Transcript Agrometeorology and Geographic Information System as

Ground truthing of LEAP intermediate
outputs with particular
emphasis on WRSI and Yield Reduction
predictions
Mathewos Hunde
And
Dr. Girma Mamo
FSCB/WFP Workshop
21 January 2008
Outline







Purpose of index verification exercise
Area selected for index verification exercise
Agencies participated in the verification
exercise
Types of LEAP derived outputs selected for
verification exercise
Verification methodology
Verification results and discussions
Conclusions and recommendations
Purpose of index verification exercise
 To
ascertain the capability of the LEAP
index as monitoring and early warning
tool in agriculture and food security
 To Verify individual input data of the
index (planting dekad, sowing
window, LCc etc)
 To identify improvement areas and
generate baselines for further
improvement of the index
Area selected for index verification
exercise
Team arrangement
Team 1: Parts of Amhara & Tigray
Team 2: Parts of Oromia, B/Gumuz and
Gambella
Team 3: Parts of Oromia, Somali and Afar
Team 4: Parts of Oromia, Southern Region
 3rd
to 27th of December 2007
Agencies participated in the verification
exercise
WFP
 MoARD
 NMA
 EIAR
 OBoARD
 WOoARD

Types of LEAP derived outputs selected
for verification exercise
Rainfall
 Moisture Index
 WRSI
 YR

Rainfall distribution for November 2007 by Zone
1st Dekad (1-10)
Actual (2007) dekadal rainfall distribution versus
average (1995-2006) for November by Zone
Below
average
Above
average
1st Dekad (1-10)
Dekada
Oct-3
Oct-2
Oct-1
Sep-3
Sep-2
Sep-1
Aug-3
Aug-2
Aug-1
Jul-3
Jul-2
Jul-1
Jun-3
Jun-2
Jun-1
May-3
May-2
May-1
Apr-3
Apr-2
Apr-1
Mar-3
Mar-2
Mar-1
Feb-3
Feb-2
Feb-1
Jan-3
Jan-2
Jan-1
Rainfall amount (mm)
Comparison of dekadal rainfall estimates between 2007 and the average of
1995-2006
Adami tulu Jido Kombolcha woreda
120
100
2007
80
60
40
Average
20
0
Dekadal Moisture Index for June to October 2007 by Zone
3rd Dekad (21-31)
Water Requirement Satisfaction index (WRSI) for
Maize in 2007
Percent Yield Reduction in relation to maximum
yield for Maize in 2007 Meher cropping season
aiz
e
Ba
rle
y
W
he
Fi
ng
at
er
Mi
Ch
ll
ick et
Pe
as
Fi
eld
Ha
Pe
ric
as
ot
Be
Ho
an
rse
s
Be
an
Le s
nti
les
Po
Sw
ta
ee
t P to
ota
to
s
Te
ff
So
rg
hu
m
M
WRSI
2007 WRSI VS Average(1995-2006) for Meher crops
Adami Tulu Jido Kombolcha Woreda
100
98
96
94
92
90
88
2007
Average
Crops
Verification methodology
Data collection

Average (normal) and actual (2007) rainfall variables
o
o
start of season (SOS), end of season(EOS), season
duration, dry spells
other natural hazards (flood, hail, frost)
•
Time series data on crop area & production
Water and pasture availability for livestock
Animal body conditions and health status
Grain and livestock prices
Other inputs (fertilizer, pesticides & herbicides, credit)

Number of affected people
•
•
•
•
Methodology …
Concurrent data from VAM/WFP, Country Office
•
Dekadal rainfall maps and raw data
Seasonal water requirement
satisfaction index (WRSI)
 Moisture index


Yield reduction data by crops
Rainfall alone
does not reflect
the reality
Methodology …
Actual data from:
Wereda Bureau of Agriculture
 Wereda Disaster Prevention & Preparedness
 Key informants
 Focused group discussion
 Surrounding farmers experience
 Selected fields

