
Often (> 10 times in the past 4 weeks)
If yes, how often did this
occur?

68