GECAFS Southern Africa Food Systems & Vulnerability Workshop

GECAFS Southern Africa Food Systems & Vulnerability Workshop

Vulnerability in Southern Africa: Insights from the VAC process

6 – 8 December 2004Oasis Hotel - Gaborone, Botswana

SADC FANR Vulnerability Assessment

CommitteeVAC

To provide background of the vulnerability analysis in the regionTo provide background to the SADC VAC systemTo give an overview of current activities and results of recent assessments; and Define link between information provided through the VACs and program and policy (including risk management)

Why this presentation?


CommitteeVAC

Definition of Vulnerability• “Vulnerability” is a concept that is relevant to a number of

disciplines: - health - finance - food security , etc

• vulnerability represents “defenselessness, insecurity and exposure to risks, shocks and stress ... and difficulty in coping with them.” It is, therefore, necessary to define vulnerability in terms of three critical dimensions: vulnerability to an outcome, from a variety of risk factors and shocks (external side), because of an inability to cope with those risks (internal side).

• Vulnerability = Exposure to Risk + Ability to Cope.


CommitteeVAC

Approaches to Vulnerability Assessments

1. Methodologies focusing on external vulnerability (also termed “shocks” or “hazards”) include:-classic early warning monitoring as undertaken by the SADC NEWUs, REWU, -remote sensing and climate monitoring as undertaken by national meteorology units, the RRSU and the DMC at the regional level, - traditional FEWS monitoring, combining the two. - Poverty studies

2. Methodologies focusing on internal vulnerability include: - the VA baseline by SC(UK), the FEG & recently FEWSNet.

3. Methods combining internal and external assessment include: - VA baseline plus hazard information to arrive at a “problem specification”,enabling outcome scenarios or risk to be assessed, promoted by SC(UK), FEWSNet, WFP/VAM, and FAO and encompasses the “Livelihoods” conceptual framework of the SADC FANR RVAC

Application Of VA in Food Security


CommitteeVAC

• The SADC VAC system comprises of national VACs and a regional VAC.

The SADC VAC system…


CommitteeVAC

SADC FANR Regional Vulnerability Assessment Committee (RVAC)

• Established in 1999 by FANR

• Comprised of a multi-agency group of technical experts working to enhance food security and livelihood conditions within SADC region.

• Specifically, to :

•Promote VAs in the region.

•Harmonize VA methodology in the region.

•Provide technical, institutional and financial support to National Vulnerability Committees.


CommitteeVAC

Strengthen capacity of Member States to undertake and utilise vulnerability assessments for the purposes of food security planning in both emergency

and non-emergency situations.

The Regional VAC mandate is to…


CommitteeVAC

Why a VAC?• Given the complex people’s livelihoods and the many

factors that impact their food security, vulnerability assessments are conducted in a multi-disciplinary and cross-sectoral manner.

• This necessitates the involvement of several agencies, both within and outside government so as to achieve good communication, collaboration and networking.

• In addition, a VAC fosters and optimises the assessment – response linkages thus ensuring that results are translated into practical interventions


CommitteeVAC

Synopsis of VAC Process and VAC Reports FocusSince 1999 to 2001 FEWS NET, WFP, SCF, CARE etc carrying out different VAS mostly

food security based

July to August 2002 Initiated a series of rolling assessments in six worst affected countries (EMOP) – Focused on emergency food aid and updated CFSAM estimates and assumptions (quantifying the population in need and the amount of food aid required)

December 2002 Focus was to update food security status and Incorporated more multi-sectoral issues, especially impacts of HIV/AIDS

April/May 2003 •More livelihoods-based assessments, in line with longer term vision of the VACs. HIV/AIDS issues covered in all countries in varying degree of detail mainly using secondary data except Mozambique which used primary data.•An Urban Assessment was carried out in Zimbabwe

May 2004 •Livelihoods based assessments. Detailed HIV/AIDS Demographic study in Swaziland. Food Security and other linkages in countries. •Progress towards establishing National Vulnerability Monitoring Systems and Annual Assessments

June to September 2004

•Initiated a three stage consultation process at a) national level, b) regional and c) national and regional combined workshops to i) Strengthen institutional arrangements of VACs, ii) Improve coordination of VA and iii) How RVAC can provide guidance to VA

METHODOLOGIES APPLIED IN VA IN THE REGION

• The “livelihoods based” VA adopted by VACs

– Food security (availability and access – coping) covered by all VACs in varied degree of detail

– Variation across countries in the collection and analysis of information for sectors such as health, education, water and sanitation and HIV and AIDS as they relate to food security and vulnerability - because of methodology differencesa) Indicator Approachb) The Household or Food Economy Approach,c) Structured Survey Methods andd) Synergy and combination of approaches

• The methodologies being used will be reviewed by a Consultant in 2005 under SADC RVAC

Some Short comings of the Data Collection and Analysis

Participatory Approaches- HEA• Normally qualitative information• A large range of people in need of assistance

and amount required• Not adequately cover the other sectors such

as HIV and AIDs, water and sanitation• Normally contacted by external experts

Structured Survey Methods• Data quality sometimes questionable• Analytical capacity limited• Surveys designed and structured without follow up

monitoring in mind

REGIONAL FINDINGS FROM RECENT ASSESSMENTS


CommitteeVAC

Cereal Production in the SADC Region (six countries)


CommitteeVAC

Food Insecurity Status in the six SADC Countries


CommitteeVAC

Findings from recent VAWhat are the threats to livelihoods? Why are

people vulnerable? • Economic decline and stagnation…• Steady erosion of assets and growing poverty reduces

capacity to mitigate shocks to livelihoods…• Rising staple food prices relative to income sources erodes

HH purchasing power…• Increasing morbidity and mortality associated with

HIV/AIDS, induces downward trends in productivity…• Lack of easy access to markets reduces income generation

potential…• Poor availability/ affordability of basic services (health,

education, water etc) weakens HH resilience.


