Download PDF - ReliefWeb

Disaster risk reduction in the drylands ofthe HORN OF AFRICA - Edition 3GOOD PRACTICE EXAMPLES FROM THE ECHO DROUGHT RISK REDUCTION ACTION PLAN PARTNERS AND BEYONDRegional Learning & Advocacy Programme (REGLAP) forVulnerable Dryland Communities

Introduction1Disaster risk reduction inthe drylands of the Horn ofAfrica:Good practice examples fromthe ECHO DRRAP partnersand beyond - Edition 3Date:December 2012Edited by:Helen de Jode and Vanessa TilstoneDesigned and printed by:Rodwell PressCover photo credit:Sven Torfinn/OxfamInside cover photo credit:Jane Beesley/OxfamFor more information contact:vtilstone@oxfam.org.ukDisclaimer:The ideas and opinions expressed in thisjournal do not necessarily reflect the viewsof REGLAP, nor its members or donors.CONTENTSIntroduction 1DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND MITIGATIONThe Drought Early Warning System in Uganda 2Improving Market-Based Provision of Humanitarian Water 6Cross-Border Participatory Drought Risk Assessment 10The People First Impact Method 14The Importance of Integrity and Accountability in Food Assistance 18BUILDING RESILIENT LIVELIHOODSCommunication, Coordination and Budgeting for Animal Health 20Ecosystem Recovery through Community Based Resource Management 22Improving Livestock Markets in Northern Kenya 24The Cross-Border Livestock Trade in Ethiopia and Somaliland 28The Potential of Dryland Products 32The Northern Kenya Investment Fund 34The third REGLAP journal on good practice examples ofDisaster Risk Reduction (DRR) begins with initiatives focusedon disaster preparedness and mitigation. ACTED’s articleon its widely used and much valued Drought Early WarningSystem in Karamoja (Uganda), explains how the system isnow more efficient through the rethinking of indicatorsand the fine-tuning of warning thresholds. An article fromOxfam looks at how the agency is rethinking its approachto emergency water provision in Ethiopia and Kenya as partof tightening up its humanitarian response to drought.Many organisations are recognising the importance ofworking across borders in preparing for drought, andCordaid’s article on Participatory Drought Risk Assessmentat the Kenya-Ethiopia border demonstrates the benefits oftaking a multi-agency cross-border approach. Partners arealso continuing to learn more about disaster preparednessand mitigation techniques from the communities theywork with, and the People First Impact Method (P-FIM) isintroduced here as one way of understanding communityviewpoints better. Transparency International provides avaluable set of recommendations on how to provide foodassistance to communities during drought with greaterintegrity and accountability.The second section of the journal covers some of theinitiatives that are building resilient livelihoods. InKaramoja it is recognised that livestock health is crucialfor household resilience and drought response, andDan Church Aid explains how the consortium it leads isimproving coordination, communication and budgetingamongst all stakeholders in order to address crossborderlivestock diseases. The Oxfam Somaliland articledemonstrates how community development interventionsthat build resilience in the aftermath of civil war andecosystem destruction can make a significant differencewith very little financial investment.One of the important factors for pastoralists coping withrepeated disasters is being able to trade their livestockassets easily, and viable livestock markets are thereforeessential. Food for the Hungry-Kenya recognises theimportance of improved marketing in resilience, and isassisting in the creation of community-based marketmanagement committees. An article by Oxfam Somalilandand Oxfam Ethiopia on the cross-border livestock tradeadvocates strongly for greater legal recognition of tradingas a means of economic survival and food security in thismarginalised region. Susie Wren’s article moves awayfrom livestock, and looks at how other products from thebiodiversity rich drylands could be better marketed andcould potentially benefit communities as an alternativeincome source.The need for private sector involvement and investmentin helping build resilience in dryland areas has longbeen discussed, and Farid Mohamed’s article outlinesthe Northern Kenya Investment Fund as a new model forattracting investors into the region. The fund is based on‘impact