DRM-ATF 1ST ANNUAL CONFERENCE - Disaster risk reduction

D R M - A T F 1 S T A N N U A L C O N F E R E N C E 

P R O C E E D I N G S 

DRM-ATF 1 ST ANNUAL CONFERENCE 

3 RD & 4 TH APRIL 2012 

HILTON HOTEL, ADDIS ABABA 

PROCEEDINGS 

Page | 1



Page | 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 



In 2003 the Government of Ethiopia established Task Forces in key sectors such as agriculture, health, 

water & sanitation, and nutrition. Following the Government’s paradigm shift from disaster 

management to risk management, the Disaster Risk Management - Food Security Sector (DRM-FSS) 

was established. The Disaster Risk Management - Agriculture Task Force (DRM-ATF) formerly the 

Emergency Agriculture Task Force, was launched in 2007. The DRM-ATF initially made good 

progress, however levels of participation fluctuated and by mid-2010 meetings were erratic and 

attendance poor. Alerted about a strong La Niňa episode in 2011, the DRM-FSS re-launched the 

DRM-ATF in the autumn of 2010 with the support of FAO. Since it’s re-launch, the DRM-ATF has 

helped members prepare for and respond to forecasted drought, flood, crop pests and livestock 

diseases and volatile food prices, acting as a tool for coordination and harmonization of approaches, 

through monthly meetings, discussion forums, monthly and quarterly progress reports, road maps and 

briefing papers. 

The DRM-ATF held its 1 st Annual Conference on ‘Innovative Agriculture-Sector DRM Practice in 

Ethiopia’, on the 3 rd and 4 th of April 2012 at the Hilton Hotel, Addis Ababa. Over 80 participants 

attended the conference, including representatives from government agencies – including the regions, 

international organizations and NGOs. The conference presentations highlight innovative DRM 

approaches that are being developed in Ethiopia. The Conference provided an opportunity for 

development partners to come together from around Ethiopia to share thinking, ideas and promote 

emerging good practice. 

Page | 3



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The DRM-ATF would like to thank all those who prepared and delivered presentations at the 1 st 

Annual DRM-ATF Conference 2012 and to those who Chaired and Moderated the technical sessions. 

We would also like to thank participating representatives of the regional and federal DRMFSS and 

other Government Offices. 

Appreciation is also due to the Conference Organising Committee and the team from the Secretariat 

who helped to make the Conference such a success. 

None of this would have been possible without the financial support of USAID/OFDA through the 

Improving Agriculture Sector Drought Response Coordination Project. 

Page | 4



ABBREVIATIONS 

BoA 

CIP 

CMDRM 

DCM 

DLS 

DRM 

DRM-ATF 

DRM-FSS 

DRM-TWG 

DRR 

EWRD 

FS 

FSN 

FSNWG 

GoE 

HABP 

IBD 

IPC 

MFI 

MoA 

MoW&E 

OFDA 

PFS 

PSB 

PSNP 

SVF 

VAT 

Bureau of Agriculture 

International Potato Centre 

Community Managed Disaster Risk Management 

Drought Cycle Management 

Diffused Light Storage 

Disaster Risk Management 

Disaster Risk Management – Agriculture Task Force 

Disaster Risk Management & Food Security Sector 

Disaster Risk Management Technical Working Group 

Disaster Risk Reduction 

Early Warning & Response Directorate 

Food Security 

Food Security & Nutrition 

Food Security & Nutrition Working Group 

Government of Ethiopia 

Household Asset Building Programme 

Integrated Water-Based Development 

Integrated Food Security Phase Classification 

Microfinance Institution 

Ministry of Agriculture 

Ministry of Water & Energy 

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance 

Pastoralist Field School 

Pit Storage Bag 

Productive Safety Net Programme 

Seed Vouchers and Fairs 

Value Added Tax 

Page | 5



CONTENTS 

1. Introduction 1 

1.1 The DRM-ATF 1 

1.2 Opening Remarks 2 

2. Smallholder Farmers: Innovative DRR Practices 5 

2.1 Improving Resilience 5 

2.1.1 Community Watershed Management, Food Security Growth in Rural 5 

Tigray, Ethiopia: The Case of the Honey Value Chain 

2.1.2 Improving Food Security through Appropriate & Cost-Effective Post- 6 

Harvest Technology 

2.2 Stabilising Markets 7 

2.2.1 Food Price Stabilization in Ethiopia 7 

2.2.2 Market-Based Response to Emergency Programming: Seed Vouchers 8 

and Fairs 

2.3 Enhancing Productivity 9 

2.3.1 Root & Tuber Crops for Food Security in Ethiopia: Potential for 9 

Expansion 

2.3.2 Apple Production in the Amhara Highlands: A Case of Dabat Integrated 10 

Food Security Project (2005-2012) 

3. Pastoralists/Agro-Pastoralists: Innovative DRR Practices 12 

3.1 Linking Relief & Rehabilitation to Development 12 

3.1.1 Linking Emergency Response to Long-Term Risk Reduction/Development: 12 

Impact Assessment of Response to Food Crisis and Drought in Ethiopia 

3.1.2 Commercial De-Stocking: Mercy Corps’ 2011 Drought Experience 13 

3.2 DRR Experiences & Innovative Approaches 16 

3.2.1 Drought Cycle Management: Lessons Learnt in Pastoral Areas of 16 

Southern Ethiopia, 2011 

3.2.2 Experience of Pastoralist Field Schools in Ethiopia 18 

3.3 Natural Resource Management 19 

3.3.1 Ecosystem Approach to Cross-Border Disaster Risk Management 19 

3.3.2 Consequences of Inappropriate Development Interventions in the Borana 21 

Rangelands in the ‘60s and ‘70s: “A Curse or A Blessing” 

4. Cross-Cutting Issues 23 

4.1 A Review of the Flood Risk Management System in Ethiopia 23 

4.2 Women’s Economic Empowerment in Smallholding Farmer Development 23 

4.3 Cash Grants & Women Traders: A Suitable Emergency Response 25 

4.4 Regional Linkages: The FSNWG Platform 26 

5. Wrap-Up & Closing Remarks 29 

5.1 Wrap-Up 29 

5.2 Closing Remarks 29 

Annex I: Conference Programme 31 

Annex II: List of Participants 33 

Page | 6

1. INTRODUCTION 

1.1 THE DRM-ATF 



The Government of Ethiopia (GoE) established Task Forces for key sectors including agriculture, health, 

water & sanitation, and nutrition in 2003. The Agricultural Task Force (ATF) was initially led by the Crop 

Production Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD) and its primary 

purpose was to provide a platform for stakeholders’ support to agriculture sector hazard management 

and response. The ATF therefore supported seasonal assessments, agriculture section hazard 

management and stakeholder coordination. Recognising the fact that, located in the Horn of Africa, 

Ethiopia is subject to recurrent drought, flood, livestock disease, crop pet and diseases and conflict, the 

2004 Government’s Business Process Reengineering exercise recommended a paradigm shift from 

disaster to risk management under a proposed Disaster Risk Management (DRM) policy process. 

Accordingly, the Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector (DRMFSS) was established and the 

in 2007 the Disaster Risk Management – Agriculture Task Force (DRM-ATF) was launched. The reformed 

DRM-ATF’s primary purpose includes improved agriculture sector hazard preparedness, mitigation, 

response and early recovery support, specifically: information sharing and capacity building; monitoring 

who is doing what, where, and when; and coordination. 

The DRM-ATF initially made good progress. However in subsequent years levels of participation declined 

and by mid-2010 meetings were erratic and attendance poor. The DRMFSS therefore decided to relaunch 

the DRM-ATF in the autumn of 2010 with the support of FAO Ethiopia. The re-launch of the DRM- 

ATF coincided with the climate forecasts for a strong La Niňa event that was forecast to result in failed 

autumn 2010 rains in the Belg smallholder farmer areas and the pastoral rangelands of southern and 

south-eastern Ethiopia. The forecast also predicted below normal rains in the subsequent spring rains of 

2011 and above rains in the Ethiopian highlands. 

The DRM-ATF therefore had a clear operational focus to support the planned Meher seasonal assessment 

and to help members to prepare for and respond to the forecast drought. Following the re-launch, the 

first monthly meeting was held in October 2011. Subsequently, members have met together every month 

to share weather, food price and La Niňa preparedness and response plans and progress. Monthly and 

quarterly progress reports have been prepared and shared with the DRM Technical Working Group to 

which the DRM-ATF is accountable. By early 2011 the stakeholders had identified the need to 

complement the monthly business meetings with a Discussion Forum that offered members opportunities to 

discuss single issues in more detail. Forum discussions have also been held monthly since January and 

topics covered include: Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards; Emergency Seed Systems; 

Volatile Food Prices; and the Drought Cycle Model informing drought risk management. 

In addition the DRM-ATF has responded to member information requests through the launch of a Briefing 

Paper Series. To-date 10 Briefing Papers have been produced and circulated including three La Niňa 

guidance papers or roadmaps. The DRM-ATF has produced three La Niña Roadmaps to provide member 

agencies with guidance on ‘best-choice’ interventions for their work in smallholder farming and pastoral 

areas. These Roadmaps have been used by donor organisations and policy planners including in other 

countries of the Horn of Africa. 

Representatives of the DRM-ATF attend the UN-OCHA Cluster Leads meetings as the DRM-ATF has 

effectively replaced the need for an Agriculture and Food Security Cluster. The DRM-ATF is therefore 

also accountable to the Humanitarian Coordinator. 

The DRM-ATF is currently working to establish regional Task Forces in each of the regions. Already relaunched 

regional Task Forces are held in Afar, Somali, Amhara and Tigray Regions, as well as Borena 

Zone of Oromia Region. 

Page | 1

1.2 OPENING REMARKS 



The opening speech was given by Ato Berhanu Wolde Mikael, Delegate of the State Minister of the 

DRMFSS, MoA, followed by opening remarks given by Adrian Cullis, DRM Coordinator, FAO Ethiopia 

and Co-Chair of the DRM-ATF. 

Ato Berhanu opened by extending his welcome to the participants of the conference. He then drew 

attention to Ethiopia’s recent and impressive economic growth, as well as recent disasters, which are 

expected to become more intense in terms of frequency, intensity and coverage, largely due to climate 

change. In order to sustain socio-economic gains made in recent years, Ato Berhanu asserted that the 

Government of Ethiopia (GoE) and its development partners are committed to reducing disaster risk 

through DRM approaches and mitigating potential impacts by enhancing the early warning and response 

system, as part of their efforts to fully operationalise the new DRM and Food Security (FS) approach in 

the country. 

Triggered by the Hyogo Framework of Action and the Business Process Reengineering, the GoE saw a 

paradigm shift from reactive crisis management to a proactive risk management approach. This shift was 

marked by the formation of the DRMFSS within the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA), comprising the Early 

Warning & Response Directorate (EWRD) and the Food Security Coordination Directorate. 

Ato Berhanu went on to explain that the role of coordination in the DRM and FS system of the country is 

vital, given the significant number of government and non-government actors and development partners 

in the country. It is with this view that the GoE established task forces for key sectors, including the DRM- 

ATF, and involving government, UN, NGOs and donor agencies in information sharing, coordination and 

joint assessments. 

Given the importance of agriculture in Ethiopia’s economy and the elevated vulnerabilities of the sector, 

Ato Berhanu emphasised the DRM-ATF’s vital significance in terms of supporting the DRMFSS, particularly 

the EWRD, through strengthening hazard monitoring, forecasting, warning, and linking early warning and 

assessment information to appropriate and timely responses by strengthening preparedness in the 

agriculture sector. The DRM-ATF, he said, has lived up to expectations, emerging as one of the most 

vibrant Task Forces in the country. Their performance in terms of coordination is highly commendable. 

One of the essential elements of such a complex task is mapping interventions, that is “who is doing what 

and where.” In this regard the Task Force has set an example by mapping agriculture and livelihood 

responses on a monthly and quarterly basis, which was an excellent compilation of vital information, 

particularly for La Niña response. The DRM-ATF has also provided technical DRM agricultural analysis 

from weather analysis and forecasts, to market prices. This, Ato Berhanu said, has not only helped inform 

policy, but has also allowed for streamlined intervention in the sector. 

Ato Berhanu recognised that the long-term running of the Task Force depends on the participation of its 

members. On the part of the GoE, Ato Berhanu assured full support to all such coordination platforms in 

the country at all levels and in all sectors. The new and soon to be ratified ‘National Policy and Strategy 

on Disaster Risk Management’ will further strengthen such coordination efforts. Ato Berhanu outlined 

several other programmes of the GoE which work to both inform and strengthen the work of the DRM- 

ATF – these are: Disaster Risk Profiling, that is preparing sub-woreda risk profiles throughout the country; 

the Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP); the Household Asset Building Programme (HABP); the 

National Incident Management System; the Multi-Agency Coordination Forum; and the revitalisation of 

the Early Warning System. 

Ato Berhanu concluded by thanking the organisers of the conference, as well as the presenters and the 

participants, and officially opened the conference. 

Mr. Cullis began his address by welcoming the participants to the conference. He then outlined Ethiopia’s 

significant agricultural sector growth and associated progress in other sectors. He then outlined 

Page | 2



vulnerabilities, particularly to poor rural households, and the country’s much needed paradigm shift from 

managing emergencies to managing risk. While the National Disaster Risk Management Policy and 

accompanying Strategic Policy Investment Framework await the approval of the Council of Ministers, he 

explained that elements of DRM are already being rolled out including the largest social protection 

programme in sub-Saharan Africa outside of South Africa – the Productive Safety Net Programme 

(PSNP). In addition, the Early Warning Response Directorate (EWRD) established the DRM Technical 

Working Group (DRM-TWG) in 2002/03 to coordinate sectoral Task Forces which were also launched at 

that time including: health, nutrition, WASH, education and agriculture. 