CommitteeVAC

Findings from recent VA Country Reports

Where are the highly food insecure?• The majority are in Zimbabwe Lesotho and Swaziland,

with all districts being affected to some degree.• About 30 % of rural popn in Zimbabwe is facing

shortages. Worst affected areas are in the 2 Mats, and in eastern and northern Manicaland and Mash East and Central provinces (total 2.3 million)

• In Swaziland, the worst affected are in the Lowveld and Dry Middleveld regions (total – 600,400).

• In Lesotho, affected areas are along the Senqu River valley and the Foothills( total – 948,300)


CommitteeVAC

Zimbabwe 2003 – Sources of Food by Province

Malawi – Sources of Food Expenditure and Sources of Cash

Zimbabwe HH Consumption Patterns

HH Consumption Coping Strategies – Zimbabwe 2003/04

Component Frequency of Analysis

Questions addressed Links to Program and Policy

1. Baseline Vulnerability Assessment

Infrequent (every 5 years or when context changes)

- What are the basic livelihoods? - What are the known or likely hazards?- Who are the most vulnerable groups?- What are the coping strategies they employ?

- Long-term development / vulnerability reduction planning- Emergency preparedness planning- Mitigation planning- Community-based preparedness activities

Hazard monitoring(Normally done by NEWUs)

Continuous - Indicator trend analysis: is there an emerging problem?- Where and how quickly is it developing?- What are the geographic dimensions of the problem?- Where should an in depth assessment be conducted?

- activate and focus needs assessments- contingency and scenario planning- guides geographic targeting- mobilize public awareness

Emergency Needs Assessments

As needed - What is the nature and dimensions of the problem?- How long is it going to last?- Who are the most vulnerable groups?- What and how much is needed; what is the best response?- What are major logistical and resource considerations?

- detailed emergency response plans and programs- detailed targeting- mobilize resources- mobilize public awareness

VAC activities and Links to program and policy


CommitteeVAC

Conclusion• Recommendation outside food security and nutrition have

been made helping developmental programmes in HIV/AIDS, Education, Health, Water and Sanitation

• SADC RVAC taking stock at the institutional arrangements, information systems, methodologies used in the 6 EMOP countries and how the information generated was used by decision makers.

• Through the 3 stage Consultation process it is hoped the information generated by NVACs post the emergency can address developmental issues and be linked to poverty, PRSP and policy

• Methodologies and approaches are still being developed eg. Questions of composite vulnerability compared to isolated vulnerability in sectors and handling of multiple stressors


CommitteeVAC

%

%%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

B o rd e r P o s ts m o n i to r e d a s o f 3 0 S e p te m b e r 2 0 0 4B o rd e r P o s ts to b e m o n it o r e d a s o f N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 4C a p ita l C i t ie s%

$#

Plu m tre e$

M oka m bo$

K a se ya #

Ch ir un d u

Ka s e s y a#

# #

Sw azi land

South A fri c a

Ango la

Ma law i

TanzaniaD.R .Congo

Zam bia

Zimbabw e

Mozambique

B otsw ana

N amibia

M k u m a n iz a#

M ch in j i

M p u lu n g uN a k o n d e

T u n d u m aK a s u m u ruS o n g w eM b a m b a Ba y

M ul oz a

K ala n j e

M ar kaM ar in e

M w a n z a#

##

#

##

##

##

K a su m ba les a#

N yam ap a n da

M ac h ipa n d a

B eit br id g e

M es sin a

Li v in g st on e /V ic tor ia F al ls

$#

$#

$$

Jo hanne sbu rg

W in d hoe k

Li lo ngw e

G abo ro n e

Lu sa ka

Luan da

Ha ra re

Ma se ru

Mapu to

###N ayu c h iN am in kh ak aK o low ik o

S an k h ul an iTe ng a n i

##

Informal Cross Border Monitoring System

Observed Trade: July – October ‘04

Fig 3. Recorded Informal Cross-border Trade in DRC, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe

0

5000

10000

15000

July August Septem ber October

Met

ric

Tons

Maize Rice Beans

Preliminary Results: Maize Trade

SOURCE DESTINATION

QUANTITIES/MONTH (MT) COMMENTSJULY AUG SEPT OCT TOTAL

Tanzania Zambia 91.3 115.1 589.8 713.7 1510 3%

Tanzania Malawi - - 21.6 21.2 42.8

Zambia DRC 96.2 - 160.0 495 751.2

Zambia Malawi 146.0 185.0 153 144 628.0

Zambia Tanzania - 54.4 17.0 3.7 75.1

Zambia Zimbabwe 616.8 636.0 1409 2,242 4903.8 10%

Mozambique Malawi 9,918.0 12,818.0 10,622 6,045.5 39,403.5 83%

Malawi Zambia - - .04 .07 1.1

Malawi Tanzania 59.0 121.3 135.0 108.1 423.4

TOTAL TRADED 10,927 13,930 13,108 9,774 47,739

Cyclists carry maize across the border into Malawi- an estimated 100 cyclist were crossing every 30 minutes

Documents

GECAFS Southern Africa Food Systems & Vulnerability Workshop