investments’, an approach now gaining tractionamong socially conscious financiers.Prepared communities, fine-tuned development practiceand effective finance can only go so far in buildingresilience: The Arid and Semi Arid Lands (ASALs) in the Hornof Africa also need strong and effective leadership fromnational and regional governments. The third section ofthe journal looks at progress being made in coordination,capacity building and advocacy. To address theinherent vulnerabilities in the ASALs stricter adherence toenvironmental and social safeguards is required, but at thesame time encouragement is also necessary if the ASALsare to attract the investment they require. The championingand coordination of development in the ASALs of Kenyais now the task of its newly created ASAL Secretariat, andHelen de Jode’s article introduces the objectives andstructure behind this long-term institution.The other articles in the third section focus on theadvocacy for policy reform that is a core part of DRR. Thefirst discusses the slow progress in implementing the AUPastoral Policy Framework. Ethiopia Oxfam’s article thenexplains how the dryland actors in Ethiopia have setout to learn from policy successes in West Africa with avaluable experience sharing visit and a national drylandsworkshop. And the section concludes with details of IGAD’sinitiative to build a common programming framework toimprove coordination and effectiveness in ending droughtemergencies.The third REGLAP journal on good practice in DisasterRisk Reduction ends with Vanessa Tilstone’s article on therecent debate about resilience, what it means for practice,and what’s still needed to ensure that key constraints indevelopment and resilience building in the drylands canbe overcome.Reproduction:The reproduction of articles is permittedprovided that REGLAP, with the supportof ECHO DRRAP, is acknowledged as thesource.COORDINATION, CAPACITY BUILDING AND ADVOCACYKenya’s ASAL Transformation Secretariat 38Progress on the AU Pastoral Policy Implementation Framework 41Learning from West African Policy And Practice in Ethiopia 42IGAD’s Drought Disaster Resilience And Sustainability Initiative 46End Words – Resilience in Practice 48

2 3Disaster PreparednessAnd MitigationInnovationThe Early Warning Stage Classification: a tool to enhance theefficiency of the Karamoja Drought Early Warning SystemThe Drought Early Warning SystemThe DEWS informs all stakeholders (communities, localand national government, development partners anddonors) in a timely manner on the risk and occurrence ofdrought, and to what extent it may affect the community.This information enables more appropriate decisionsto be made on activating preparedness mechanisms,the time frame available and the type of early actionsto be implemented. The communities receive messagesvia local radio stations and discussions with localleaders. These messages, formulated by the localgovernment representatives (district officials) in chargeof the monthly data analysis, give precise and actionablerecommendations on what best practices should beimplemented at household level to protect assets andlives.Malika Ogwang, Early Warning Specialist, ACTED UgandaThe Karamoja region is one of the least developed areas in Uganda, where the mainly agro-pastoralist population live insemi-arid lands and suffer from recurrent and increasingly more frequent drought. Since 2009 ACTED, in collaboration withthe Government of Uganda and various partners (NGOs, Community Based Organizations, UN agencies, FEWSNET) hasimplemented a Drought Early Warning System (DEWS) for the region. ACTED has recently developed a new methodology toanalyse the DEWS data. Since June 2012 an Early Warning Stage Classification has guided district heads of departmenton how to establish warning stages out of the analysis of each indicator. These warning stages are key in raising timely andreliable alerts, and allowing stakeholders to design the right interventions in advance. This article reviews the principles of thismethodology and the benefit it has brought so far to the DEWS in Karamoja.The climate has really changed, it used to be more balanced ~Moding NgolepusSven Torfinn/OxfamThe system currently monitors information on 21 indicatorson a monthly basis, collected mainly at household levelbut also at district level. These indicators cover six sectors:livestock, crop, water, weather