The progress made by the DRM-ATF since its re-launch in November 2010 were outlined by Mr. Cullis, 

including monthly meetings, discussion forums, briefing papers and roadmaps. Significantly, Mr. Cullis 

pointed out that with the support of FAO Ethiopia, the DRM-ATF also tracks and records member 

agencies DRM interventions in the form of annotated maps. Presented each quarter, these maps are 

available from the DRM-ATF Secretariat (Getachew Abate with Tefera Muhie and Mahlet Mulugeta). The 

Secretariat have recently summarised DRM agriculture sector interventions for 2011 and it is now known 

that a total of US$17.8 million was invested in livelihood support in the drought. The first observation to 

make is that this amount is insignificant compared to the US$800 million or more used by colleagues in 

the Food Management Task Force. In future droughts it will be important to achieve a better balance and 

this is something that the DRM-ATF has to work towards. The second observation is that of the US$17.8 

some 49 percent was used to support water point rehabilitation including water points for livestock. 

While the work is considered important some of this work could have been done in ‘normal’ times under 

development programmes. 

Mr. Cullis expressed his relief in seeing the onset of the rains. While the rains will recharge ground water, 

replenish stream flow and will result in a pasture regeneration and improved livestock productivity, the 

delay will almost certainly affect the Belg harvest for the second year in succession. The National 

Meteorological Agency also forecasts below normal rains in the pastoral rangelands and therefore the 

hagaya/deyr rains later in the year take on increased significance. In response the DRM-ATF has updated 

the Road Map in Briefing Paper 9. Importantly in the latest Briefing Paper the DRM-ATF is 

encouraging regional Task Forces to prepare and develop regionally specific road-maps with a view to 

inform, coordinate and harmonise regional responses and, in this way, improve the quality of livelihoodbased 

drought response. 

Looking to the future Mr. Cullis anticipates that with the help and support of participants, the DRM-ATF 

will continue to: 

- Organise monthly business meetings at federal and regional level; 

- Organise monthly Discussion Forums; 

- Support NGOs and development partners develop livelihood-based proposals to secure 

increased funding to the sector; 

- Attend the DRM-TWG meetings and more actively represent members at the DRM JSOC and 

Technical Committee level; 

- Participate in seasonal assessments and ensure continually improved representation of 

agriculture sector and livelihood needs in the HRD; 

- Offer international donors a ‘first choice’ information facility on agriculture and livelihood 

sector hazard management in both highland and lowland contexts; 

- Lobby more aggressively for more flexible programme funding in Ethiopia’ belg and 

pastoral areas; 

Page | 3



- Support IGAD’s Initiative to End Drought Emergencies in the Horn of Africa and regional 

food security information networks including the Food and Nutrition Security Working Group 

(FSNWG) to provide timely information on agriculture sector hazards and to share lessons 

learned and emerging good practice. 

In conclusion, Mr. Cullis thanked the following for their important contribution: The Organising Committee 

(Getachew Abate, FAO; Animesh Kumar, WFP; Fasil Demeke, Mercy Corps and Ato Kassahun Bedada, 

EWRD/ DRMFSS); the donors (USAID/OFDA in particular for resourcing the conference and its support in 

2011 to the DRM-ATF); the facilitator, Dr Amdissa Teshome, Chairs, Rapporteurs and Presenters; and the 

participants. 

The Conference was then opened, with presentations given over the period of two days, and rounded off 

with discussion sessions at different intervals. The presentations were divided into three main areas, 

namely: Innovative DRM Practices for Smallholder Farmers; Innovative DRM Practices for 

Pastoralists/Agro-Pastoralists; and Cross-Cutting Issues. The presentations are outlined in the following 

sections. Following the presentations within each sub-topic, presenters and participants took part in a 

discussion session. The key points raised during each discussion session are summarised below each 

presentation. 

Page | 4



2. SMALLHOLDER FARMERS: 

INNOVATIVE DRR PRACTICES 

2.1 IMPROVING RESILIENCE 

2.1.1 COMMUNITY WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, FOOD SECURITY & GROWTH IN RURAL TIGRAY, ETHIOPIA: 

THE CASE OF THE HONEY VALUE CHAIN 

- MELAKU GEBREYESUS, SOCIAL PROTECTION SPECIALIST, WORLD BANK 

In the late 1990’s the GoE and rural communities adapted strategies towards environmental 

transformation – integrated community watershed development – based on livelihood diversification, 

food security and economic growth in Tigray region. In this regard, honey and beeswax production, and 

the honey value chain as a whole, was found to be a successful example. This is because honey and 

beeswax production in central Tigray benefits from a comparative advantage rooted in the historical 

legacy of its production in the region coupled with indigenous knowledge/practices, as well as 

environmental suitability, and the resiliency of honey and beeswax production to climate change. An 

enabling environment further contributes to creating a comparative advantage, made up of: (a) 

Availability (inputs for production and operation); (b) Affordability (start-up capital and extension 

support from the PSNP, HABP, NGOs, cooperatives, micro-finance and private traders); (c) High 

potential for value chain, scale and scope of operation; and (d) Market potential, both current and 

future. These factors, combined with joint efforts and support from institutions and development 

programmes, significantly contribute to food security and growth. 

The adapted transformation strategies and processes that are being demonstrated in the honey value 

chain are the following: A shift from traditional to modern beekeeping and honey production (knowledge 

and technological transfer, improved quality of honey); economic returns have become relevant sooner 

from investment in environmental rehabilitation (re-greening degraded land through conservation such as 

area enclosures); contribution of investment in environmental rehabilitation towards food security and 

economic growth; change in behaviour and attitude (e.g. rural landless youths, including university 

graduates see rehabilitated areas a good businesses opportunity thus many youths are forming 

cooperatives and are becoming engaged in the honey value chain); improvement in the over-all honey 

value chain (participation of stakeholders and actors); and improvement in honey market outlets (local 

and international). 

The honey value chain has shown to have better programmatic linkages (in terms of complementing 

programmes and having a synergy effect with these) as compared to the crop, livestock and nonagriculture 

sectors. For example, a significant number of PSNP and HABP beneficiaries are engaged in 

the honey value chain and experiencing positive returns. In this way the honey value chain complements 

social protection programmes. This implies that the support of the honey value chain is an integral part of 

social safety nets, having promotional and transformation functions. Additionally, because 

beekeeping/the entire honey value chain is resilient to climate change it can be considered to be a 

component of CCA/CCM interventions. The honey value chain also plays a significant role in DRM in that 

it ensures income security for poor people in vulnerable environments. Experience from the last ten years 

(during which Tigray has faced the challenge of recurrent drought) has shown that fluctuations in honey 

production and income sources were very low as compared to other agricultural products. Lastly, because 

honey is instrumental in ensuring food security and income security, it significantly contributes to 

development programmes. 

At present and beyond, a scalable and sustainable honey value chain is possible – it has comparative 

advantages at both production and market function levels. However, along with the increased 

engagement in the honey value chain, the GoE and other supporting institutions should give equal 

attention to addressing the honey value chain constraints and challenges and other emerging issues, which 

Page | 5



include the following: Inadequate input and credit supply; under-developed value chain; weak 

governmental/institutional arrangement and capacity to support and manage the honey value chain; 

honey quality standards have not yet been institutionalized, lack enforcement and need monitored 

mechanisms; expansion and growth of beekeeping in rehabilitated area enclosure prevails without 

monitoring of the carrying capacity; unintended impact are felt from the use of chemicals; the regional 

Government lacks a specific regional strategic vision and development plan. 

In this regard, the following is recommended: (i) Continue expanding and intensify demand-driven access 

to inputs and credit; (ii) Strengthen and balance technical and service support to improve the honey have 

chain; (iii) Strengthen institutional arrangement and capacity, considering the importance of the honey 

value chain in ensuring food security and economic growth; (iv) Institutionalize honey quality standards; 

(v) Track carrying capacity of rehabilitated lands and monitor the unintended impacts of chemicals; and 

(vi) Develop an evidence-based regional strategic vision and plan. 

2.1.2 IMPROVING FOOD SECURITY THROUGH APPROPRIATE AND COST-EFFECTIVE POST-HARVEST 

TECHNOLOGY 

- FASIL DEMEKE, DME MANAGER, MERCY CORPS 

In East Hararge zone of Ethiopia, post-harvest losses – mainly due to moisture and insect infiltration – 

accounts for 30-40% of total crop production. This makes smallholder farmers more vulnerable to the 

impacts of food insecurity as they lose a third of their already small harvests. While there have been 

many attempts to address the issue with affordable, scalable and locally available technologies, truly 

effective and universally appropriate solutions have been elusive. Utilising a participatory research 

approach for solving the problem in its context, Mercy Corps has identified primary causes of postharvest 

losses, investigating possible solutions, and selecting potentially appropriate interventions and 

technologies. 

The Pit Storage Bag (PSB) is a storage liner for underground pit grain stores that is effective, affordable 

and adaptable to almost any pit of different shapes and sizes. It is easily and inexpensively 

transportable and installable, culturally acceptable, and appropriate for scaling efforts using a market 

facilitation inputs supply chain approach. It was thus identified as an appropriate technology to address 

post-harvest losses. In order to build in an exit strategy from the start, private sector actors who could 

manufacture, market and disseminate the PSBs were identified and the Mercy Corps team worked with 

three larger sewing businesses with the productive capacity to quickly manufacture the initial trial supply 

of 1,400 PSBs. Simultaneously, the team worked with 11 Farmer Field Schools as local sales agents and 

trainers on product use, as well as with the government extension workers to build awareness. 

The impact analysis of the technology indicates that the use of PSBs wholly eliminates losses, and the 

viability of grain stored using PSBs was found to have roughly 90% germination rates meaning it was 

used for seed, home consumption and marketing (selling) purposes. However, farmers who stored grain 

using tradition methods (i.e. no PSB) during the same period in the same areas reported an average of 

31.4% losses, predominantly attributed to weevils and grain moulding. The PSB-stored grain was found 

to be free of odour, soil, mould and colour adulteration, and also eliminated the tedious work of cleaning 

and sorting grain which normally would consume much of the day for women and girls. Conversely, grain 

stored in traditional pits was found to be unappetizing and time-consuming to clean as it was mixed with 

soil, discoloured from mould, and smelled rancid. Economically, at a retail cost of roughly USD 32.00, a 

2-ton PSB is demonstrated to generate an annual gross revenue of roughly USD 104.00 (USD 72.00 net 

profit). With an estimated lifespan of over 2 years, the return on the investment on a PSB is about USD 

176.00 (over 5-fold), roughly the value of over 1,200kgs of grain on the local market. 

Page | 6



The lessons brought forward from this intervention are that Farmer Field Schools can play paramount 

roles in dissemination and adoption of new agricultural technologies; even very poor farmers are willing 

to pay for the PSB technology; and the private sector is an efficient and effective means of disseminating 

new technologies and practices to rural communities. 

2.2 STABILISING MARKETS 

2.2.1 FOOD PRICE STABILIZATION IN ETHIOPIA 

- ASCHALEW FELEKE, PROGRAMME OFFICER/MARKET ANALYST, WFP 

Weather variability translates into yield and price variability. When there is a spike in the price of 

staple food commodities, poor market-dependent households suffer the consequences. In countries where 

food expenditure accounts for a disproportionate allocation of household income, households face 

unbearable consequences. This is the case for Ethiopia, and resultantly, the income elasticity of demand 

for food is high (growth in income is likely to lead to a large increase in demand for food). When 

considering the national inflation rate, 57% of changes in the inflation rate are caused by changes in 

food prices (of which cereal accounts for 22.5%). Therefore any increases in the prices of food 

components – particularly cereals – have a direct impact on food as well as overall inflation. This has 

drawn the attention of national policymakers and as a result the GoE launched food stabilization 

mechanisms in March 2007 to minimize the impacts. 

Studies revealed that food price instability in Ethiopia to be caused by: domestic staple cereals being 

less related to world prices; a rapid growth in money supply relative to economic growth; an overall 

increase in grain demand due to an increase in nominal income (in turn caused by a rise in GoE 

expenditure, disbursed credit, transfers in the form of remittance, PSNP cash and population growth); 

marketable surplus lagging behind rising demand due to increased retention on the farm (due to 

increased consumption by farmers and access to cash from various sources); collusion and hoarding 

behaviour of traders; cross-border trade; and an increase in international commodity prices (for example 

oil and fertilizer). 

The GoE therefore put certain mechanisms in place since March 2007 to stabilize domestic market prices 

and protect the urban poor and net rural buyers. These mechanisms included: export bans on cereals; 

import of wheat grain, edible oil and sugar for distribution at subsidized prices; avoidance of VAT on 

grains; intermittent bank loan freeze; wage rate adjustments; wholesale and retail price ceilings on 

selected basic commodities; and administrative measures taken on traders to prevent hoarding. Despite 

its implications, the intervention of the GoE is appropriate in situations such as the one Ethiopia finds itself 

in, where the private sector is not responsive to such phenomena and short term solutions are lacking. 