Methodology …
Data analyses and synthesis report

LEAP yield prediction= Ym-(Ym*YR/100)
Where:Ym= maximum yield (Q/ha)
YR= Yield reduction (%)

Yield reduction =100-((1-(1-WRSI)*Ky)*100)
Where:WRSI= Water requirement satisfaction index (%)
Ky= Crop response factor (to stress)
WRSI: < 50% complete crop failure
51-75% moderately adequate
> 75% Adequate

Input data update for further improvement of the index (SOS,
EOS, dry spells, SWHC, Ky, Kc)

Report synthesis
Result and Discussion
Part I. Comparison of actual (2007) and
LEAP generated seasonal rainfall
performance by test weredas
Table 1: Comparison of actual (2007) and LEAP generated
seasonal rainfall performance by test weredas
Weredas
Adami
Actual
Tulu Jido LEAP
Actual
Kuyu LEAP
Actual
Sokoru LEAP
Actual
Miesso LEAP
Actual
Ginir LEAP
Actual
Yabello and
Moyalle
Goncha
Siso Enso
Angolela
Tera
Guba Lafto
Habru
Kalu
Sodo Zuria
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
20
Dekads
21 22 23
24
25
26
Flood
Hail
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
Flood
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
Flood
Dry spell
Dry spell
Flood Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Table 1. Continued
Weredas
Arbaminch
Konso
Shebedino
Assossa
Gambella
Dire Dawa
Jijiga
Kola
Tenben
Enderta
Raya
Azebo
Asayita
wereda
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Actual
LEAP
Dekads
21 22 23
24
25
26
27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
Flood
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
Hail
Dry spell
Dry spell
Dry spell
Summary of seasonal rainfall performance by test
weredas

Seasonal rainfall performance during the 2007 was
generally favorable (SOS, amount, distribution &
duration) including the risky areas. This was fairly
consistent with the index output.
 Disparity between the observed and the LEAP
products for all the cardinal rainfall variables was
not so wide. Eg.1, Goncha Siso Enese reveals such a
reality, where both the actual observation and the
model prediction exactly concurred. E.g. 2,Kuyu.
Comparison of actual (2007) and LEAP …

For Ginir and Kalu the actual observation revealed
an extension of the growing season, while the model
did not capture this event.

Wider dissimilarity was observed for Konso, where
the actual observation on the SOS, EOS and
duration mismatched the model out put.
Result and Discussion …
Part II. Comparison of average and actual
(2007) production and area planted to
crops in test weredas
Comparison of average and actual (2007) production
and area planted to crops in test weredas