and environment, healthand nutrition, and security. They include information onthe vulnerability of the population, coupled with satelliteimages and weather predictions from the Departmentof Meteorology. Combining these two informationsources helps users assess both the risk of drought andits potential impact on the population in each livelihoodzone (agricultural, pastoral and agro-pastoral).The Early Warning Stage ClassificationThe Early Warning Stage Classification developed froma need to: harmonize the analysis of DEWS data withindistricts; to guide the District Officials on how to usea combination of the DEWS dataand their own understandingand experience of the context inKaramoja to establish warningstages; and ensure a transparentanalysis that the reader can easilyunderstand.The methodology is based on 4steps:Step 1: The identification of thewarning stages for the vulnerabilityindicators. This includes identifyingthe warning stages of each indicatorfirst, followed by the identificationof the warning stages of each sector, in each livelihoodzone.Step 2: Identification of the level of risk of drought. Thisis derived from the weather forecast produced by thenational government.Step 3: Identification of the global early warningstage per livelihood zone. This is a combination of thevulnerability warning stages and the level of risk ofdrought.Step 4: Forecast for the next one to three months. Thisestablishes a stable/improving/worsening trend.Identification of thresholds: In the absence of historicaldata for the 21 indicators, the EWPC relies on thresholds(normal/alert/alarm/emergency) and trends determinedout of the experience of technical experts who haveextensive knowledge and experience in the contextof Karamoja (see example in figure 1 below). Thesethresholds are tested and reviewed seasonally by thedistrict heads of department to improve their accuracy.Visualization in the Drought Bulletin: In order tomake the conclusions of the analysis easily and quicklyunderstandable by the end users, warning gaugesindicate the stage as shown in Figure 1. A summary of thestage for each zone, followed by the predicted trends andthe vulnerability warning identified for each sector arerepresented on page one of the district Drought Bulletins.Analysis per livelihood zone: Within each district ofKaramoja the analysis is made and recommendationsgiven for each livelihood zone. This is because thevulnerability of the population often differs between thezones and a district wide conclusion may mask importantdisparities.Figure 1: Visualization of the results given by theEarly Warning Stage ClassificationHow the classification improved the efficiency of thedrought early warning systemIn June 2012 all District Officials involved in the DroughtBulletin analysis (about 50 officers) were trained on howto use this new methodology. The methodology has nowbeen tested for three months and results already appear inthe Drought Bulletin production. While the thresholds arestill being fine-tuned, and some particular points are stillbeing discussed among partners, the new advancementof the DEWS has already shown a positive impact:1. The District Officials developed a considerable interestin the methodology and consequently in the wholesystem. The number of District Officials attendingthe Drought Bulletin analysis meetings almostdoubled from April to May 2012, making the analysis,interpretation and recommendations richer and moreaccurate. This also enhanced the local governmentownership of the system and is a step forward inensuring the sustainability of the system.2. The final document/Drought Bulletin is being read bya much higher number of partners including donors atinternational level.3. The Drought Bulletins are increasingly used for routinemonitoring and strategic decision-making of partnersworking in Karamoja. (Examples include: The KaramojaLivelihoods Programme, an EU and Government ofUganda initiative, that uses the Drought Bulletins toprioritize their activities and the communities most inneeds; and the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industryand Fisheries which uses it for the national FS updates)4. The presentation on the front page of the DroughtBulletin shows very clearly the problems and threatsidentified. The format is easily readable and muchappreciated by the various practitioners and decisionmakers.