The implementation process has shown improvements. Major challenges were however experienced, 

including: Having to shift medium and long term development resources; pressure on balance of 

payments; uncertainty created in markets and private sector engagements; a reduction on government 

revenue; a widening in government controls and room for informal and illegal practices; illegal 

movement of sugar and edible oil by some traders; selling goods on the black market above 

government-determined prices; the limiting of quota to flour mills forcing them to operate below full 

capacity; and the inability to reach distant markets/areas. 

Despite improvements caused by the intervention, the longer the intervention is handled by the GoE, the 

more it will contribute to the weakening of market development and the creation of uncertainty in those 

private sectors engaged in food supply and processing. Considering the lessons learnt from the 

intervention, and looking towards a long-term remedial solution, the GoE needs to play a leading role in 

coordinating development partners to render their support in materializing appropriate actions to uproot 

Page | 7



the basic causes. Otherwise, continuation of this short-term response intervention with the existing 

modality would have incalculable impacts in the development of medium- and long-term investments. 

Based on the above, a set of recommendations can be made, as per the following: Country-specific 

interventions that increase production and productivity should be carried out while aiming to minimize 

post-harvest losses; national monetary and fiscal policy should be strengthened; market efficiency should 

be strengthened though infrastructure, information flows, transport and storage thus minimizing costs; 

private sector needs capacity building; improve transparency and accountability; promote conditional 

based stock holding; promote and support local edible oil producers; and sugar shortages should be 

solved in the medium-term. 

DISCUSSION SESSION: KEY POINTS 

Participants discussed the way forward in stabilising market prices in the country. It was noted that 

although the GoE price stabilisation effort has brought improvements in stabilising the market, the 

longer the intervention however, the weaker the markets will potentially become thereby increasing 

uncertainty. 

2.2.2 MARKET-BASED RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY PROGRAMMING: SEED VOUCHERS AND FAIRS 

- LEGESSE DADI (DR.), AG/NRM PROGRAMME, CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES 

Many farming communities affected by disaster are food insecure, among other things, because seeds 

are either unavailable, unaffordable to disaster-affected farmers, or of an unacceptably low quality. 

Differing approaches are used in emergency responses according to the type of problem – for example, 

if seeds are unavailable, direct distribution is employed. However, if seeds are available but 

unaffordable to disaster-affected farmers, as is the case during emergency situations in Ethiopia, marketbased 

approaches should be used. Seeds are often available at the local level, but the poorest and most 

vulnerable farmers lack the means to access these. Three types of market-based approaches can be 

used when seeds are inaccessible, namely; cash/cash vouchers, seed vouchers and fairs (SVF), and 

commodity vouchers, with each approach having its own strengths and weaknesses. The SVF approach 

was employed in Ethiopia by Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and its implementing partners because the 

advantages of such a system (outlined below) is most appropriate to the Ethiopia context. 

Seed fairs are market-organised to distribute seeds to disaster-affected households through a voucher 

system, and are organised on specific days, in specific locations, and announced in advance. Vulnerable 

households are provided vouchers worth a certain value, which are exchanged with registered vendors 

for seeds, who in turn redeem the vouchers for cash from project holders the same day. It is assumed that 

local markets are strong and responsive. This system allows farmers (beneficiaries) the freedom to decide 

what type of seeds to buy, how much of them to buy and from which registered vendor to buy them from. 

Seed quality is left to the judgment of farmers. Transactions are carried out in open markets and prices 

are negotiated between the buyer (farmer) and the seller (local trader and/or farmer). The SVF system 

can be used for restocking (rebuilding of productive assets eroded by disaster) or can also be used to 

promote a specific commodity. 

SVFs have a number of advantages: To begin with, and as mentioned above, the system empowers 

farmers (beneficiaries) by allowing them the freedom to decide what type of seeds to buy, how much of 

them to buy and from which registered vendor to buy them from. The system is also a relatively low-cost 

approach. Furthermore, it allows farmers to meet their immediate seed needs, as a fair can be planned 

and implemented in a short period of time (between 7 – 15 days, depending on the experience of the 

Page | 8



implementing agency). The community is actively involved in the planning and implementation of the fair. 

SVF is also an open and transparent process. Additionally, local production is supported with the 

strengthening of local farming systems. Formal and non-formal seed systems are also strengthened. The 

system can also lead to awareness-creation in terms of alternative seed sources and varieties. Lastly, the 

SVF approach increases financial and social capital in the targeted communities (as the proceeds from 

the sale of seeds are mostly shared among community-based traders). A major disadvantage, however, 

is that SVF beneficiaries may have less access to commercial seeds and seeds of new crop varieties. 

CRS and its implementing partners have implemented the SVF approach in Ethiopia since 2003, and have 

reached 106,000 households between 2003-2010. CRS has implement SVF in many areas of Ethiopia 

making several types of seeds – such as wheat, maize, sorghum, beans, and the like – available. The 

major challenges experienced by CRS have been the following: Some traders/vendors wanted 

guarantees on seed volumes and price of seeds; initially some traders were skeptical and refused to 

travel to distant villages; vendors have a tendency towards increasing prices; and lastly, the formal seed 

sector in Ethiopia has shown little interest in SVFs and thus there has been less access to seeds of 

improved varieties. 


Although the market-based approach is the best approach in terms of its benefits both to farmers and 

traders, some of the participants raised concerns on the assumption made that seeds are always 

available within the community, particularly in the face of the severe recurrent drought affecting 

communities. The experience from implementations during drought years was shared in the course of 

the discussion. 

2.3 ENHANCING PRODUCTIVITY 

2.3.1 ROOT & TUBER CROPS FOR FOOD SECURITY IN ETHIOPIA: POTENTIAL FOR EXPANSION 

- WONDIMAGEGNE SHIFERAW, AGRONOMIST, FAO ETHIOPIA 

In August 2009 FAO launched a project together with its implementing partners (MoA, regional BoAs, 

several universities, USAID and CIP) with the objective of improving food security in several agroecological 

zones of Ethiopia. Phase I of the project aimed to improve food security, income status and 

livelihoods of 28,000 households affected by recurrent drought and soaring food prices, through the 

introduction, multiplication and distribution of diversified root and tuber crops in 12 Woredas of Ethiopia. 

Phase II aimed to scale up root and tuber crop diversification in 15 Woredas (15,000 households) of 

Amhara, Oromiya, SNNPR and Tigray regions of Ethiopia. The project ran from August 2009 to March 

2012. It was funded by USAID/OFDA and had a budget of USD 2,175,098. USAID/OFDA then 

approved further funding of USD 1,000,000 for the scaling up of the same activites from April 2012 to 

March 2013. The root/tuber crops targeted were Irish potato, taro, enset, cassava and sweet potato. 

The projects achievements are considerable and include the following: 

- 7,326qts of Irish potato; 4,994qts of taro; 89,522 pcs of cassava; and 16.28 million pcs of 

sweet potato distributed between August 2009 – July 2011; 

- 2,600qts of Irish potato; 1,000 qts of taro; 200,000 pcs of cassava pieces; and 6.4 million 

pcs of sweet potato distributed to 15,998 households between October 2011 – June 2012; 

- 25 improved varieties of sweet potato, Irish potato, taro and cassava were distributed; 

Page | 9



- 13 focal persons trained in acclimatization of tissue culture plants; 64 women farmers, focal 

persons and home agents trained on root and tuber crop food preparation with hands-on 

exercises in SNNPR and Oromiya; 212 extension workers trained in improved root and 

tuber crop production; 640 farmers trained in all project Woredas. 

- 47,581 beneficiary households diversified their cropping systems and increased their annual 

food production and income through direct sale of root and tuber crop products; 

- 47 DLSs (Diffused Light Storage) constructed (design prepares, construction materials 

supplied, local materials and labour sourced from the Woredas); 

- Training of trainers (ToT) conducted (joint FAO/CIP) – a total of 22 technical staff 

participated from all project areas; 

- FAO has supported the established Ethiopia’s first tissue culture association known as “Plant 

Biotechnology Society of Ethiopia (PBSE)” in collaboration with USAID/MoA/MASHAV 

project; 

- Based on lessons learned from the USAID/OFDA project, FAO is distributing large quantities 

of root and tuber planting materials in La Niña affected Woredas of SNNPR and Oromiya 

recovery projects supported by HRF and ECHO; 

- The project has 237,905 direct beneficiaries. 

The impacts felt from the project in each of the project regions have been significant. For example, in 

SNNPR, a large number of farmers have experienced a change in livelihood through protection and 

building of assets. The ripple effect of the project through farmer-to-farmer exchange of improved crop 

varieties is considerable. Farmers are also aware of the quality and nutritional value (vitamin A) of the 

OFSP variety. In Oromia farmers have witnessed a 3-fold increase in production through the use of 

improved varieties as compared to the previously-used local varieties. In Tigray (Alaje Woreda), 

households with plots of approximately 200-250m 2 harvested 8-18qts of potato using 50kg of Irish 

potato seed tuber provided by the project. During the first harvest these farmers obtained 3,000 – 

5,800 Birr each from the sale of potatoes and have retained enough seeds of the improved varieties for 

the next planting season. In Amhara, the 2,700 households that received seeds in 2010 have produced a 

total of 23,080qts of potato (average of 8.7qts per household) from very small pieces of land (less than 

0.025ha). In Farta and Dessie Zuria Woredas an average yield of 275qt/ha was obtained from 84ha 

of potato planted with 3 improved varieties. 

The project did however face some serious challenges in the form of: serious shortages of good-quality 

planting materials of root and tuber crop varieties; few varieties available on the market; knowledge 

gap in the growing/cultural practices and disease identification of root and tuber crops; limited knowhow 

on food preparation, processing & consumption; and high risk of disease dissemination through 

planting materials. The need for nutrition education was however noted during the project. 

The success of the project showed that root and tuber crops can greatly contribute to food security, 

especially when merging short and long term development interventions (emergency/recovery and 

development). Expansion to more food-insecure areas is recommended. 

2.3.2 APPLE PRODUCTION IN IMPROVING THE LIVELIHOODS OF SMALLHOLDER FARMERS IN THE AMHARA 

HIGHLANDS: A CASE OF DABAT INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY PROJECT (2005-2012) 

- ELIAS GETACHEW, PROGRAMME MANAGER, SAVE THE CHILDREN NORWAY 

A number of GOs and NGOs have mainstreamed apple production as a poverty-reduction strategy in 

the highland areas of Amhara, and are trying to introduce and expand production across the region. 

Page | 10



Apple production has high potential in Amhara because of the favorable agro-ecology of the region: 

The growing population in Amhara is forcing family heads to split the land, resulting in smaller plots per 

family. The highland areas are also characterized by steep slope land forms, low temperatures, erosion 

and deforestation. Moreover, the agricultural activities taking place in the highlands are characterized 

by annual crops, and subsistence rain-fed farming dominated by Barley, Fava bean and Potato. The 

crop diversity in the highland areas is generally low, when compared to the lowland areas, which often 

causes yield instability across years. Additionally, the dominant crops currently grown in the area have 

low productivity, market value and demand. The overall agriculturally associated problems are 

contributing to the prevalence of poverty in the farming communities of the region. Indeed, of all the 

rural Woredas, nearly 50% are food insecure. In the highlands of the region where there is no fruit 

alternative, apple cultivation provides an indispensable role in maximising farmers’ incomes from sale of 

the fruit, and simultaneously improves the diet of family members. Moreover, as the apple is a perennial 

crop, it has vital contributions to environmental sustainability. In line with this, the efforts made by GOs 

and NGOs in the promotion of apple production in Amhara so far has shown an encouraging response. 

Up until 2008 only 253ha of land (with 280,000 trees) was used as apple plantations, but the coverage 

was expected to increase by at least one fold by 2011. 

Save The Children Norway, Ethiopia, initiated a project in Dabat in partnership with ORDA, one of the 

regional development actors who became involved in the promotion of apple production as of 2004/5 in 

Dabat through Dabat IFSP. The main intervention activities were the following: Provision of 20,000 

seedlings to over 325 food insecure households; training on nursery management and marketing; 

provision of farm implements; and experience exchange among farmers from various woredas. As a 

result the knowledge and skills of beneficiary households improved; farmers have planted various 

varieties of apple seedlings and are collecting 200 -250 fruits per tree, from 6-7 year old trees and 

selling an apple for between 2-3 birr each. A total of 310 households have benefited from the 

intervention. As a result the income of beneficiary farmers is increasing; they are also building assets and 

diversifying their income opportunities. Additionally, members of beneficiary households are benefitting 

from the consumption of apples which has great nutritional benefits for children as well. 

A few challenges were identified along the way, including: the availability of trained manpower in 

managing apple cultivation; monitoring and provision of support to smallholder farmers; availability of 

seedlings; local knowledge on apples; and availability of middlemen to sell apples in cities and nearby 

towns. The lessons learnt during the project were that the trial nursery sites served not only as 

demonstration sites, but also as income generating sites for youths during the final hand-over period. 

Also, creating linkages with woreda-level agriculture offices ensured technical support after handover. 

Additionally, targeting women-headed households has a significant impact on livelihoods. Considering the 

significantly positive impacts of the project, it is concluded that further interventions of a similar nature 

are needed to increase annual income and crop alternatives for farmers in the highlands. It is 

recommended that market linkages and value chain processing be included in the initial project plan. 

Moreover, intensive support should be provided to the farmers, as this ensures quality products. Good 

working linkages should be created with regional research institutions and cooperative offices. Lastly, 

there should be a focus on activities that reinforce and are reinforced by apple production. 

