Reliance of external auditors on internal audit work : a corporate governance perspective

The literature suggests an increasing need for interactions among board of directors, management, internal audit and external audit as the four components of corporate governance and presents internal audit as a resource for the other components. External auditing standards that originated in the Western world, which are also being applied in developing countries, recommend external auditor’s reliance on internal audit to achieve audit efficiency. Nevertheless, whether this efficiency motive explains such reliance in corporate governance settings that differ from the West has not been sufficiently explored as yet. This study examines external auditor reliance on internal audit work using questionnaire survey of 119 external auditors in Ethiopia. Mann-Whitney U test results suggest that external auditors’ reliance on internal audit work is not significantly associated with the competitiveness of external audit sub-markets in Ethiopia. Results of multiple discriminant analysis indicate internal audit work performance is the most important factor that determines the extent of external auditors’ reliance on internal audit work. Overall, findings suggest that organizations can enhance corporate governance effectiveness by strengthening internal audit and fostering internal-external auditor coordination

Voices from the Source: Struggles with Local Water Security in Ethiopia

This report explores local water security in two different sites in Ethiopia, Shinile and Konso. This issue cannot be reduced to a single diagnostic such as measures of water use or presence of an improved source. The pressures of water security on livelihoods and household-level responses are discussed and local and national government responses are examined

From poverty to complexity?: the challenge of out-migration and development policy in Ethiopia

This brief assesses the current state of migration-related policies in Ethiopia, and provides some early recommendations and policy pointers based on work carried out under the AGRUMIG project. In Ethiopia, the scale of migration and its impacts on rural and urban transformations are underestimated and probably increasing. There is a lack of a coherent national migration policy in the country, which is a potential development hindrance. Establishing a national migration policy and improving bilateral arrangements with receiving countries could help Ethiopia reap greater positive impacts from migration and remittance income, including assisting in crucial processes of social transformation in rural areas

Genotype by Environment Interaction and Grain Yield Stability Analysis for Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn) Genotypes from Western Oromia

Crop yield is a complex trait influenced by a number of component characters along with the environment directly or indirectly. Genotype performance  depends on its genetic potential and the environment where it is grown. Genotypes by environment (GxE) interactions are generally considered to be  among the major factors limiting response to selection and the efficiency of breeding programs. Ten advanced finger millet genotypes and one standard  check were evaluated at Bako and Gute research center for three years (2013-2015) and at Bilo Boshe for one year (2014) with objectives of identifying  high yielding and stable genotypes. Analysis using additive main effect and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model revealed highly significant (P≤0.01)  variations among environments, genotype and GxE interaction. This implied that the tested genotypes respond differently over environments as the test  environments are highly variable. Only the first IPCA-I was significant (p ≤0.01) and contributed 41.57% of the total genotype by environment interaction.  It is found that genotypes 214995 and BKFM0063 are high yielding and IPCA value closer to zero, an indicator of stable yield performance across years  and location. Analysis using Eberhart and Russell regression model showed that genotypes 214995, BKFM0063 and BKFM0052 were the most stable  candidates with better grain yield of 2.99, 2.70 and 2.53 ton ha-1, regression coefficients of 0.9879, 1.22 and 0.9459 and reasonably acceptable deviation  from regression 0.0321, -0.01135 and 0.0607, respectively, further confirming that these genotypes are stable and widely adaptable. Genotype and  genotype by environment interaction biplot (GGE) also portrayed the stability of Acc. 214995. Overall, the AMMI, Regression and GGE Biplot revealed  similar results and both 214995 and BKFM0063 genotypes were proposed for possible release. Finally, 214995 was released and recommended for the  test environments and similar agro-ecologies of western Ethiopia based on farmers preferences, stable yield performance and disease tolerance across    locations

Flood adaptation and mitigation in the Awash Basin: Responding to new climate patterns. REACH Synthesis report

The Awash Basin in Ethiopia experiences frequent flooding, sometimes with devastating consequences. Climate change is now creating new flood regimes in different parts of the basin and reshaping the interaction of flooding with rapidly changing communities. This is causing heightened risk, particularly for the most vulnerable communities across the basin, and requires new forms of management and response. This study explores the physical changes in rainfall and landscapes leading to major f lood events and examines the interaction of physical phenomena with societal and economic dynamics across the basin’s upper, middle, and lower reaches. The study’s multi-dimensional perspective includes analysis of hydroclimatic variables at the basin level including global drivers, flood characterization in selected catchments, and understanding of affected communities at sub-catchment levels. Selected catchments cover urban parts of the Awash, as well as agricultural, pastoral, and agro-pastoral areas. The major focus of the work was the recent extreme wet season in 2020 and associated f looding during which an estimated, 144,000 were displaced and 60,000 hectares were inundated. This was the most serious flood event in the basin since 1996. The core questions of the study are as follows: 1. What kind of rainfall was responsible for flooding in the summer of 2020 and what were the large-scale drivers? 2. What aspects of the 2020 flood characteristics were different from previous floods and what is the interaction between land use and land cover with flooding? 3. What are the non-climatic drivers of flooding and what are the impacts of flooding on different communities and their coping mechanisms? The study results show that rainfall extremes during the summer of 2020 occurred in unexpected parts of the basin. Compared to the 1981-2010 baseline the lower part of the basin had a rainfall anomaly of more than 75%. Moreover, antecedent rainfall conditions from April to June contributed to soil saturation before the exceptional rainfall, as the months before July were wetter than the base period on average by 62%. Soil moisture conditions overall were wetter than average from 10 to 40% during these antecedent months which, combined with higher rainfall in the lower basin, and timing was a major cause of flooding in 2020