Over all, the actual area and production data of the dominant food
security crops have increased over the average and that was also fairly
captured by LEAP during the year 2007 in all test weredas
 Maize
area and production increase (Sokoru, Kuyu, Miesso,
Guba Lafto)
 Wheat
area and production increase (Sokoru, Kuyu, ATJK,
Ginir, Kalu, Angolela Tera, Goncha Siso Enese, Arba Minch
and Endrta)
 Sorghum
area and production increase (Miesso, Kalu, Goncha,
Guba Lafto, Habru, Raya-Azebo, Assosa, Dire Dawa)
 Teff
area and production increase (Kuyu, ATJK, Habru, Kola
Temben, Enderta, Raya-Azebo)
Sokoru
Kuyu
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops
in Kuyu
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops
in Sokoru
25000
200100
180100
160100
140100
120100
100100
80100
60100
40100
20100
100
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Dominant crop
Dominant crop
Average production
Actual production
Average production
Average and 2007 area of dominant crops in
Sokoru
Average and 2007 area of dominant crops in Kuyu
20000
18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Area (ha)
400000
Area (ha)
2007 Production
300000
200000
100000
0
Dominant crop
Average production
Actual production
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Adami Tulu Jido Kombolcha
Miesso
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Meisso
250000
140000
200000
120000
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Adamitulu Jido combolcha
150000
100000
100000
80000
60000
40000
50000
20000
0
Sorghum
Tef
Wheat
Barley
Dominant crop
Average production
0
Haricot
bean
Sorghum
Maize
Sesame
Dominant crop
Actual production
Average production
Average and 2007 area of dominant crops in
Adamitulu Jido combolcha
2007 Production
Average and 2007 area of dominant crops in Miesso
25000
18000
16000
20000
14000
Area (ha)
Area (ha)
Tef
15000
10000
12000
10000
8000
6000
5000
4000
0
2000
Sorghum
Tef
Wheat
Barley
Dominant crop
Average production
Actual production
Haricot
bean
0
Sorghum
Tef
Maize
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Sesame
Kalu
Ginir
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Kalu
180000
160000
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
330100
300100
270100
240100
210100
180100
150100
120100
90100
60100
30100
100
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Ginir
Dominant crop
Dominant crop
Average production
Average production
2007 Production
Average and 2007 area of dominant crops in Kalu
14000
14000
12000
12000
Area (ha)
10000
10000
8000
6000
4000
6000
2000
Average area
2007 area
Dominant crop
0
O
at
W
he
at
B
ar
H
le
ar
y
ic
ot
be
an
H
or
se
be
an
C
hi
ck
pe
as
Fi
el
d
pe
as
ai
ze
M
Te
f
0
or
gh
um
8000
4000
2000
S
Area (ha)
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Ginir
2007 Production
Dominant crop
2007 area
Average area
Guba Lafto
Angolela Tera
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Angolela tera
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Gubalafto
160000
140000
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
120000
90000
120000
100000
60000
30000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
0
Teff
Barley
Dominant crops
Average production
2007 Production
7000
7000
6000
6000
Area (ha)
Area (ha)
8000
3000
Field
pea
Lentil
2007 Production
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in
Angolela tera
8000
4000
Horse
bean
Dominant crop
Average production
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in
Gubalafto
5000
Wheat
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
2000
0
1000
0
Teff
Dominant crop
2007 area
Average area
Barley
Wheat
Horse
bean
Dominant crop
Average area
Field pea
2007 area
Lentil
Goncha Siso Enese
Habru
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Goncha
Siso Enese
Fig ? Average and 2007 production of dominant crops
in Habru
12000
Production (Q)
8000
6000
4000
240000.0
200000.0
160000.0
120000.0
S
M
W
he
at
C
hi
ck
P
ea
s
Fi
el
d
P
ea
H
s
or
se
B
ea
ns
0.0
ar
le
y
0
B
40000.0
ai
ze
2000
Te
ff
80000.0
or
gh
um
Area (ha)
10000
Dominant crop
Average area
Average production
Fig ? Average and 2007area of dominant crops in
Habru
12000.0