Page | 11

3. PASTORALISTS/AGRO-PASTORALISTS: 

INNOVATIVE DRM PRACTICES 

3.1 LINKING RELIEF & REHABILITATION TO DEVELOPMENT 



3.1.1 LINKING EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO LONG-TERM RISK REDUCTION/DEVELOPMENT: IMPACT 

ASSESSMENT OF RESPONSE TO FOOD CRISIS AND DROUGHT IN ETHIOPIA 

- GEZU BEKELE & NAZARETH FIKRU, REGIONAL HUMANITARIAN COORDINATOR, OXFAM AMERICA 

Oxfam America and partners have been implementing “Response to the Food Crisis and Drought in 

Ethiopia (RFCD)” programme in Oromia and Tigray regions with the support of the Bill and Melinda 

Gates Foundation, since late 2008. RFCD is a two-phase program designed to assist poor vulnerable 

households to cope with, and recover from, the combined impacts of drought and the global food crisis. 

The first phase started in the last quarter of 2008, with a view to both addressing the immediate food 

shortage and protecting livelihoods assets, and was followed by the recovery phase in early 2009. 

The presentation describes three of the six RFCD recovery phase program interventions selected for 

impact assessment: restocking plus cash-for-work, cash-for-work for bush clearance, and small-scale 

irrigation, implemented in the Jidda, Moyale and Liben woredas respectively in Oromia region. The 

impact assessments were conducted in December 2010 and January 2011 using a combination of focusgroup 

discussions and household interviews, and involving a range of participatory methods. 

The results show: In Jidda, around 16% of households benefitting both from the CFW and restocking 

interventions that were classified as poor in 2008 have moved up to the middle and/or better-off wealth 

classes in 2010, and this positive change in wealth status was limited to project participants. In Moyale, 

income from CFW contributed to protecting household livestock assets and reduced the need to engage 

in the sale of firewood/ charcoal, or to migrate to other areas for work. In Liben, although the smallscale 

irrigation project has been affected by flooding, there was a significant increase in total farm 

production and the proportion consumed (p




Participants asked why maize was chosen as the crop for the small-scale irrigation scheme, as 

opposed to other high-value cash crops. The presenters responded that the priority crop, maize, was 

chosen based on market access, importance in securing household food needs, and perishability of 

crops – however the integration of other high value cash crops is under consideration. When asked 

about the sustainability of the project, as well as the sustainability of its impacts, the presenters 

answered that the involvement of both the GoE and beneficiary communities contribute towards 

sustainability. With regards to sustainability vis-à-vis climate change, effective ways in which to carry 

out water harvesting and distribution have been considered. Lastly, a participant asked if restocking 

was the only cause for flock size increments. To this the presenters responded that the increments are a 

results of the complementary effects of all the programme interventions. 

3.1.2 COMMERCIAL DE-STOCKING: MERCY CORPS’ 2011 DROUGHT EXPERIENCE 

- TATE MUNRO, CHIEF OF PARTY, MERCY CORPS 

The Revitalizing Agricultural/Pastoral Incomes and New Markets (RAIN) Project is a 36-month initiative 

funded by the United States Agency for International Development within the Office of U.S. Foreign 

Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA).The goal of the project is Protect, Promote, and Diversify livelihoods 

as a means of increasing households’ resilience to shock. The target area is a strategic cluster of four 

zones and 18 woredas across the Somali and Oromia Regions of Ethiopia. The project aims to benefit 

682,934 individuals with a total budget of US$ 16.9million. 

The RAIN project strategy is an integrated graduation model that leverages existing OFDA and USAID 

initiatives and linkages with communities in the Oromia and Somali Regions of Ethiopia to build a more 

comprehensive, effective and holistic response to the escalating food security crisis. Building on extensive 

business, government and civil society networks and community relationships, the RAIN project follows a 

bottom-up and participatory approach. Empowering pastoral, ex-pastoral, agro-pastoral, and marginal 

farming households to increase their productivity, economic activity, and income generation, their 

resilience to recurring livelihood shocks is strengthened through an integrated approach that: Prevents 

food insecurity and livelihoods collapse via improved preparedness; Protects existing productive asset 

base to strengthen and diversify livelihoods; and Promotes market-based business models, local economic 

development, and economic integration and trade. 

The commercial de-stocking formula presented below is the one Mercy Corps used for the recent 2010- 

2011 Horn of Africa drought from late May to August 2011, which included working with 17 established 

private livestock traders as the commercial de-stockers, the government as key governance regulators, 

private inputs suppliers and abattoirs as support and core market (value chain) actors, and Mercy Corps 

as a temporary financial service facilitator and temporary relationship broker between livestock traders 

and abattoirs. 

Step 1: Assessment of Drought Level & LEGS Criteria 

Step 2: Examine Past Lessons Learned 

Step 3: Identify “Right” Traders 

Step 4: Develop Appropriate Mechanism 

Step 5: Legalise Agreements 

Step 6: Link Traders to Inputs Supply Chains 

Step 7: Link Traders with Alternative Output Markets 

Step 8: Continually Monitor 

Step 9: Partners Return Financial Supports 

Step 10: Evaluate Impact 

Page | 13



Mercy Corps’ commercial de-stocking intervention had certain key elements or features that appear to 

have heavily influenced its fairly well managed processes and positive outcomes. These included: 

- The “Right” Partners (traders, abattoir, feed supplier & government): Innovative partners 

with demonstrated histories of substantial, market-based action who understand and 

appreciate contracts and recognise the long term opportunity in addressing the near term 

needs of thousands of drought stricken pastoralists. 

- Linkages: Building and strengthening linkages critical in the livestock inputs and outputs 

market systems. Essential for targeting linkages was ensuring incentives lined up with roles. 

Near and long term economic incentives drove all the stakeholders. 

- GoE Coordination: Close and continuous communication between Mercy Corps and its 

partner line bureaus facilitated critical design, preparation, implementation and modification 

actions during the activity. 

- Legalised Agreements & Collateral Requirement: Recognizing it was engaging with 

professional businesses in a business relationship that had precedent setting qualities; there 

was strong commitment to the process of business interaction. 

- Appropriate Financial Support Mechanisms (conditionality, size and cultural 

appropriateness): The features of the financial support mechanisms were critical to this 

initiative working with the local traders. The financial support mechanisms had to be large 

enough to make scaling possible both to reach a sizable number of beneficiaries as well as 

reach a tipping point in the trader-abattoir and trader-feed supplier linkages. The traders 

and producers were all Muslim so the financial support mechanisms had to observe the 

essential tenants of Islam. The financial support mechanisms also had to create an obligation 

for the partners to target the vulnerable, drought-stricken pastoralists while not prohibitively 

interfering with basic essential market forces that would lead to long term producer-traderabattoir/inputs 

supplier relationships. 

- Timeliness (holidays/seasonal markets): In many areas, the peak of this drought occurred 

around the two largest Muslim holidays of the year when demand for livestock consumption, 

and therefore prices, were highest. The high prices and substantial demand meant traders’ 

perceived risk was at the years lowest. 

Mercy Corps’ use of the commercial de-stocking tactic was not without challenges. These challenges 

included: 

- Movement of livestock: Shortage of pasture, availability of water points and animals’ 

deteriorated body condition made moving them to re-conditioning, fattening or intermediary 

and terminal markets difficult. The greatest impediments were the restrictions placed on 

traders who were transporting de-stocked livestock by vehicle from some parts of the 

country to their fattening stations in other locations near less secure borders. 

- Movement of livestock associated inputs (e.g.: animal feed): Animal feeds were restricted 

from being moved from areas of supply to the traders’ fattening stations. 

- Short periods of the financial support mechanisms: The initiative’s key partners, the livestock 

traders, were frustrated that the upstream linkages with producers and feed suppliers, as 

well as downstream linkages with various end markets were difficult to maintain because the 

financial support mechanism period was only 110 days. 

- Issues amongst members of trader groups: The leaders reported difficulties with members 

who ‘free road’ on the hard work of other traders who reached distant, drought-affected 

pastoralists meeting weekly achievements and demand. 

Over the course of 110 days, over 10,608 livestock were de-stocked by project supported traders. This 

benefit reached roughly 28,350 pastoralists (4,500 households). In addition to the traditional overland 

market channels, a new market channel to a highland abattoir, Helmix, was established. Over 2,408 

shoats were sold to Helmix abattoir. In another first-of-its-kind relationship, 1,200 quintals of commercial 

animal feed was purchased from a commercial feed supplier, Ethiofeed PLC in Nazreth, and transported 

Page | 14



to the Somali region by a partner livestock trading/fattening group. The reach of the livestock traders 

was impressive. Livestock were purchased from over 23 woredas – many areas where humanitarian 

agencies were not otherwise permitted to access and deliver relief support. Of the 10,608 livestock destocked, 

478 were cattle, the rest shoats. The average pastoralist household sold either 2.3 shoats or 1 

cow. The average price per de-stocked shoat was ETB 545 (US$ 33.45) and de-stocked cattle was ETB 

2,000 (US$122.70). Therefore, the average benefit per household was either ETB 1,254 (US$76.93) or 

ETB 2,000 (US$122.70) depending if they sold shoats or a cow. The total financial support mechanism 

amount for each trader was ETB 250,000 (US$15,337) or ETB 4.25million (US$260,736) for all 17 

traders combined. Traders repaid 100% of their loans. The total estimated overall benefit was 182% of 

the financial support amount: ETB 7.7million (US$472,392). ETB 6.6million (US$ 405,121) or 86% of this 

benefit was paid directly to pastoralists as purchasing price for their shoats and cattle. 14.48% was for 

cattle, 85.52% for shoats. Government benefitted roughly ETB 485,000 (US$29,754) or 6% of the total 

benefit mainly from currency exchange fees as the cost of the export licenses was negligible. The traders 

gross revenue was ETB 615,000 (US$37,730) or roughly 8% of the total benefit, though their actual 

profit margin is lower when controlling for their costs for transport, fattening, watering, veterinary care 

and other livestock associated costs. Recognising the 100% cost recovery success of this activity, the 

actual cost of this initiative was only the programming running costs. The full ETB 4.25million original 

financial support capital was then able to be re-invested in other activities supporting the project’s 

overall objective. 

During the course of designing, implementing, monitoring and evaluation this activity a number of lessons 

were learned: 

i. The majority of benefit from commercial de-stocking appears to go directly to pastoralists. 

ii. The most significant gap in the livestock value chain in this instance was availability of 

culturally- and scale-appropriate financial services. 

iii. Commercial traders were able to quickly mobilize and scale their operations, much faster 

and more efficiently than NGOs are usually able to. 

iv. It is possible to substantially amplify reach of resources using partners. 

v. Emergencies do not supersede all bottlenecks: in spite of urgent need to transport droughtstricken 

livestock, critical animal feed supplement and strong support from Regional 

government partners delays at critical transport gateways led to higher than necessary 

mortality rates and transaction costs for de-stocked livestock. 

vi. Strong agreements and commercial approach to partnerships lead to achievements at 

multiple levels. 

vii. Multiple market outlet channels as well as fortunate seasonal timing contributed to the scale 

of the benefit. 

Page | 15




Discussion following the presentation ranged from dialogue over market linkages to price 

determination and scaling up of the programme. Mr. Munro explained that the financial support 

mechanisms provided by Mercy Corps ceased once the emergency was over. However, there is interest 

among all parties involved in commercial destocking in continuing with the established market 

linkages. With regards to the determination of destocking prices, the presenter confirmed that a 

number of factors were taken into consideration by a number of parties, price was not set by the 

NGO or government as this would be against the key market value of the activity, and the actual 

prices were agreeable to all parties. As for the scaling up of the programme to other geographical 

areas, it was stated that the impacts of the intervention need to be analysed carefully before further 

action. 

3.2 DRM EXPERIENCES & INNOVATIVE APPROACHES 

3.2.1 DROUGHT CYCLE MANAGEMENT: LESSONS LEARNT IN PASTORAL AREAS OF SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA, 

2011 

- ABOMSA KEBEDE & AXEL WEISER, SAVE THE CHILDREN USA 

La Niña events which recently caused drought in Ethiopia, saw the country go through different drought 

cycle phases. These phases differed in various locations. For example in Borana, we experienced (on the 

basis of the drought cycle management model DCM) an “alert/alarm phase” already in late 2010. 

Accordingly, the Pastoralist Livelihoods Initiative Phase II (PLI II) started with early response interventions, 

such as commercial destocking, in February 2011. When the start of the main rainy season in March 

failed, the DCM model moved to the “emergency phase”. PLI II implemented livelihoods-based 

emergency interventions, such survival feeding and slaughter destocking. During the late ganna rains in 

April and May, the DCM phase did not progress to “recovery” but returned to “alarm/alert”. During July 

to mid September the DCM phase returned again to “emergency” because the previous rains were 

insufficient to sustain livelihoods throughout the dry season. During the small rainy hagaya season in late 

September and October, Borana received exceptionally good rains. However, it was not sufficient for 

full recovery of the weakened livestock and consequently the DCM phase returned to “alarm/alert” and 

not to “recovery”. This phase remained throughout the dry season until early 2012. The DRMFSS-ATF 

Briefing Paper 9 March–April 2012 highlights the related Road Map and the National Guidelines for 

Livestock Relief Interventions in Pastoral Areas of Ethiopia provide a sound basis for programming. 