4 5Disaster PreparednessAnd MitigationInnovationFigure 2: Page One of the Drought Bulletin5. The new tool is also easily understandable by localleaders. This has increased the level of disseminationof potential threats, and of the recommendations givenby the District Officials down to the communities.6. Designing and implementing the Early Warning StageClassification methodology has been an opportunityto learn more on the best way to adjust the list of EWSindicators and thresholds.7. Following the training of the District Officials on thismethodology, ACTED reviewed, together with theofficials, the indicators and the thresholds initiallydesigned in 2010. This process proved that such amethodology helps in orienting the choice of theindicators and thresholds in a way that optimizes theefficiency and accuracy of the system.Optimizing the list of EWS indicatorsIn July 2012 ACTED reviewed its initial list of 26 indicators.The exercise was done in collaboration with the districtheads of department who analyse the DEWS data everymonth. Its purpose was to reduce the list of indicatorsin order to keep only the most crucial and relevantones. A shorter list of indicators would be more timeand cost efficient—two paramount factors towards thefuture sustainability of the project. With a more simpleanalysis results could be more accurate and transparent.Doing this exercise at the same time as the work on EarlyWarning Stage Classification helped in several aspects:1. The EWSC helped eliminate some indicators that did notplay a crucial role in the identification of the warningstage.2. The EWSC analysis helped identify some indicatorsthat were redundant, or were only a consequence ofanother indicator.Examples of indicators that were dropped for the abovereasons were:a. Coping mechanisms: This indicator, though interesting,is too complex to fit into the Early Warning StageClassification and was difficult to collect without biasfrom households. The information contained in ‘copingmechanisms’ described as “slaughtering of animals/destocking” also comes under the DEWS indicator“type and number of animals in the market”. Likewise“moving herds to far grazing area/splitting of herds”comes under the DEWS indicator “time spent to reachthe grazing area”. And information on “permanentmigration” can be retrieved from DEWS indicator“livestock migration”. Coping mechanisms such as“reducing portions of meals”, “reducing frequency ofmeals”, “begging for food” and ”borrowing food fromneighbours” which all relate to lack of access to foodand poor availability of food can be easily included inthe three following DEWS indicators:- Price of food (gives information on food availabilityand access)- Terms of trade (gives information on access tofood)- Type of food eaten (gives information on quality offood intake)Changes in one or several of the three indicatorsmentioned above definitely leads to more drasticcoping strategies related to improving access to food.b. Safe water points: In the absence of capacity totest water sources, this indicator was not included inthe stage classification. The review showed that thisparameter is always a conclusion of the analysis of thepercentage of usage of boreholes by the householdrespondents. Therefore the information obtained fromthe indicator “type of water source”, is enough to givea direct estimation of the quality of water used by thecommunities.c. Calf mortality rate: Although this indicator potentiallygives interesting information about the condition oflivestock, it always come as a consequence of livestockdisease incidence or of poor body condition due tolack of pasture or water. The two latter indicators arecollected in the system, and if fully analyzed, theindicator on calf mortality rate becomes less crucial.Caroline Gluck/OxfamThe type of water source gives a good indication of water qualityFine tuning the thresholds for correct determinationof warning stagesAs mentioned above, the thresholds to be used in thismethodology were identified prior to finalising the designof the methodology. When the District Officials startedimplementing the stage classification, several thresholdsturned out to be difficult to use, for example:a) Livestock Body Condition:This indicator gives a percentage of animals in poor,fair and good body condition. The thresholds initiallyattributed percentage of poor/fair/good animalsfor each warning stage. However, it became clearthat many compilations of the three percentagescould not fit in any scenario, and that relying on onecriterion only – the percentage of animals in goodcondition – was more than enough to establish thewarning stage of this indicator. This simplified notonly the methodology but also the thresholds.b) Animals in the market:This indicator gives an estimation of the number offour types of animals brought on sale in the markets:bull, cows, heifers and bull calves. When designingthe thresholds experts gave percentages for each ofthese four types. Using it in practice however proveddifficult as the different types could give differentresults. To simplify the system and make it morepractical, livestock experts agreed that