Area (ha)
10000.0
8000.0
6000.0
4000.0
2000.0
Dominant crop
Average productivity
2007 productivity
ar
le
y
B
Te
ff
W
he
at
C
hi
ck
P
ea
s
Fi
el
d
P
ea
H
s
or
se
B
ea
ns
S
or
gh
um
ai
ze
0.0
M
Productivity(Q/ha)
Average and 2007 Productivity of dominant crops in
Goncha Siso Enese
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2007 Production
Dominant crop
2007 area
Average area
2007 area
Dominant crop
Konso
Shebedino
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops
in Shebedino
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Konso
240000
40000
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
210000
180000
30000
150000
120000
20000
90000
60000
10000
30000
0
Maize
Teff
Barley
Haricot
bean
Wheat
0
Sweet
potato
Maize
Teff
Dominant crop
Average production
Average production
2007 Production
Chick pea
2007 Production
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in
Konso
Average and 2007 area of dominant crops in
Shebedino
6000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
5000
Area (ha)
Area (ha)
Haricot
Sorghum
bean
Dominant crop
4000
3000
2000
1000
Maize
Teff
Barley
Haricot
bean
Dominant crop
Wheat
Sweet
potato
0
Maize
Teff
Haricot
Sorghum
bean
Dominant crop
Average area
Average area
2007 area
2007 area
Chick pea
Sodo Zuria
Arbaminch
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Sodo Zuria
Average and 2007 production of dominant
crops in Arbaminch
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
300000
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
360000
240000
180000
120000
60000
0
Dominant crop
Dominant crop
Average production
Average production
2007 Production
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in
Arbaminch
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Sodo
Zuria
4000
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
3500
Area (ha)
Area (ha)
2007 Production
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Kola Temben
Enderta
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops
in Kola Temben
130000
120000
110000
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops
in Enderta
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
200000
160000
120000
80000
40000
0
Maize
Teff
Barley
Sorghum
Dominant crop
Average production
Finger
millet
Dominant crop
Average production
2007 Production
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Kola
Temben
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in
Enderta
10000
10000
Area (ha)
12000
Area (ha)
12000
8000
6000
2007 Production
8000
6000
4000
4000
2000
2000
0
0
Maize
Teff
Barley Sorghum Finger
millet
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Dominant crop
2007 area
Average area
Raya Azebo
Asossa
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Raya Azebo
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Asossa
140000
Production (Q)
Production (Q)
500000
400000
300000
200000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
100000
0
0
Maize
Teff
Barley
Wheat Sorghum Chick pea
Dominant crop
Average production
Dominant crop
Average production
2007 Production
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Raya
Azebo
12000
16000
10000
Area (ha)
Area (ha)
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Asossa
18000
14000
12000
10000
8000
2007 Production
8000
6000
4000
2000
6000
0
4000
2000
0
Maize
Teff
Average area
Barley
Wheat
Dominant crop
Sorghum Chick pea
2007 area
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Dire Dawa…
Average and 2007area of dominant crops in Dire
Dawa
Average and 2007 production of dominant crops in
Dire Dawa
12000
10000
120000
Area (ha)
Production (Q)
160000
80000
8000
6000
4000
40000
2000
0
0
Sorghum
Maize
Dominant crop
Average production
2007 Production
Sorghum
Maize
Dominant crop
Average area
2007 area
Result and Discussion…
Part III. Agreement between actual (2007)
and LEAP predicted yield (Q/ha)
under the 2007 meher season WRSI
Table 2: Summary of Agreement between actual (2007) and LEAP predicted yield
(Q/ha) under the 2007 meher season WRSI : an example
Wereda
Dominant
crops
WRSI (%)
in meher
season
Range of
actual yield
in 2007
(Q/ha)
Range of
LEAP
predicted
yield in 2007
(Q/ha)