But what are the triggers/thresholds for changes in phases The IPC (Integrated Food Security Phase 

Classification) uses multi-dimensional aspects of food security as indicators to classify the different 

situations. These multi-sectoral indicators include: crude mortality rate, malnutrition, stunting, food 

access/availability, dietary diversity, water access/availability, coping mechanisms, livelihood assets, 

civil security and hazards. The IPC classifies the stages as follows: 

Phase 1A: GENERALLY FOOD SECURE 

Usually adequate and stable food access with moderate or low risk of sliding into 

Phase 3, 4 or 5. 

Phase 1B: GENERALLY FOOD SECURE 

usually adequate and stable food access with moderate or low risk of sliding into 

Phase 3, 4 or 5. 

Phase 2: 

MODERATELY/BORDERLINE FOOD INSECURE 

Page | 16



Borderline adequate food access with recurrent high risk (due to probably hazard 

events and high vulnerability) of sliding into Phase 3, 4 or 5. 

Phase 3: 

ACUTE FOOD & LIVELIHOOD CRISIS 

Highly stressed and critical lack of food access with high and above usual 

malnutrition and accelerated depletion of livelihood assets that, if continued, will 

slide the population into Phase 4 or 5, and/or will likely result in chronic poverty. 

Phase 4: 

HUMANITARIAN EMERGENCY 

Severe lack of food access with excess mortality, very high and increasing 

malnutrition, and irreversible livelihood asset stripping. 

Phase 5: 

FAMINE/HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE 

Extreme social upheaval with complete lack of food access and/or other basic needs 

where mass starvation, death and displacement are evident. 

The challenge in identifying a specific phase in Ethiopia’s lowlands is that many different livelihood zones 

exist. For example, at least nine different pastoral and agro-pastoral based livelihoods, including: cattle 

pastoral, camel/shoats pastoral, camel/shoat/cattle pastoral, market isolated cattle and shoats pastoral, 

maize/cattle agro-pastoral with dryland farming, maize/cattle/shoats agro-pastoral, agro-pastoral with 

irrigation, riverine agro-pastoral; and various crop based rural as well as semi-urban systems. Moreover, 

there are a number of pastoral and agro-pastoral livelihoods dynamics and transitions: moving up 

(commercial and thriving); stepping out (vulnerable but viable); moving out (vulnerable and exiting); and 

exited from pastoralism. 

By gathering information from different sources, transitions between stages can be identified and 

thresholds can be understood. Programs in Save the Children USA, such as PLI II, PILLAR and drought 

response projects, combine three main mechanisms to identify DCM phases and their transitions: (i) 

analysis of different information from various sources (DRMFSS EW Bulletin, FEWSNET, ICPAC, FAO and 

WFP price trends, OCHA Humanitarian Bulletin, HRD factsheets, etc.); (ii) maintaining continuous dialogue 

with different community members, local government, NGOs and civil society; (iii) own people-centered 

DRM (vulnerability, coping, hazard, risk) and livelihoods needs assessments. The combination of these 

mechanisms supports up-to-date programming and management decision making and thus timely action 

in such dynamic situations. 

In this context another important question needs to be asked: What are the interactions of DCM phases 

with development Does development stop during a drought emergency phase Save the Children has 

learned that development programmes should continue also during an emergency phase while 

integrating with relief assistance activities. Especially interventions that aim at improved health and 

education, child protection, participatory natural resources management (PNRM), gender mainstreaming, 

livelihoods diversification, alternative livelihoods, 

early warning, conflict prevention and mitigation, 

do no harm (DNH), and risk reduction are essential 

during all DCM phases. Therefore specific 

development activities should continue throughout 

the DCM cycle. However, for some interventions 

the implementation approach needs to be 

adjusted. The development phase supports an 

explicit focus on “help for self help” and higher 

levels of community resource contributions. On the 

other side, humanitarian interventions require less 

or no contribution from communities. Against this 

background Save the Children’s DCM 

Page | 17



programming and practical work develops towards more integration of DCM phases than maintaining a 

distinct separation. This can be visualized in the adjusted DCM, above. 


Discussions in reference to the above presentation began with the observation that drought cycle 

management has served as an excellent framework but is becoming static – a more 

continuous/flexible approach is needed. This was related to a point raised about fund rigidity to 

address emergencies: The development community needs to move away from the current 

compartmentalised funding structure to flexible funding – donors should have flexible funding 

mechanisms (such as USAID’s crisis modifier), which should in turn improve the chronic problem of 

timing of response. Donors need to support the entire drought management cycle. A question was then 

raised about the correct balance between emergency management and risk management. It was stated 

that a sound development foundation is needed, although there is also a need to work on emergency 

activities – there is indeed a strong need to integrate drought response and mitigation interventions. 

The discussion then turned to the effectiveness of dialogue with the government, whereby Save the 

Children USA confirmed dialogue has been effective especially during emergency, although more has 

to be done, especially in terms of development activities. 

3.2.2 EXPERIENCE OF PASTORALIST FIELD SCHOOLS IN ETHIOPIA 

- TAREKEGN TOLA (DR.), FAO ETHIOPIA 

Pastoralism as a production system is facing growing internal and external challenges: The occurrence of 

multifaceted hazards; increased dynamic pressures (both human and livestock population); weakening 

indigenous coping mechanisms; weak pastoral extension systems/poor dryland farming and water 

harvesting experiences; encroachments (invasive spp., settlements in grazing/watering fronts); market 

challenges (information, infrastructure); poor basic social services (as compared to the national average); 

chronic food insecurity; and lack of long term vision and policy support, result in continuous adaptive 

changes, some of which have negative impacts. And, in turn, as a result of the challenges and consequent 

adaptations, the perception of pastoralism is changing in a way which is more adaptable to the present 

without losing its economic and ecological potential: “Modern and Mobile.” 

Given the above pressures, Pastoralist Field Schools (PFS) have come into existence as an adaptation of 

Farmer Field Schools, for communities that live in arid and semi-arid, where livelihoods largely depend 

on livestock production. PFSs are community-based, practical-oriented field study programmes involving 

pastoralists/agro-pastoralists, and are facilitated by extension staff or by other pastoralists/agropastoralists. 

PFSs act as forums for pastoralists/agro-pastoralists to learn, test and adapt practices and 

new technologies using practical hands-on methods of learning that emphasise field observation, 

discussion, analysis, experimentation and collective decision-making. They are “schools without walls” 

which result in capacity building. PFSs not only act as a platform for learning, but for empowerment in 

enhancing pastoralists’/agro-pastoralists’ food security and improve their preparedness to drought and 

other natural calamities as well. 

Specifically, PFSs have the ability to address a number of difficulties by finding ways to cope with these. 

Examples include: New developments such as climate change or emerging diseases; weakening 

traditional coping mechanisms and the need to supplement these with modern solutions; strengthening the 

capacity of local communities to analyze their livelihood systems, identify their main constraints and test 

possible solutions; quick adaptation to the dynamism of the pastoral systems; preparedness against 

multitudes of hazards and associated livelihood shocks; and enhanced livelihood diversification. 

Page | 18



FAO and its implementing partners – Oromia Pastoral Areas Development Commission; Somali Region 

LCRDB; Afar PADB; Oxfam GB; DCA and partners (AFD, ASE and LWF); Save the Children UK; and 

IIRR/GPDI – launched a project to establish a number PFSs in Ethiopia. The project was funded by The 

Swiss Development Cooperation, ECHO and the European Commission. So far 49 PFSs have been 

established around the country (Borana, Guji, Bale, Somali, Afar and SNNPR). Learning enterprises and 

lessons of the PFSs thus far include rangeland management, livestock fattening, livelihood diversification 

mechanisms (e.g. apiary), water and soil conservation, and seedling planting. 

Through the project it has become clear that PFSs are an ideal approach for adaptation and livelihoods 

diversification. They improved community analytical skills, the decision-making capacity of communities, 

and stimulated local innovation. New research products and technologies can easily be disseminated 

through the PFSs. However, the success of PFSs depends on the support and goodwill of the facilitators, 

communities and authorities at various levels especially community leaders, government experts and 

supervisors. It was also found that community cohesion and team spirit was strengthened beyond the 

learning component. Lastly, it was noted that PFSs require strong follow-up and monitoring. Significant 

challenges included the limited commitment of pastoral development offices, high turnover of government 

DAs, and the fact that activities focused on more sedentary herds. FAO recommends that future activities 

target mobile herds as well. It also recommends that PFSs should be linked to Community DRR initiatives 

as well as informal education and research institutions; PFS approaches should be harmonised; learning 

should be enhanced among illiterate participants by developing learning tools based on drawings and 

pictures; and lastly, technologies that are tested and applied by PFSs should be locally available for 

pastoralists to practice individually. 


Dialogue on PFSs began with the observation that these are currently the emerging tool for provision 

of appropriate pastoral extension (knowledge and technology dissemination). Concern was however 

raised over who is responsible for deciding what topics will be focused on during the learning sessions. 

Dr. Tarekegn explained that it is the community who decides what areas to focus on depending on the 

community’s needs and priorities – from which the learning curriculum is developed. Concern was also 

raised about the compatibility of the concept of “schooling” with the pastoralist lifestyle – however, 

PFSs are not as defined and strict as fixed schools in that these take place in different locations and 

on different topics, based on the needs of the community, and are therefore more adaptable to the 

pastoralist lifestyle. Lastly, the role of women in PFSs was discussed, with the presenter explaining that 

although we are currently far from gender equality on PFSs, the number of women involved in PFSs is 

on the rise. However, in certain PFSs, the number of women is higher than that of men – such as the 

OGB case, which is made up of 70% female members. 

3.3 NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

3.3.1 ECOSYSTEM APPROACH TO CROSS-BORDER DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT 

- ABAY BEKELE, OXFAM GB 

In contrast to the Community Managed DRM (CMDRM), which tends to use Kebele as a geographic unit of 

analysis and intervention, Oxfam GB’s landscape/ecosystem approach to cross-border DRM approach 

emphasises a deeper understanding of the vulnerability context at landscape scale to inform measures 

that enhance the capacity and cooperation between households and communities that enables them to 

manage the complex environments they live in. While CMDRM is still an important component in building 

resilience, the use of Kebele as a management unit is found to be limiting as it misses movements of 

livestock and herders between landscapes. In contrast, the use of the common ecosystem cross-border 

Page | 19



areas of Ethiopia and Somaliland as a management unit helps better understand the strategic water 

points and dry season grazing areas, the distribution of basic services across the border, the 

differentiated livelihoods groups and the reciprocal resource sharing and local social protection 

mechanisms used to address problems of vulnerability and impoverishment. 

The findings of Oxfam GB’s observation runs counter to the CMDRM approach which has been used by 

Oxfam and many other organizations to build communities’ resilience to disaster risk. Some of the 

problems communities face stem from the implementation of CMDRM in isolated Kebeles which are likely 

to reinforce vulnerability in the longer term. Our analysis shows that, interventions undertaken in isolated 

Kebeles tend to focus on addressing the manifestations of vulnerability such as birkads and ponds which 

may improve the water situation through a single season, but do not provide protection against lengthy 

droughts, or the establishment of community institutions and by-laws which represent the interest, positions 

and needs of the communities only. At the aggregate level, such isolated inputs are enough to create 

privatization of communal assets, acting as disincentives for social cooperation and increased 

differentiation within and between local communities. 

The biggest challenge shared with households, community, landscape and ecosystem is to reduce the 

number and magnitude of disaster risk management mistakes, given these mistakes will have high social, 

economic and ecological consequences in the dryland environment. For the Ethiopia and Somaliland some 

of the new focus areas are: 

- Ecosystem: Access information such as volume of total dry matter in the ecosystem and 

strategic water resources, cross institutional cooperation to address drought risk; and, crossborder 

access to basic services (human, health, education and veterinary services) to manage 

stressors; 

- Landscape: The development of strategic water resources and the management of dry 

season grazing areas around them in a socially acceptable, environmentally sound and 

economically feasible manner; better manage conflict and unintended social and 

environmental impacts; 

- Community: Strengthening/establishing of community institutions that lead the planning and 

implementation of CMDRM, linked to, and in coordination with, local government, and other 

communities within and across the border; 

- Households: Enhancing the ability of households to engage in safer and smoother transitions 

to alternative livelihoods, using for example, the pastoral field school approach, and 

aligning customary and external social support systems. 

Policy implications from our ecosystem approach in the context of Ethiopia and Somaliland are different 

from the way CMDRM is currently implemented. Interventions to enhance the resilience of households and 

communities to disaster risks and stressors require a deeper understanding of the opportunities, 

constraints, and relationships within a common ecosystem. Interventions may be packaged under safer 

transition of households, community managed disaster risk reduction, strategic resource management at 

landscape level and cross border coordination of resources and services. Strengthening the institutional 

mechanisms that facilitate the cooperation between individuals and communities; and, between 

landscapes must be treated as the central engine of building resilience. 

Page | 20




Participants began with the question of how to link to the regional (Somali) Early Warning system: Dr. 

Abay explained that information sharing occurs at Regional Task Force meetings, which provides a 

linkage with the regional Early Warning system. Next the collection, analysis and dissemination of 

information to the community was discussed – in particular, it was asked how this is done. The 

presenter explained that the community-based Early Warning system is scaled up from Borena zone 

and adapted for Somaliland, and uses standard EW indicators to collect data and disseminate it to 

the communities. With the support of Oxfam GB, the community analyses the Early Warning data and 

takes early action. 