monitoringthe sale of bull and heifers was giving enoughinformation for the purpose of issuing warnings. Thisagain simplified not only the methodology but alsothe thresholds.ConclusionThe Early Warning Stage Classification reinforces thetechnical aspects and improves the quality of the DroughtBulletin. The review of all indicators was a necessary stepin ensuring the full efficiency of the Drought Early WarningSystem. The new list of indicators is being implementedprogressively and should be fully operational in the next fewmonths. The Drought Bulletin gives valuable informationto stakeholders on the crop, livestock, water and livelihoodsectors. And this new tool, through advanced analysis,provides the reader with a general conclusion on the levelof risk that the population faces of being affected by adrought. This is essential to guide stakeholders on the needto implement preparedness measures or not.For comments or suggestions related to this article, pleasecontact: malika.ogwang@acted.org

Disaster PreparednessAnd MitigationProgramme Practice10 11Learning from a Cross-Border Participatory Drought Risk Assessmentin Northern Kenya and Southern Ethiopia—the value of planningWoldehanna Kinfu, Hussein Jirma and Mohamed Dida, Cordaid Ethiopia and KenyaThis article underlines the importance of undertaking pre-disaster planning with communities as part of DRR, and theadvantages of using a cross-border methodology as part of this. The article highlights the learning from a cross-borderParticipatory Drought Risk Assessment exercise, and how by taking a multi-agency approach, experience can be spread widerand coordination vastly improved.Community initiatives across borders can reduce the impact of drought.Crispin Hughes/OxfamKenya and Ethiopia lack a specific harmonized policydocument for promoting cross-border programming,but draft DRM national policies, the AU Pastoral PolicyFramework and the IGAD declarations on Ending DroughtEmergencies, all encourage more collaboration andpartnership along the borders. There are also encouragingdevelopments in decentralized planning including financialresource management at local levels.In Ethiopia contingency planning is highly appreciated atthe Federal and Regional levels of administration, and willbe rolled-out at woreda and kebele levels in the near future.In Kenya the National Drought Management Authority isalready active, and will be linking community initiativesto county contingency and development plans. These arepromising developments, if backed by adequate resourcesand linked to cross-border planning processes.The ProcessThe Cordaid and IIRR process of practicing, documentingand then reflecting on the four CMDRR steps began witha peer-facilitated 2-day ‘training of trainers’ course for21 facilitators in September 2012, followed by a 5-daypractical exercise with selected cross-border pastoralistcommunities in Marsabit North and Sololo Districts inKenya, and in Dire and Miyo woredas in Ethiopia. Theselected communities (Torbi, Forole, Funanqumbi andGolole in Kenya, and Magado, Meti and Teso in Ethiopia)reflected the complexities and dynamics of the pastorallivestock-based economy across the national border. Thecommunities share common strategic resources, have longreciprocal resource use arrangements, and share a commonculture and language. They have also been exposed tosimilar effects of recurrent drought.Lessons learnta) Participants and NGO staff need to be well selected and wellinformedThe general rule in Participatory Drought Risk Assessment(PDRA) is to involve as many community participants aspossible. However, this exercise showed that carefullyselected community members from each of the crossbordercommunities could facilitate the process justas effectively. Local leadership and peace committeerepresentation was found to be essential. Having effectiveparticipants also made it easier for subsequent validationof the development and contingency plans by the rest ofthe community members.The NGO staff members who facilitate the exercise needto be well informed—requiring a good knowledge ofthe area, the communities and the cross-border issues.During the exercise it was observed that the projectstaff’s understanding of the local social, economic andpolitical context (i.e. culture, livestock and commoditytrade ties, resource utilization, and management by localgovernments through partnership and collaboration),was crucial for effective facilitation of the discussions andcomprehending the communities’ thinking.b) Facilitators and stakeholders can both learn from a jointexerciseThe ECHO DRRAP partners (FAO, COOPI and CARE), thegovernment staff from the National Drought ManagementAuthority and the Drought Management Initiative, theproject staff, and Cordaid’s partners (PACIDA, RACIDA-K,RACIDA-E, HODI, CIFA-K, CIFA-E, ACORD, IIRR and MID-P),all participated in the cross-border PDRA exercise. Theyreported that they found the process:BackgroundSince 2005 a number of stakeholders, including governmentagencies and ECHO DRRAP partners, have piloted theCommunity Managed Disaster Risk Reduction (CMDRR)approach in northern Kenya and southern