Deviation
Remark
Adami Tulu
Jido
Komolcha
Sorghum,
teff, maize,
wheat,
barley,
haricot bean
92-100
10 for teff
to 44 for
maize
8.9 for teff
to 28.1 for
maize
LEAP model
under estimated
actual sorghum
yield by 78%
and over
estimated wheat
yield by 44.3%
The closer the
actual and the
predicted yields 
strong agreement,
Miesso
Sorghum,
teff, maize,
sesame
67-100
4.4 for teff
to 14.7 for
maize
5.5 for
maize to 7.1
for sorghum
LEAP under
estimated actual
maize yield by
164.7% and
overestimated
teff yield by
28.3%
Konso
Maize, teff,
haricot bean,
sorghum and
chick pea
98-100
Closer
agreement
between the
two
Table 3: Summary of grouping of the overestimated and underestimated 2007
yields of dominant meher crops in test weredas
Wereda
Dominant crop
Sokoru
Wheat
-
90.3
Adami Tulu Jido
Kombolcha
Wheat
-
44.3
Sorghum
LEAP under
estimated (%)
LEAP over
estimated (%)
77.6
Sodo Zuria
Arba Minch
Kuyu
Irish Potato
-
87.5
Wheat
167
-
Sweat potato
1506
-
Sweat potato
-
78.1
Horse bean
166
Haricot bean
127
Teff
132.8
wheat
135.5
Sorghum
414.6
Miesso
Maize
164
Kola Temben
Sorghum
115
Enderta
Wheat
171.5
Lentil
269.5
Maize
207
Sorghum
81
Dire Dawa
Assossa
Maize
138.7
Remark
Closer agreement in 32% of
the weredas, overestimated in
16% and underestimated in
32% of the werdas
Kuyu
Sokoru
95
90
85
80
Productivity (Q/ha)
100
WRSI (%)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
Dominant crops
Observed Yield
Average productivity
Dominant crops
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Predicted Yield
Average productivity
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Kuyu
5
4.15
4
3
Dominant crops
0.62
Dominant crops
0.72
-0.06
Field peas
0.63
Chick peas
Wheat
-2
Tef
-1
0.18
Horse bean
1
0
1.36
1.33
Barley
2
Sorghum
0.09
Devation
-0.90
0.03
Horse bean
Maize
0.02
sorghum
0.09
Wheat
0.10
Barley
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
Tef
Devation
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield
in Sokoru
Observed Yield
Maize
Productivity (Q/ha)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
WRSI (%)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Kuyu
Comparison of 2007 ,average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in sokoru
Adami Tulu Jido Kombolcha
Miesso
95
90
85
80
Sorghum
Tef
Wheat
Barley
Haricot
bean
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Sorghum
Dominant crops
Observed Yield
Average productivity
Observed Yield
Average productivity
2
0.776
1.647
0.564
0.6
1.5
0.508
0.4
1
0.142
-0.6
-0.5
Tef
0
0.219
-0.283
Maize
-0.443
Horse bean
-0.4
sorghum
Maize
Wheat
Barley
Tef
0.5
Sorghum
0.124
0.2
-0.2
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Miesso
1
0
Maize
Dominant crops
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Adamitulu jido combolcha
0.8
Tef
WRSI (%)
100
Productivity (Q/ha)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Miesso
WRSI (%)
Productivity (Q/ha)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI
Ginir
Kalu
-2
Dominant crops
WRSI (%)
pe
a
ai
ze
C
hi
ck
M
W
he
at
H
or
se
be
an
S
or
gh
um
B
Te
ff
0.06
0.03
Wheat
0.36
Barley
Devation
Field
peas
Horse
bean
0.58
0.53
0.34
Horse bean
-1.5
-0.59
-0.06
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
Teff
-1
0.43
Haricot
bean
-0.5
0.43
Barley
0
Maize
0.22
Sorghum
Devation
0.5
0.49
Wheat
0.65
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Kalu
1.10
Tef
1
70
Observed Yield
Dominant crops
Average productivity
Fig ? Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Ginir
1.5
80
75
-0.12
Dominant crops
Chick pea
WRSI
85
Maize
Predicted Yield
Dominant crops
Average productivity
95
90
Sorghum
Observed Yield
100
ar
le
y
Productivity (Q/ha)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Ba
rle
Ha
y
ric
ot
be
an
Ho
rs
e
be
an
Fi
el
d
pe
as
W
he
at
ai
ze
M
Te
f
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
WRSI (%)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Kuyu
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
So
rg
hu
m
Productivity (Q/ha)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Ginir
Angolela Tera
Guba Lafto
Productivity (Q/ha)
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
WRSI (%)
30
100
25
95
20
90
15
85