3.3.2 CONSEQUENCES OF INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS IN THE BORANA RANGELANDS IN 

THE ‘60S AND ‘70S: “A CURSE OR A BLESSING” 

- SORA ADI 

Ethiopia’s rangelands were once renowned as one of the best in East Africa, with pastoralists efficiently 

using the rangeland by employing traditional pastoralist and grazing systems (including communal 

property systems) developed and refined over many centuries. The Borana pastoralists and other ethnic 

groups occupy the vast territory of the southern part of Ethiopia. This region is home to the famous 

Borana cattle breed. The arid region has a dynamic and highly resilient ecosystem, with a strong 

capacity to regenerate rapidly when the rains return. Because pastoralism is a major livelihood 

component in the area, maintaining the integrity and productivity of rangelands is key. 

However, development interventions in the ‘60s and ‘70s, particularly in the Borana lowlands, led to 

unintended consequences in the form of widespread overgrazing (caused by the construction of ponds in 

the area), extensive bush encroachment, and the expansion of agriculture into the rangelands. This may 

have been caused by the lack of indigenous knowledge on the part of project designers, as well as their 

failure to include the participation of pastoral communities in project planning. Similarly, past 

development interventions aimed at improving rangeland and living conditions of local communities 

failed to identify appropriate rangeland management techniques due to the use of a top-down 

approach. Furthermore, no attempt was made to address problems of pastoralist communities using a 

holistic approach, and policy makers failed to understand the dynamics of pastoralist systems. 

This has resulted in the deterioration of Borana rangelands and in turn the deterioration in the 

productivity of pastoralism (both the land and the livestock) and pastoralist livelihoods themselves have 

deteriorated. These problems are worsened by the effects of drought, climate change and the absence 

of bush fires. The carrying capacity of the rangelands has declined so much that the pastoralists are 

forced to keep few numbers livestock. Indeed bush encroachment has rendered it more suitable for 

camels and shoats rather than the Borana cattle. The deteriorated rangelands no longer support 

pastoralist livelihoods. Strategies need to be designed in a way that restore the rangelands and 

maximise its use. Disaster Risk Reduction (DDR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) each have the 

potential to highlight and address the underlying causes of vulnerability thereby placing rangeland 

dwellers higher up on the development and investment agenda. 

In recent years the GoE, as well as other relevant stakeholders, have recognised the issue and are 

moving forwards in addressing it, both at the national and international level. Government policy in the 

last few years has been strongly committed to alleviating rangeland problems through the provision of 

water and the implementation of integrated water-based development plans (IBD). Certain aspects of 

the IBD plan have already been implemented on a promising scale but still need to be translated into 

Page | 21



implementable actions in order to solve some emerging implementation and administrative problems. 

Moreover, the recently endorsed Policy Frame Work for pastoralists in Africa from the African Union is 

another undertaking which would provide an excellent platform for guiding government efforts in 

securing pastoralism as a viable livelihood. 

The Borana area at present needs significant rangeland management interventions: Construction and/or 

rehabilitation of ponds/wells/water troughs is a solution, but the location of water sources needs to be 

studied as to avoid over-grazing and animal/human disease contamination. Improvement of bush 

encroachment will require proper understanding of the mechanics of invasion. The lowland vegetation 

that is typical of a savannah, dominated by varying proportions of woodlands and more grasslands, has 

shifted more towards woodlands. Savannah vegetation is maintained under climatic variation and 

periodic disturbance in the form of grazing, fire and drought. Disturbance in the cycle results in 

unpredictable changes in woody-grass ratio, and changes favor woody plants when grassland 

productivity is reduced. Additionally, levels of desirable (decreaser) species of plants decline with overgrazing, 

and gives way to undesirable increasers and invaders (bush) that are not consumed by cattle. In 

the end, an entirely new ecosystem comes into existence, the “bush land.” Other challenges to addressing 

the problem include: Drought; ethnic conflicts; poor infrastructure; weak market access; poor market 

conditions; lack of cooperatives or collective decision-making in order to influence livestock prices; and 

the cessation of the bimodal rain pattern of the region due to climate change. 

The lessons learnt have been that multi-sectoral programs based on pastoral economic organizations may 

be most promising. Additionally, raising productivity will be of no use without efficient markets. The 

export market for livestock is as yet not well established. Establishing a modern livestock marketing 

system in rangelands not only benefits the producers, but a value chain with added value along the chain 

will be created to siphon out young steers and unproductive animals for both domestic and foreign 

markets. Recommendations include the following: Work closely with pastoralists to determine where and 

how they should settle; maintain and enhance mobility of livestock; adopt the use of traditional 

ponds/wells and modern water troughs appropriately; control the build–up of further human pressure in 

pastoral areas; halt encroachment by farmers and nature conservationists onto pastoral land, except 

where multiple land uses of benefits to both sides can be negotiated; arrange for veterinary personnel to 

take care of the animal health component; work towards opening up marketing opportunities to Isiolo, 

Kenya and onto Mombasa; introduce appropriate forage crops near to the fattening scheme in 

collaboration with the Oromia Pastoral Development Commission (OPDC); promote and demonstrate the 

usage of current modern marketing facilities in the region; develop and establish an early warning 

system specifically for pastoralist economies; develop interventions to reduce long-term vulnerability (e.g. 

increased use of dry-season fodder, improved grazing management); invest in stand-by capability; 

provide restocking loans (guarantee funds); and provide education to mobile pastoralists. 

Page | 22



4. CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES 

4.1 A REVIEW OF THE FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN ETHIOPIA 

- KEDIR SHEMSU, GIS OFFICER, WFP 

In Ethiopia, flood disasters (flash and river floods) are increasing in frequency and severity in recent 

years. Their negative effects have caused severe damage in human life and assets. It is worthy to 

reconsider the existing flood risk management and response system to deliver an effective and reliable 

service in view of uncertainties such as climate change. In theory, flood risk management addresses the 

complete management cycle focusing on risk assessment, prevention, protection, preparedness including 

flood forecasts and early warning systems. However, there is often a lack of appropriate implementation 

mechanisms as well as consistent policy in the country. 

Ethiopia’s disaster structure is better prepared for slow onset disaster risk: The various hazards (including 

flood) experienced in 2006 have emphasised the need for comprehensive disaster risk management and 

mitigation. The nationwide flood crisis and the Acute Watery Diarrheal (AWD) epidemic reinforced the 

need for better risk management for all disaster risks, particularly fast on-set ones such as flood and 

health epidemics. There is a need for an enhanced sectoral early warning mechanism and contingency 

planning to facilitate early response and support for early recovery. Furthermore, current practice of 

sector ministries needs to shift from managing disaster to disaster risk management (DRM). This would 

mean a shift from managing the risk and not the flood itself; giving equal consideration to physical and 

non-structural measures; and developing a continuous cycle of assessment, implementation, and 

maintenance. A flood risk management cycle would have to be developed whereby risk analysis takes 

place (information on flood risk); followed by risk assessment (perception and evaluation); and finally 

risk reduction (interventions to decrease risks) - continually. The ability to manage flood risk will largely 

be governed by the ability to coordinate policies and actions amongst several partners (for example, 

between the DRMFSS, the Ministry of Water & Energy (MoW&E), regional DPFSCOs, the National 

Meteorological Agency, and the Ministry of Health). There is also a need for greater coordination by 

DRMFSS on sectoral-level DRM activities within the line ministries. 

However, poor working linkages among different government institutions and on ad hoc basis, are 

barriers to the implementation of flood risk management cycle. Furthermore, government capacity at all 

levels is a problem. Another difficulty exists in that donors are still more prone to react with reconstruction 

models rather than with preventive action. Uncertainty as to whether an extreme natural event is actually 

going to occur often deters decision makers from investing in DRM programmes. 

It is recommended first and foremost that a shift from disaster management to DRM. DRM policy should 

get proper attention urgently and be ratified. Links amongst GoE institutions should be strengthened. 

Consequently, based on the DRM policy specific guidelines for flood risk management, a proper 

institutional arrangement should be established, which specifies areas of responsibility, authority and 

accountability. The commitment of each partner institution is required in working towards the common 

goal of managing flood, and there should be strategy to ensure their commitment. Government initiatives 

on reducing exposure also have to be strengthened through improved flood forecast and management, 

scaling up of integrated watershed management in flood-prone upper catchments, and improved flood 

defence in the floodplains. Finally, enhancing adaptive capacity has to be coupled with building DRM 

capacity at all levels and an early warning system. 

4.2 WOMEN’S ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT IN SMALLHOLDING FARMER DEVELOPMENT 

- BERHANU GELETO, RIFT VALLEY CHILDREN & WOMEN DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION 

Rift Valley Children and Women Development Organization (RCWDO) is an indigenous NGO which was 

established in September 1993. It deals with welfare promotion of the poor, particularly vulnerable 

Page | 23



groups such as children, women and the elderly. Arsi Negelle woreda, one of RCWDO’s operational 

area, has been subject to tremendous shocks caused by erratic and reduced rainfall since 1985/6. This 

reduced and erratic rainfall pattern has gotten worse every year, eventually leading to total crop 

failure and food insecurity in the lowlands of the district. The poor were severely affected, particularly 

the destitute and female-headed households. 

The main source of income in the target areas is subsistence farming which includes crop and livestock 

production, with low levels of production and productivity, as well as a lack of alternative income sources, 

which has in turn further exacerbated the effects of drought. The recurrent drought has decreased the 

resiliency of the community to shocks as their asset base has been depleted through time. Coping 

mechanisms include the selling of livestock, charcoal making and selling of firewood (of which the last two 

are environmentally destructive). Women tend to engage in informal sector activities to sustain the 

livelihoods of their family members, which increases the workload on women. In addition, women often 

take loans from local money lenders to access food for their households – but access to such credit is 

highly challenging particularly for the poor families due to collateral requirements. Gender inequality is 

one of the main factors bringing about prolonged poverty for women in society, as women’s 

disempowerment has led to worsening in resilience capacity. In order to address this problem and 

enhance the condition and position of women in development, systematic gender mainstreaming is very 

important, so that women can equally benefit from any development effort. 

RCWDO’s intervention – in partnership with Oxfam GB – aimed to build the resilience of poor, foodinsecure 

and drought-affected households, with a specific focus on women. It aimed to do so by 

undertaking smallholder farmer development and enhancing the market and value chain; enhancing 

productive capacity and purchasing power; enhancing women’s economic empowerment; and 

strengthening their resilience to shock. The starting point was to conduct a participatory community-based 

risk assessment, which was done in collaboration with Oxfam GB and the local government. The 

assessment highlighted the specific vulnerabilities of women (especially pregnant and lactating women), 

children and the elderly, and raised awareness about the underlying factors that make people 

vulnerable to hazards. It confirmed that taking loans is a common coping mechanism in the area, and that 

women generally engage in informal sector income-generating activities to address gaps and reduce 

vulnerability to drought. 

The major components of the intervention included: Improvement in women’s participation in activities 

which increased agricultural productivity and facilitated market access (e.g. irrigation schemes); 

promotion of women’s self-help groups in order to develop solidarity, address socio-economic challenges 

and facilitate resource pooling and sharing; cash transfers to drought-affected households in order to 

increase their purchasing power through engagement in public works consistent with the PSNP approach; 

and, linking organised self-help groups with other food security interventions. Throughout the intervention, 

the following approaches were used: poverty-targeting approach; gender mainstreaming approach; 

participatory learning and action; livelihood-focused functional adult literacy through REFLECT approach; 

building on indigenous knowledge and existing potentials; and capacity building. The key impacts were: 

welfare promotion; better access to resources; increased participation in the community; improved risk 

management skills; improved management over household resources and community issues; and 

strengthened solidarity and democratic values. 

The key challenges and lessons learnt were the following: 

- Most of the targeted poorest-of-the-poor households, particularly women-headed 

households, rent out their land to in order to access food for the household; re-gaining the 

land takes time and many women found it difficult to engage in other income-generating 

activities through support of the project; 

Page | 24



- Limited access to land by women – even in female-headed households, traditional views 

have suppressed women by stopping them from openly demanding title of ownership; 

- Due to the existence of different interventions by various development actors including 

NGO’s and government targeting the same communities/households in the project areas, 

some households, particularly women, try to benefit from different interventions. As result 

they are overstretched, which is in turn affecting their active participation; 

- Integration of basic literacy education in the promotion of SHG to facilitate women’s 

economic empowerment is an important intervention in ensuring sustained empowerment, but 

most livelihood programmes by the government and donors disregard this component. 


Discussions began on the way in which the poorest of the poor were identified: RCWDO used 

community indicators such as wealth ranking to identify the poor – in general PRA tools were used, 

with different social groups identified, including the poorest of the poor. In this regard it was 

observed that poverty is not only related to financial terms. Next, participants asked what types of 

changes were observed in the relationships between husbands and wives, and males and females, if 

any. Ato Berhanu noted that in both male and female-headed households, females generally consult 

males in the decision-making process, resulting in pseudo-male headed households. With regards to 

value addition to the existing indigenous system, it was observed that women generally share 

resources as part of their culture – however, training on business skills, and on linking indigenous 

knowledge to modern technology was provided, as well as strengthening institutions, in order to 

transform their traditional approach into a more business-oriented approach, and in order for the 

communities to access loans. Lastly, a participant asked what practical changes have been observed. 

The presenter indicated that women are now able to sell assets and finance their children’s schooling. 