Policy and practice recommendations on flood risk management in the Awash basin

In the Awash basin flooding is a frequent occurrence during the main rainy season in July and August. The changing climate patterns are intensifying extreme rainfall conditions and causing floods in unexpected locations and seasons. Added to which, narrow channel width, land cover changes and land degradation can all exacerbate flood impacts. Recent exceptional wet extremes in 2020 caused massive flooding and severe damage to property in parts of the basin. A displacement of 144,000 persons and over 5 billion Birr damage was reported in Afar Regional State alone. With support from the REACH program, the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) examined characteristics of extreme rainfall and associated drivers of flooding, comparing previous flood occurrences, and investigating non-climatic drivers including differential impacts on social groups. Key points emerging from this analysis are as follows: -Unusual rainfall in terms of location, magnitude, and timing was the major cause of flooding in 2020 -The 2020 flood was characterized by early onset, delayed recession and larger extent of floods -Although the initial trigger was extreme rainfall, many non-climate drivers contributed to and exacerbated flooding, as well as the range and intensity of impacts on communities -The impacts of flooding vary across groups within communities-Variation in type of flooding and differential impacts requires contextualized interventions Recommended action points for practitioners and policy makers: -Institutional design to facilitate coordinated management and response to floods -Collaboration on operational guidance and improvement in flood early warning -Revision of studies on the Awash based on recent science and data -Implement web-based systems for data and information sharing including “data-free-of-charge” policy for researchers and research-users -Integration of indigenous knowledge into flood risk preparedness and research -Gender-responsive interventions are critical-Inclusion and strengthening of Awash flood-related research themes in universities’ water-related program

Survey to assess farmers’ economic perceptions, preferences and decision-making criteria relating to climate-smart soil protection & rehabilitation in Benin, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, India and Kenya

Key findings This document reports on a study to assess farmers’ economic perceptions, preferences and decision-making criteria relating climate-smart soil protection and rehabilitation (CSS) measures in Benin, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, India and Kenya. Specifically, it aims to answer the question: what do farmers perceive as the key costs, benefits, barriers and enabling conditions that influence their uptake (or rejection) of different land management practices? The study applies the Evaluating Land Management Options (ELMO) tool, a participatory method that has been developed by CIAT to investigate farmers’ own perceptions and explanations of the advantages, disadvantages and trade-offs associated with different land management choices as they relate to their needs, aspirations, opportunities and constraints. The study is able to highlight farmers’ preferences for different CSS measures in the five study sites, as well as to identify the main inputs, outcomes, barriers and enabling conditions that influence their uptake (or rejection) of different land management practices. While there remain key differences between (and within) the study sites, a number of common lessons emerge which relate to the assessment and design of CSS measures. One is the need to take account of farmers’ constraints and limitations as concerns their ability to access the cash, labour and technical knowhow that are required to implement new land management practices. Even when a land management technique may be perceived to be of great interest and high potential benefit, many farmers are simply not in a position to allocate the extra inputs that are required to implement it. The other is to recognise that most farmers do not merely strive to achieve one outcome or maximise a single stream of benefits when they make land management choices. Rather, it is the array of values, and the interactions between them, that matter and shape their preferences. The most desirable and viable land management alternatives are seen to be those which not only increase the flow of physical products (for example cash, food and other items), but also enhance livelihood diversity and security (such as filling critical food and cash gaps over the course of the year), at the same time as helping to secure longer-term improvements in the production base (most importantly soil fertility and moisture). The study findings serve to underline the fact that the most preferred land management are not necessarily those that yield the highest production gains, generate the greatest income, or entail the lowest costs (the characteristics that would traditionally be deemed important when land management interventions are designed). The metrics that are used to determine the desirability and viability of different land management options, measure their desired effects, and weigh up their advantages and disadvantages do not just concern cash costs and benefits or physical inputs and outputs, but encompass a wide array of monetary and non-monetary factors (such as the type and diversity of benefits generated and costs incurred, their timing, certainty, risk and relative ease of delivery). Unless these broader needs, constraints and preferences are identified, and addressed in the land management ‘solutions’ that are presented to farmers, CSS measures are unlikely to be acceptable, effective or sustainable in practice