Ethiopia. Theirfocus has mainly been on drought as the key disaster orhazard. Recent independent reviews and evaluationsof the CMDRR approach have revealed the considerablesuccess of the methodology, but also weaknesses inits application, meaning that the approach has not yetreached its full potential in promoting resilience to droughtat the community level.To improve the quality of CMDRR implementation,Cordaid, its Global CMDRR advisor and the InternationalInstitute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR), together with otherpractitioners, carried out an exercise that would apply,document and then reflect on the four key steps in CMDRR:Step 1: Participatory Disaster Risk AssessmentStep 2: Creation of development and contingency plansStep 3: Strengthening community organizationsStep 4: Monitoring, evaluation and learningThe exercise provided a learning opportunity throughwhich practitioners engaged with community championsto share new ideas, new learning, innovations and goodpractice.It was anticipated that the cross-border focus of the CMDRRexercise would help demonstrate that programming canbenefit considerably from joint participatory planningby cross-border communities. Often cross-borderprogrammes focus on implementation and coordination—for example concurrent vaccination during drought andconflict resolution interventions at the peak of conflicts—but they do not involve communities in planning togetherfrom the start. The exercise would also demonstrate thatharmonized cross-border contingency plans, supportedby shared early warning information, are critical for linkingcommunity initiatives to government emergency responsestrategies—thereby reducing the damage from droughtand building future resilience.Cross-border map - Forole (Kenya) and Magado (Ethiopia)Author’s photo

Disaster PreparednessAnd MitigationResearch14 15Giving Voice to Disaster Affected Communities in Turkana & EastPokot, Kenya: The People First Impact Method (P-FiM)Gerry McCarthy and Paul O’Hagan, PFiMNot all agencies manage to establish good communication with the communities they work with. This article introduces thePeople First Impact Method as a means of avoiding organisational bias, and revealing valuable insights from communities atthe frontline of disasters. The findings are based on several inter-agency exercises conducted in 2012.and recorded the discussions and statements made by thegroups.Staff trainers first received two days of training on P-FiM,covering communication, open questioning techniques,listening skills, understanding bias, integrated humandevelopment etc. Training on P-FiM was essential to identifythe stages and quality of interpersonal communicationwithin community groups, and to recognise and accuratelyrecord quantitative and qualitative impact statements.On the morning of day three the trainees (now teamfacilitators) were deployed in their teams of 3 to meettheir community groups. The approach demonstrated toboth the communities and the agencies that agencies canwork together effectively. Discussions moved quickly fromfactual quantitative statements to animated expressionsof feelings and values. Statements were recorded andread back to the interviewees to ensure accuracy. Groupsdiscussed between 4 to 6 issues over a period of 4 hours,with a refreshment break.Immediately following the exercise each team made arecord of the community statements categorising themaccording to group and place; adults (M&F), youth (M&F)and girls & boys; whether the impact statement andeffect was positive, negative or neutral; and who/whatwas responsible (e.g. NGO, government, community).The level of communication recorded as being factual orfeelings and emotions. The teams then presented theirfindings in plenary to other interviewers for discussion andclarification without altering the community statements.The recorded feedback and written statements were thenused to compose the P-FiM reports.The identification and attribution of impactsParticipants in the 21 groups provided 130 impactstatements categorised as positive, negative or neutral.Communities were able to attribute what and whom theysee as the causes of change in their lives. These drivers ofimpact are the results of humanitarian interventions, andby wider events and actors within the context of theirlives. They were attributed to the usual players within ahumanitarian response: Community, Government, theKenyan Red Cross Society, UN Agencies, Non-GovernmentalOrganisations, Faith Organisations, businesses and otherwider events (e.g. drought, disease and conflict). Directlinks were made from the community’s perspective onwhat did and did not work.The graphs below show (a) the most important positiveimpact differences in Turkana, (b) the most importantnegative impact differences in East Pokot, and (c) who orwhat caused the most important positive, negative andneutral impact changes in Turkana.A P-FiM exercise reveals feelings and valuesThe P-FiM Impact MethodThe People First Impact Method (P-FiM) was developed toencourage communities to express their views on whatis most important to them, i.e. what they see as workingor