4.3 CASH GRANTS & WOMEN TRADERS: A SUITABLE EMERGENCY RESPONSE 

- BLESSING MUTSAKA, OXFAM GB 

The failure of the short rains in December 2010 saw the beginnings of a particularly harsh drought in 

2011, coming at a time when pastoralists in Ethiopia were still recovering from the effects of earlier 

droughts. In Shinile Zone, pastoralists are exposed to multiple hazards. Ongoing drought, which impacts 

on the availability and accessibility of water and pasture, combines with a weakening asset base and 

negative coping mechanisms to leave pastoralist communities with high levels of poverty and destitution. 

Recent wealth ranking by Oxfam revealed that more than half of the population live in poverty with less 

than 5 sheep or goats (‘shoats’) per capita – compared to the 40 shoats needed per household to 

maintain a sustainable herd size, and a decent pastoral livelihood. Worryingly, more than half of these 

poor pastoral groups are women. 

In response, Oxfam implemented a programme with both emergency food security and livelihoods (EFSL) 

and public health interventions, to help prevent further depletion of livestock, distress migration, and 

other negative coping strategies by vulnerable and destitute households. According to the logframe, the 

overall and specific objectives are: 

- Overall objective: To contribute to reduce suffering of pastoral communities in Shinile zone of 

Somali Region of Ethiopia. 

- Specific objectives: To reduce human suffering and loss of asset in drought affected areas of 

Shinile zone in Somali region. 

Page | 25



Specifically, the intervention included a number of activities aimed at improving beneficiaries’ access to 

food – these were: Market support through women traders; cash for work; and unconditional grants. It 

also included three interventions aimed at livelihood protection: Animal treatment through vouchers using 

CAHWs & drug support; logistical support to Government vaccination campaigns; and animal 

concentrate feed distribution. These in turn aimed for improved food security and livelihoods protection. 

The objective of the women traders’ support initiative was to ensure availability of affordable basic food 

items to rural communities with limited market access, and reduce the risk of inflation as a result of the 

cash transfer programming. The process involved identifying women groups and assessing their 

capabilities. Selected groups were then trained in business skills and record-keeping. They were then 

provided with stock and equipment. Lastly, the activities of the groups were monitored, links with 

suppliers were created, and transport for the second round stock delivery was subsidised. The progress 

made to date is outlined below: 

- Greater food availability and access - food now available at kebele level at affordable 

prices (at lower price than during drought); 

- Women groups have start-up capital to start and expand a business; 

- Market ‘infrastructure’ at Kebele level which can be utilised in subsequent livelihoods 

programming; 

- Aside from those earning a wage from working in the store, there has been limited impact on 

household income so far, as most groups are putting all proceeds back into the business; 

- Group size may hinder operations and reduce profitability; 

- Exclusion of women in Sub-Kebeles due to targeting of already existing groups; 

- No direct impact on women group households yet as groups are re-investing earnings into 

the business; 

- Some groups feel constrained in what they can engage in due to licensing issues. 

OXFAM GB carried out an Emergency Markets Mapping & analysis EMMA in the area (Pasta, Sorghum, 

water and Shoats). It was found during the EMMA that profit margin on staples are low. While the 

cooperatives are a valuable source of staple foods in communities, and help increase staples’ 

availability, profit margins should be increased to more significant levels. Oxfam GB therefore 

recognises that diversification, in addition to stocking of cereals, needs to be considered for the future. 

There is a possibility for groups to become Food Import License Holders – need to check amount of profit 

from this before further consideration. Lastly, there is a need for Small Business Training in order to 

improve their knowledge of basic bookkeeping, stock management, savings, re-investment and profit 

calculation. 

4.4 REGIONAL LINKAGES: THE FSNWG PLATFORM 

- DANIELE DE BERNARDI, REGIONAL FOOD SECURITY ANALYST, FAO 

The Food Security & Nutrition Working Group (FSNWG) for central and eastern Africa is a multistakeholder 

forum established in 2005 and based in Nairobi. The working group is co-chaired by IGAD, 

owned by its members and its secretariat is hosted by FAO, The working groups includes more than 25 

International NGOs, 12 UN agencies, 20 donors, technical partners and regional initiatives. Regional & 

National Governments are also key stakeholders. –It covers 13 countries in the eastern and central Africa 

region and it is organized in a core group and several thematic sub-groups or task forces (i.e. Market 

Analysis Subgroup – MAS; the Regional IPC Steering Committee; the Regional Livestock Subgroup; La 

Niña Task Force etc.). Its objectives are to: 

Page | 26



- Create consensus on situation analysis and share the information across the region; 

- Strengthen links between risk profiling, situation analysis and appropriate response 

identification; 

- Coordinate donor and partner advocacy towards strategic response; 

- Initiate regional joint programming; 

- Build Food Security & Nutrition (FSN) capacity at country & regional levels; 

- Develop joint FSN tools. 

The work of the FSNWG core group and its thematic sub-groups covers three pillars: Situation Analysis, 

Response Analysis and Advocacy & Capacity Building. The FSNWG has developed an information 

system relying on country-level platforms/clusters/ national technical working groups (such as the DRM- 

ATF) that feed information into the regional FSNWG. The FSNWG compile and analyse this information 

together with other information provided by the sub-working groups and by regional initiatives & 

partners, and produces several regional informational products on a regular basis (such as monthly 

updates, regional analyses, regional Food Security maps, response roadmaps, etc.), products that are 

shared with country- regional- and global- actors. Information on the situation in the region is first 

presented during the monthly meetings, where consensus is built with the different partners. The monthly 

update newsletters, the regional presentations on food security situation and outlook, special newsletters 

(e.g. La Niña alerts) and other products are then widely disseminated via email or through the FSNWG 

webpage. 

The FSNWG webpage is currently hosted by a broader DRR focused website, and can be found at 

http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/east-central-africa/fsnwg . The DRR website is also a valuable 

resource of relevant sectoral information and reports that are uploaded directly by partners. It also 

includes online mapping of projects and activities in the region, directly uploaded by implementing 

partners. Another mapping tool available on the DRR website is the dynamic map of water points that 

provides details on water source types, location, name, status and organisation that provided the 

information about the point. 

Partnerships with governments and NGOs, for water points mapping have been completed in Kenya, 

Djibouti and Uganda (Karamoja). The DRR website also features a section on mapping of cash, vouchers 

and input-based interventions. Starting in Kenya with mapping WFP cash-based interventions, other 

stakeholders and the Government of Kenya expressed interest in mapping their short and long-term cash 

and vouchers programs. The cash mapping tool will then be presented to Ethiopia, Djibouti and South 

Sudan, to start the regional roll out. Country-owned specific DRR webpage in the regional DRR website 

are also being developed upon request (i.e. Djibouti, Burundi). Lastly, the FSNWG Market Analysis Sub- 

Group (MAS) has initiated a cross-border formal-informal trade monitoring intiative and the information 

is posted on the website (http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/east-central-africa/mas). 

Country-level platforms are key to the FSNWG as it relies upon country platforms’ experiences and best 

practices to be replicated in the region. For example, the drought preparedness, response and recovery 

roadmap produced by the DRM-ATF has been used to inform key partners in the region in order to 

design appropriate drought-related actions. 

Page | 27




Discussion on the above presentation mainly focused on two areas: a multi-sectoral approach and 

institutionalisation. With regards to the multi-sectoral approach, it was asked why FSNWG only 

focuses on food and security nutrition when DRR/DRM applies to all sectors. Mr. De Bernardi 

explained that the FSNWG is slightly moving towards a broader direction, from a pure focus on 

emergency to more analysis of structural and underlying causes, including other sectors of interest (i.e. 

urban issues). The FSNWG is currently focusing on food security and nutrition, that to be adequately 

understood require a multi-sectoral approach . As for institutionalisation, the presenter observed that 

institutionalisation started with IGAD recently (December 2011) – it is linking the FSNWG to 

governments. 

Page | 28

5. CONCLUSIONS & CLOSING REMARKS 

5.1 WRAP-UP 



A discussion session reviewing the Conference revealed that participants saw tremendous progress being 

made through the development of more innovative DRM work. This is supported by GoE (both federal 

and regional) ownership; networking & coordination; and impact assessments that are supporting the 

replication and taking to at least modest scale of some of the interventions. It was recognised however 

more has to be done, including developing a more holistic approach to DRM that includes both a focus on 

production and marketing, with government and other actors playing a more supportive role of markets. 

In relation to this it was recognised that it is important to promote community-orientated approaches that 

builds on existing resilience and does not undermine it. Overall it was noted that there is a sense that 

DRM is maturing in Ethiopia and the momentum should be supported. 

During the closing remarks Ato Hassen Ali, Assistant FAOR, FAO Ethiopia, noted a good start for the 1 st 

Annual Conference of the DRM-ATF. He particularly emphasised the importance of linking short-term 

interventions to long-term ones, as well as finding a way of reducing emergency interventions in Ethiopia 

while promoting more development and mitigation interventions. 

Ato Melaku Gebreyesus, Programme Adviser/Social Protection Specialist, World Bank questioned to 

what extent development partners are supporting each other and not competing with one another. He 

also raised concerns about the value of money, and how it should be addressed in terms of efficiency 

and effectiveness at the aggregate and institutional levels. Additionally, he highlighted the importance of 

capturing lessons learnt and that of experience sharing. Lastly, he emphasized that funding flexibility 

and timely response are a necessity. 

Adrian Cullis, DRM Coordinator and Co-Chair of the DRM-ATF, FAO Ethiopia, expressed his appreciation 

of the level of knowledge in the house, and like Ato Melaku, emphasised the importance of sharing 

experiences. With regards to short-term and long-term interventions, he noted that short term 

interventions can, if appropriately implemented, have longer-term impacts. Looking ahead, he noted the 

need to improve the gender balance, and for the regional government to present papers and share their 

lessons in future. 

5.2 CLOSING REMARKS 

Ato Kassahun Bedada, Hazard Monitoring, Early Warning & Response Case Team Coordinator, EWRD, 

and Chair of the DRM-ATF, delivered the closing remarks. He began by pronouncing his appreciation at 

the opportunity provided by the DRM-ATF 1 st Annual Conference for development partners, institutions 

and others to come together and share lessons and experiences on the on-going DRM activities in the 

country. Furthermore, he said the conference provided an opportunity to identify emerging issues and 

strategies, and based on these, to develop partnerships or enhance existing ones, in order to strengthen 

coordination mechanisms at federal and regional level. The EWRD, he said, is working towards 

strengthening cooperation and integration among humanitarian agencies. The mandate of the DRM-ATF is 

to provide support in order to minimise the impacts of disasters on communities, as well as raising 

awareness on critical issues. The conference, Ato Kassahun said, has provided an opportunity to raise and 

discuss issues supporting both the EWRD and DRM-ATF mandate. 

Ato Kassahun then emphasized the progress made by the DRM-ATF since its re-launch in 2010, 

particularly in terms of the progress made in bringing development partners together to coordinate and 

harmonise approaches, in order to undertake prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response and early 

recovery actions. He also noted the steady increase in DRM-ATF members, execution of regular meetings, 

information exchange and the establishment of regional Task Forces. Ato Kassahun emphasized that all 

Page | 29



of the above has been accomplished through the relentless work of FAO and good cooperation of the 

members. 

Lastly, Ato Kassahun expressed his thanks and appreciation to the participants for actively participating 

in the conference. He also thanked FAO for its continued support and effort, as well as other members 

for their contribution in making the conference a success. 

Page | 30



ANNEX I 

CONFERENCE PROGRAMME 

T I M E S E S S I O N P R E S E N T E R 

D A Y 1 : 3 R D A P R I L 2 0 1 2 

08:30 – 09:00 Registration 

09:00 – 09:10 Conference Programme & Objectives Overall Facilitator 

09:10 – 09:20 Welcome & Opening Remarks DRMFSS Official 

09:20 – 09:30 Speech of Honourable Guest 

09:30 – 09:55 Introduction to DRMATF Coordination in 2011 and Future Vision Adrian Cullis, FAO 

09:55– 10:20 Regional Perspectives 

10:20 – 10:40 T E A B R E A K 

A)10:40 – 

11:05 

B) 10:40 – 

11:05 

A)11:05 – 

11:30 B) 11:05 

– 11:30 

A)11:30 – 

12:30 B) 11:30 

– 12:30 

H A L L A : T E A M 1 H A L L B : T E A M 2 

T H E M A T I C A R E A 1 : I M P R O V I N G 

R E S I L I E N C E 

Community Watershed Management, Food 

Security, Growth in Rural Ethiopia, Tigray: 

Supporting Landless Rural Youths in Value Chain 

Honey and Beeswax Production – Melaku 

Gebreyesus, Productive Safety Net Program 

Donor Coordination Team, World Bank 

Improving Food Security through Appropriate and 

Cost-Effective Post-Harvest Technology – Fasil 

Demeke, DME Manager, Mercy Corps 

Discussion and Reflection on Presentations 

12:30 – 14:00 L U N C H B R E A K 

T H E M A T I C A R E A 1 : L I N K I N G R E L I E F & 

R E H A B I L I T A T I O N T O D E V E L O P M E N T ( L R R D ) 