10
80
5
75
0
70
Teff
Barley
Predicted Yield
WRSI
0.62
0.40
0.37
0.33
0.29
Dominant crops
Lentil
Field pea
Barley
0.11
Teff
-0.30
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Horse bean
Dominant crops
Chick pea
Wheat
-0.32
Horse bean
-0.5
Barley
-0.3
Maize
0.03
Sorghum
-0.1
Devation
0.12
0.12
Teff
Devation
0.32
0.3
0.1
Lentil
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Agolela tera
0.61
0.5
Field
pea
Observed Yield
Average productivity
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield
in Gubalafto
0.7
Horse
bean
Dominant crops
Dominant crops
Observed Yield
Average productivity
Wheat
Wheat
Productivity (Q/ha)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
WRSI (%)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Angolela tera
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Gubalafto
Goncha Siso Enese
Habru
Productivity (Q/ha)
30.0
WRSI (%)
20.0
15.0
10.0
Predicted Yield
Dominant crops
Average productivity
WRSI
Horse
Beans
Field
Peas
Wheat
Sorghum
Maize
Teff
0.0
Chick
Peas
5.0
Barley
pe
Ha
a
ric
ot
be
an
Observed Yield
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
25.0
el
d
Fi
be
an
Ho
rs
e
Ba
rle
y
W
he
at
ai
ze
M
Te
ff
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
So
rg
hu
m
Productivity (Q/ha)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
WRSI (%)
Comparison of average, actual (2007) and predicted
yield against WRSI in Habru
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Goncha Siso Enese
Observed Yield
Predicted Yield
Dominant crops
Average Productivity
WRSI
Fig ? Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Habru
Fig ? Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Goncha Siso Enese
1.5
1
1.34
0.67
0.72
Wheat
Barley
Sorghum
-0.5
Teff
-0.01
0.0
-1.0
-1
Dominant crops
Dominant crops
-0.02
0.01
Horse
Beans
0.30
Field
Peas
0.25
Chick
Peas
0.5
Maize
Devation
Field
pea
-0.21
Horse
bean
Barley
0.15
Wheat
-0.5
0.24
Maize
0
1.0
0.47
0.30
Teff
0.37
Sorghum
Devation
0.5
-0.09
Shebedino
Konso
95
90
85
80
75
Productivity (Q/ha)
100
WRSI (%)
Productivity (Q/ha)
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Teff
Barley
Haricot
bean
Wheat
100
8
95
90
6
85
4
80
2
75
0
70
Maize
10
70
Maize
Sweet
potato
WRSI (%)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Konso
Comparison of 2007,average,and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Shebedino
Teff
Haricot
bean
Sorghum
Chick pea
Dominant crops
Observed Yield
Dominant crops
Average productivity
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Dominant crops
Sweet potato
-0.20
Wheat
-0.12
0.04
Chick
pea
-0.22
0.06
Sorghum
-0.2
Maize
0.10
Haricot bean
-0.11
Barley
-0.03
Teff
0.10
Devation
0
0.04
Haricot
bean
0.2
0.84
Maize
Devation
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Fig ? Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Konso
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Shebedino
Teff
Observed Yield
Average productivity
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
Dominant crops
Sodo Zuria
Arbaminch
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Sodo Zuria
H
Te
ar
ff
ic
ot
be
an
S
or
gh
S
w
ee um
tp
ot
a
Iri
sh to
po
ta
to
ar
le
y
W
he
Fi
at
el
d
pe
H
or
as
se
be
an
s
B
WRSI
Observed Yield
Predicted Yield
Dominant crops
Average productivity
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Arbaminch
Dominant crops
Dominant crops
-0.78
Irish potato
Sweet potato
Teff
-0.01
Horse beans
-1
0.89
0.19
Field peas
-0.5
0.96
0.30
Wheat
0.5
Barley
-0.88
0.93 0.98
1
0
Irish potato
-0.23 -0.02
Field peas
chick peas
Sorghum
0.00
Sweet potato
Horse bean
0.04
1.27
Maize
Devation
1.5
1.67
Wheat
Haricot bean
0.25 0.19 0.16
1.67
Sorghum
15.07
Barley
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
3
1
-1
Teff
Devation
2
Haricot bean
Dominant
crops Yield
Predicted
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
M
B
ar
H
le
ar
y
ic
ot
be
an
W
h
H
o r eat
se
be
S
w
an
ee
tp
ot
at
o
S
or
gh
um
ch
ic
k
pe
as
Fi
el
d
pe
Iri
sh a s
po
ta
to
Observed Yield
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
ai
ze
Productivity (Q/ha)
WRSI (%)
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
Te
ff
Productivity (Q/ha)