not working, and who or what is responsible, andexpressing this information in relation to their lives. Thestarting point is the communities themselves, not theorganisations involved or the projects underway. A P-FiMexercise is delivered with personnel who are from the area,speak the language and know the culture.A P-FiM exercise takes 4 days, including training, fieldworkand the collation of results. Typically, personnel of 15 to30 agencies will participate in an individual exercise i.e.government, NGOs, UN, faith organisations, CBOs andlocal businesses. Inter-agency teams of three (a facilitator,reporter and observer) will be identified. They will meet withgroups of community representatives, e.g. 12 teams willmeet with 12 groups. The depth of discussion reveals bothquantitative (what has happened), and qualitative (howpeople relate to what has happened), verifiable informationthat will inform the P-FiM report. An additional day maybe added for further focussed discussion with the samecommunities and inter-agency teams, on issues emergingfrom the P-FiM exercise, e.g. drought mitigation measures,P-FiMcommunication within the community, policy issues, useof natural resources, service provision, sustainability ofdevelopment efforts, care of vulnerable groups etc.P-FiM reports include: narrative reports, impact andattribution graphs, community statements, and alignmentof sectoral budget expenditure with impacts (when suchagency information is made available). The result is an indepthprofile of how a community views and relates toissues that matter most to it, and who or what is responsible.The findings allow communities, agencies, governmentsand donors to know ‘if they are doing things right, and aredoing the right things.’ P-FiM reports are valuable for makingpolicy more effective and also for strategy development.A goal-free inter-agency approachIn March and June 2012, 66 Kenyan staff from 40organisations carried out P-FiM exercises in Turkana andEast Pokot districts 4 . 376 community members (229 womenand girls and 147 men and boys) from 21 livelihood groupsparticipated, drawn from varied locations. Communitygroups led discussions and identified their importantissues over the past two-year period, and who or what wasresponsible. The inter-agency teams facilitated, observed4 East Pokot http://www.alnap.org/resource/6495.aspx; Turkana http://www.alnap.org/resource/6494.aspxFigure 1: Positive impacts by sector for Turkana districtFigure 2: Impact changes in East Pokot

16 17Disaster PreparednessAnd MitigationResearchFigure 3: Impact attribution in TurkanaConclusionsCommunities in the front line of disasters have deep insightsand understanding of their context: Strategies and policesshould be directly informed by these communities so thatthey are locally owned. Good new ideas should always befully communicated and discussed with communities toensure that they are appropriate and adapted to the localcontext: Some agencies are getting this communicationright and some are not. The socio, economic and politicallife of communities is rich and varied, and they know whoand what works best for them. It is the organisations thathave long-term, relevant relationships with communitiesthat are often getting it right as they understand andrespect the local context. This should be the norm, not theexception.For further information please contact:Email: contact@p-fim.orgLinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/people-firstimpact-method-p-fim/53/339/841The community’s perspectiveThe results of the exercises strongly affirmed the needto use REGLAP’s good practice principles on communitydevelopment for CMDRR 5 – especially the importance ofputting the community first and the need for in-depth localknowledge for appropriate and cost-effective humanitarianaction … “Our approach is all too often top-down, driven byperceptions of donor or organisational risk, and not sufficientlybased on a clear understanding of the communities’ ownperceptions of risk.” 6 The importance of … “linking impactmeasurement and accountability better to the funds agenciesreceive” was also highlighted. 7 The importance of the voiceof the community, a critical link in the overall humanitarianand development approach, is self-evident, but is oftenmissing or undervalued by agencies.While the PFiM reports provide important insights intocommunity perspectives in each location, they also providecomparisons on how humanitarian and developmentactors are responding differently to the similar challengesfaced by communities in Turkana and East Pokot districts.There are important issues and stark contrasts, for example:• The number of agencies operating in Turkana wasmuch greater compared to East Pokot, even thoughboth areas face similar challenges;• The need for basic infrastructure was strongly statedin both areas as essential for building local resilience;• Blanket relief handouts are undermining communityresilience and local business development;• The need to address child rights e.g. FGM, labourabuse, early marriage, lack of access to services etc.was felt strongly in both communities• While HIV-AIDS is