Linking Emergency Response to Long-Term Risk Reduction / 

Development Impact Assessment of Response to the Food 

Crisis and Drought in Ethiopia – Nazereth Fikru, Regional 

Humanitarian Coordinator, Oxfam America 

Commercial Destocking Activity in Pastoralist Households 

across the Somali Region of Ethiopia – Tate Munro, Chief of 

Party, Mercy Corps 



A)14:00 – 

14:20 B)14:00 

– 14:30 

A)14:20 – 

14:40 B) 14:30 

– 15:00 

A) 14:40 – 

15:00 

A)15:00 – 

15:30 B)15:00 

– 15:30 

15:30 – 

15:50 

T H E M A T I C A R E A 2 : S T A B I L I S I N G M A R K E T S 

Food Price Stabilization in Ethiopia – Aschalew 

Feleke, Programme Officer / Markets Analyst, 

WFP 

Diversifying Markets for Increasing Resiliency – 

Maria Ruiz, RDD Coordinator, SCUK 

Seed Voucher Practices - CRS 


T E A 

B R E A K 

T H E M A T I C A R E A 2 : D I S A S T E R R I S K R E D U C T I O N 

( D R R ) E X P E R I E N C E S & I N N O V A T I V E A P P R O A C H E S 

Drought Cycle Management in Disaster Risk Management – 

Weiser Axel, Livelihoods Unit Director, SCUS 

The Experience of Pastoral Field Schools in Ethiopia – 

Tarekegn Tola (Dr.), DRR Officer, FAO 



A)15:50 – 

16:20 B) 15:50 

– 16: 20 

A)16:20 – 

16:50 B) 16:20 

– 16:50 

T H E M A T I C A R E A 3 : E N H A N C I N G 

P R O D U C T I V I T Y 

Root and Tuber Crop Activities in SNNPR – 

Wondimagegn Shiferaw, Agronomist, FAO 

Apple Seedling for Smallholder Farmers in the 

Amhara Highlands: A Case of Dabat Woreda – 

Elias Getachew, Programme Coordinator, Disaster 

T H E M A T I C A R E A 3 : N A T U R A L R E S O U R C E 

M A N A G E M E N T 

Our "Ecosystem" Approach to Rangeland Management in the 

Pastoral Programme – Abay Bekele (Dr), Pastoral 

Programme, Oxfam GB 

Rangeland Improvement: Gone are the days when in 60’s and 

70’s the Ethiopian Rangelands were Renowned as one of the 

Best Rangelands in East Africa – Sora Adi 

Page | 31



A)16:50 – 

17:30 B) 16:50 

– 17:30 

Management & Emergency Response, SC Norway 



D A Y 2 : 4 T H A P R I L 2 0 1 2 

08:30 – 09:10 Recap of Day 1 and Introduction to Day 2 program –Amdissa Teshome (Dr) 

09:10 – 09:35 

A Review of Flood Risk Management and Response System in Ethiopia – Kedir Shemsu, 

GIS Officer, VAM Unit, WFP 

09:35 – 10:00 Women's Economic Empowerment – Birhanu, Director, Rift Valley (Oxfam GB Partner) 

10:00 – 10:25 Cash Grant and Women Traders – Blessing _OXFAM GB 

10:30 – 11:00 T E A B R E A K 

11:00 – 11:30 Discussion and Reflection on presentations 

11:30 – 11:50 Summary points of day1 parallel session discussions 

11:50 – 12.10 Plenary discussion & lessons learned –Amdissa Teshome (Dr) 

12:10 – 12:30 Wrap-up Presentations – Animesh _WFP/DRMFSS 

12:30 – 12:40 Closing Remarks 

12:40 – 14:00 L U N C H ( E N D O F P R O G R A M M E ) 

Page | 32



ANNEX II 

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 

# Participant Name Position Agency Telephone Email 

1 Abay Bekele (Dr) Pastoral Prog. Manager Oxfam GB 0911.891.804 ABekele@oxfam.org.uk 

2 Abdulkadir Sulaiman Early Warning Officer DPFO 0910.998.421 abdiksul@gmail.com 

3 Abera Kassa Livestock Expert DRMFSS 0911.308.289 kabere76@yahoo.com 

4 Abomsa Kebede SCUS 0911.387.617 akebede@savechildren.org 

5 Adrian Cullis FAO 0920.341.384 Adrian.Cullis@fao.org 

6 Ahmed Mohamed (Dr) FAO 0913.988.173 Ahmed.Mohammed@fao.org 

7 Aisha Mohammed Head DPFSPCO 0911.717.676 Aishafar11@yahoo.com 

8 Akloweg Nigatu DRMFSS 0911.877.321 aklog1yod@yahoo.com 

9 Alemtseheg Aberra Consultant 021.567.168 alemtseheg10@yahoo.com 

10 Amare Kendie Deputy Head DPFSPCO 0918.340.128 Amare20001@yahoo.com 

11 Amy Martin OCHA 

12 Animesh.Kumar DRMFSS/WFP 0912.797.646 Animesh.Kumar@wfp.org 

13 Anna Zingg Early Recovery Specialist UNDP 0911.218.934 anna.zingg@undp.org 

14 Aschalew Feleke Prog. Officer/Markets Analyst WFP 0913.912.447 Aschalew.Felek@wfp.org 

15 Axel Weiser SCUS aweiser@savechildren.org 

16 Ayele Sebaro 

GOAL 

Ethiopia 

0911.922.878 ayeles@et.goal.ie 

17 Beletu Tefera DRMFSS 0911.339.040 beletut@yahoo.com 

18 Berhanu Admassu Tuft University 0911.243.501 berhanu.admassu@tufts.edu 

19 Berhanu Woldemichael DRMFSS berhanuw@yahoo.com 

20 Berhanu Geleto Director RCWDO 0911.217.390 riftvalley@ethionet.et 

21 Blessing Mutsaka 

Emergency Food Security 

Specialist 

OXFAM GB 0921. 784.702 bmutsaka@oxfam.org.uk 

22 Chetan Deva DRMFSS 0928.310.235 chetan.r.deva@gmail.com 

23 Claire Balbo UNDP 0922.112.334 claire.bablbo@undp.org 

24 Daniele De Bernardi FAO daniele.debernardi@fao.org 

25 Dereje Asaminew FAO 0911.733.531 Dereje.Asaminew@fao.org 

26 Degeme Mebratu DRMFSS 0911.715.701 

27 Demeke Eshete USAID deshete@usaid.gov 

28 Desta Arega 

Programme Manager, Joint 

Emergency Operation Plan 

WV 0911.840.604 desta_arega@wvi.org 

29 Elias Getachew 

Programme Coordinator, 

DM&ER 

SC Norway 

0912.125.596 

0113.206.381/8 

4 

eliasg@scne.org 

30 Esmael Tesssema VSF Germany 0911.000.526 Esmaelt2011@gmail.com 

31 Ewnetu Mekonnen Programme Officer GAA 

0911.468.096 

0116.624.765 

ewnetum@yahoo.com 

32 Fasil Demeke DME Manager Mercy Corps 0911.141.233 fdemeke@et.mercycorps.org 

33 Fuyera Abdi SOS Sahel 0911.208.838 fuyerabdi@yahoo.com 

34 Gebreegziabher Abay Market Officer EGTE 0911.207.790 egtepmr@ethionet.et 

35 Gemeda Gelge ODPPC 0911.191.536 gemeda614@yahoo.com 

36 Getachew Abate Analyst FAO 0911.457.160 Getachew.Abate@fao.org 

37 Gezahegn Eshete SCUK 0911.373.072 Gezahegne.E@scuk.org.et 

38 Gezu Bekele PRE 0911.407.631 gezubekele@yahoo.co.uk 

39 Gijs Van’t Klooster FAO 0921.329.756 gijs.vantklooster@fao.org 

40 Girma Legesse 

Oxfam 

America 

0911.644.172 Glegesse@oxfamamerica.org 

41 Habtamu Tada 

Plan 

International 

0911.680.908 habtamu.tada@plan.int.org 

Page | 33




42 Hailu Hagos HAPS 0912.120.886 haihagos@yahoo.com 

43 Hassen Ali FAO 0911.402.420 Hassen.Ali@fao.org 

44 Helen Alemayehu FAO 0921.944.724 mita_helen@yahoo.com 

45 Herrie Hamedu FAO 0911.7588.02 Herrie.Hamedu@fao.org 

46 Ilona Gluecks VSF-Suisse igluecks@vsfsuisse.org 

47 Jami Montgomery USAID jmontgomery@usaid.gov 

48 Kassahun Bedada DRMFSS 

49 Kedir Shemsu GIS Officer WFP 0911.199.709 Kedir.Shemsu@wfp.org 

50 Kelay Belihu (Dr) FAO 0911174.311 Kelay.Belihu@fao.org 

51 Kidist Hailemariam SOS Sahel 0911.400.497 kiduhaile@yahoo.com 

52 Kidus Belay Agro-Meteorologist NMA 0911.016.830 kibe_302001@yahoo.com 

53 Kinfu Mamo DCA 0911.482.712 kmag@dca.dk 

54 Legesse Dadi (Dr) CRS 0911.736.620 legesse.dadi@crs.org 

55 Lemessa Demie Senior DRR Advisor Oxfam GB 0911.489.842 ldemie@oxfam.org 

56 Lucia Di Troia 

Italian 

Cooperation 

0922.825.064 l.ditroia@itacaddis.it 

57 Mahlet Mulugeta FAO 0911.461.332 Mahlet.Mulugeta@fao.org 

58 Mahmudul Islam 

Food & Nutrition Security 

Prog. Manager 

FAO 

Mahmudul.Islam@fao.org 

59 Martha Getachew UN OCHA 

0911.101.458 

0115.444.156 

getachewm@un.org 

60 Melaku Gebremichael 

PSNP (WB) Donor 

Coordination Team 

WB/DCT 0911.343.784 mgebreyesus@worldbank.org 

61 Mekonnen Kebede (Dr) FAO 0911901.663 Mekonnen.Kebede@fao.org 

62 Mesfin Arega CARE 0921.567.670 mesfina@care.org.et 

63 Mesfin Ayele Assistant Country Director Mercy Corps 0911.605.994 mayele@et.mercycorps.org 

64 Miesso Nebi CDI 0911.366.465 miesson@yahoo.com 

65 Muktar Ebrahim Mercy Corps 0911.694.183 mebrahim@et.mercycorps.org 

Regional Humanitarian Oxfam 

66 Nazereth Fikru 

0911.462.564 nfikru@oxfamamerica.org 

Coordinator 

America 

CAFOD, SCIAF 

67 Patricia Wall 

pwall@cst-together.org 

& TROCAIRE 

68 Peter Muhangi SC UK Peter.M@scuk.org.et 

69 Rahel Asmare SCUS 0911.369.178 rasmare@savechildren.org 

70 Rwash Tut Gak Head DPFSA 0911.032.730 rwashtutgak@yahoo.com 

salomon.hussein@zoaethiopia.or 

71 Salomon Hussein ZOA 0911.391.731 

g 

72 Shanti Kleiman Mercy Corps skleiman@et.mercycorps.org 

Shiferaw, 

Wondimagegne.Shiferaw@fao. 

73 

Agronomy Consultant FAO 0911.608.833 

Wondimagegne 

org 

Regional DRM-ATF 

74 Sileshi Mekonnen (Dr) 

FAO 0911.445.844 Sileshi.Mekonnen@fao.org 

Coordinator 

Livestock Marketing and IT EMDTI/Mercy 

75 Sintayehu Alemayehu 

0911.045.053 sintayehu1@gmail.com 

Specialist 

Corps 

76 Sora Adi Private 0921.467.114 soraadi94@yahoo.com 

77 Tadesse Manoro EWFS 0916.825.623 

78 Tamrat Terefe 

Emergency Programme Christian Aid 

Officer 

Ethiopia 

0912.062.566 tterefe@christian-aid.org 

79 Tamrat Mengistu Expert DPFSPCO 0911.033.035 dinatamrat@yahoo.com 

80 Tamrat Tsegaye 

DRMFSS/EWR 

D 

0911.487.096 tamrattm@gmail.com 

81 Tarekegh Tola (Dr) DRR Officer FAO 0910.448.939 Tarekegn.Tola@fao.org 

82 Tate Munro Chief of Party Mercy Corps 0920.563.559 tmunro@et.mercycorps.org 

83 Teamrat Belai 

CAFOD/SCIAF 

/Trocaire 

0911.315.526 teamratb@cst-together.org 

84 Tefera Bekele ODPPC 0911.038.473 

85 Teketel Abuto 

Livelihoods Programme Food for the 

Coordinator 

Hungry 

0912.993.4 64 tabuto@fh.org 

Page | 34




86 Teshome Dega SOS Sahel 0911.119.882 tashgada@yahoo.com 

87 Ton Haverkort Cordaid 0911.248.993 thacor@cordaid.net 

88 Weiser Axel Director, Livelihoods Unit SC USA 0911.513.716 AWeiser@savechildren.org 

89 Wendwosen Beri DPFSO 0911.023.689 wendwosenb@yahoo.com 

90 

Wondimagegne 

Wondimagegne.Shiferaw@fao. 

Agronomy Consultant FAO 0911.608.833 

Shiferaw 

org 

91 Yilma Muluken 

Food Security and Emergency ActionAid 

yilma.muluken@actionaid.org 

0911.339.524 

Coordinator 

Ethiopia 

ymuluken@yahoo.com 

92 Yohannes Gebeyehu EWRFS 0916.309.370 

gebeyehu_yohannes@yahoo.co 

m 

93 Zekeria Mohammed Early Warning Officer FSDPO 0915.136.554 zemd1@yahoo.com 

94 Zelalem Ewnetu WFP 0913.505.880 Zelalem.Ewnetu@wfp.org 

95 Zelealem Letyibelu 

National Humanitarian Affairs 

Officer 

UN OCHA 0911.600.391 letyibelu@un.org 

Page | 35

DRM-ATF 1ST ANNUAL CONFERENCE - Disaster risk reduction

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?