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
WRSI (%)
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Arbaminch
Comparison of average , actual (2007) and predicted
yield against WRSI in Sodo Zuria
Kola Temben
Enderta
Comparison of 2007 average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Kola Temben
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Enderta
10
5
0
5
0
Sorghum
Teff
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Dominant crops
Maize
Lentil
2.70
1.77
1.71
1.22
1.03
0.39
0.00
Dominant crops
Lentil
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
Maize
-0.08
Devation
Finger millet
-1
Sorghum
-0.5
0.08
Barley
0
Teff
0.02
Maize
Devation
1
0.24
Sorghum
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield
in Enderta
1.15
0.5
Wheat
Observed Yield Dominant crops
Predicted Yield
Average productivity
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Kola Temben
1.5
Barley
Sorghum
Observed Yield
Dominant crops
Average productivity
10
Hanfetse
Wheat
15
Wheat
Barley
20
Barley
Teff
25
Teff
Maize
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
WRSI (%)
15
30
Productivity (Q/ha)
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
WRSI (%)
Productivity (Q/ha)
20
Raya Azebo
Asossa
25
20
15
10
5
0
Maize
Teff
Barley
Wheat
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
25
20
15
10
5
0
Maize
Ground
nut
Observed Yield
Predicted Yield
WRSI
Dominant crops
Average Productivity
WRSI
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield
in Asossa
2
1.5
1.05
Dominant crops
0
-0.5
-1
0.24
-0.11
-0.31
Dominant crops
Haricot bean
Chick pea
0.5
Finger millet
-1
Sorghum
Wheat
Barley
Teff
0.05
Teff
0.5
0.11
1
0.63
Sorghum
0.65
1.39
Maize
0.69
Devation
1
Maize
Haricot
bean
Predicted Yield
1.5
Devation
Finger
millet
Average productivity
Deviation of predicted yield from 2007 yield in
Raya Azebo
-0.5
Teff
Observed Yield
Dominant crops
0
Sorghum
Sorghum Chick pea
-0.15
Ground nut
30
30
Productivity (Q/ha)
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
WRSI (%)
Productivity (Q/ha)
35
Comparison of Observed and predicted productivity
against WRSI in Asossa
-0.60
WRSI (%)
Comparison of Observed and predicted productivity
against WRSI in Raya Azebo
Dire Dawa…
Fig ? Deviation of predicted yield from 2007
yield in Dire Dawa
Comparison of 2007, average and predicted
productivity against WRSI in Dire Dawa
15
10
5
0
Sorghum
Maize
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
Dominant crops
Observed Yield
Predicted Yield
Average productivity
WRSI
0.81
Maize
20
2.07
2
Sorghum
25
2.5
Devation
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
WRSI (%)
Productivity (Q/ha)
30
Dominant crops
Summary on agreement of actual and
predicted yield of 2007
About 52% in agreement
 About 16% overestimated
 About 32% underestimated
 Possible reasons for disparity are:
 Quality of data provided (area, production,
yield)
 Individual data inputs used in the index
(Sowing window, LGP, Crop basket weight
(%) etc)

Conclusion and recommendation
1.
Seasonal rainfall performance during the 2007 was
generally favorable (SOS, amount, distribution &
duration) including the risky areas. This was
consistent with the index output.
2.
Generally, the index has reasonably captured the
actual
production/yield
level,
but
further
improvement is needed enhance its capability.
This means that the index can be used for crop
monitoring and early warning purpose
And thus the government particularly MoARD should
take the lead in incorporating the tool into the EWS
3.
4.
Conclusion and…
5
However, continuous refinement and testing of the index is
crucially important
6.
Therefore there has to be active involvement of key
stakeholders (NMA, EIAR, WFP etc) in further refinement,
testing, and operationalization of the index.
7.
LEAP outputs/predictions needs to be always adjusted based
on actual events on the ground (monitoring data) and thus
the tool should have a function allowing to do that.
7. LEAP should be further developed so that it can also be used
for forage monitoring and early warning in pastoral areas.
8. Similarly, flood index needs to be developed and built into
LEAP
Thank you