being addressed positively inTurkana there were no HIV-AIDS support groups incommunities in East Pokot District.Long-term engagement is valued mostBoth communities provided valuable insights into whatis or is not working, and who is responsible. They werecritical and insightful in a constructive and mature way.They spoke in pragmatic (quantitative) terms about workdone, and passionately (qualitatively) about how they feltin relation to both positive and negative impacts. Theymentioned several positive examples of agencies doinggood work, and these tended to be agencies with longtermengagement and strong local knowledge—includingfaith organisations and government line ministries.In Turkana, for example, people felt that food aid wastrapping them in dependency, and this was echoed byagency staff: “Our projects are making our own peopledependent.” Overall people want sustainable support -especially information on establishing, developing andmaintaining their livelihoods. The entrepreneurial spiritand drive for self-reliance was obvious. Groups spoke withpassion about beekeeping, irrigated crop production,improved fishing etc. as examples of self-reliance, but theywanted the right kind of support to develop these. “We areheading somewhere and have shown we can move forward –we are developing.” 8 They want to participate in the planningand policy development that impacts their livelihoods, sothat they as communities can benefit most from their ownnatural resources.Broader understanding is neededThe impact results call for a much greater understandingof the factors influencing livelihood choices and incomediversification, including pastoralism. The issue of ‘migration’and ‘forced migration’ was raised a lot, underlying thedesire to have alternative or additional livelihoods. Cashtransfers were reported to be working well in Turkana, buthave not yet been tried in East Pokot. Within a discussiongroup of vulnerable children in Lodwar, senior teacherswere taken aback by the experiences of struggle faced bychildren in their school. Insecurity is a major issue in bothTurkana and East Pokot. Both communities constantlyraised the need for basic infrastructure, correct informationand appropriate support services and structures.People want sustainable support for maintaining their livelihoodsP-FiM.5 See: http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/east-central-africa/library/?category=goodpracticeprinciples&reglap=16 RHPT and IAWG Round Table discussion report, 1 st of March 20127 DFID 2011, Humanitarian Emergency Response Review8 Beekeepers in East Pokot

18 19Disaster PreparednessAnd MitigationResearchResearchLearning from the 2011 drought response:The Importance of Integrity and Accountability in Food AssistanceProgrammesNicolas Seris, Programme Coordinator, Humanitarian Aid Programme,Transparency International KenyaOver the last decade there has been increased focus on integrity, accountability and transparency in the implementationof humanitarian aid programmes. Humanitarian organizations have made efforts to strengthen their systems to addresscorruption risks, and to enhance accountability mechanisms. However, an analysis of the 2011 drought response conducted byTransparency International Kenya (TI Kenya) demonstrates that serious challenges and gaps remain.Nicolas Seris/TI KenyaLolupe, TurkanaFor several years foodaid has represented thelargest component ofemergency responsein Kenya. In 2011,3.75 million Kenyanswere affected by foodshortages, promptingthe Government of Kenyaand the internationalcommunity to launch a national response effort. Itwas against this background that TI Kenya, with thecollaboration of government and non-state humanitarianactors, conducted a study on the integrity of food aidprovision during the 2011 drought response. 9The TI study highlighted integrity and accountabilitymechanisms governing the delivery of food assistanceand food security programmes in Kenya, and analysedthe risks pertaining to different types of these (i.e. fooddistribution interventions, vouchers and direct cash transferprogrammes). It identified gaps and loopholes that couldallow the diversion of aid and/or prevent access to food bytargeted beneficiaries. It also made recommendations toenhance the effectiveness of food assistance in Kenya.MethodologyThe TI study was conducted through desk research, keyinformant interviews in Nairobi and the Arid and SemiArid Lands (ASALs), and also focus group discussionswith communities receiving food assistance in Wajir, WestPokot and Turkana counties. It was carried out betweenSeptember and December 2011. The study was conductedwith the close cooperation of key actors in the sector,namely the Government of Kenya, the United Nations, aswell as humanitarian and donor organisations.Key Findings1. In-kind food aid is the most susceptible to corruptionThe study sought to establish the risks facing differentfood assistance instruments in Kenya—namely generalfood aid (in-kind), cash transfers and voucher programmes.The vast majority of respondents perceived in-kind food9 http://www.transparency.org/files/content/pressrelease/2012_TIKenya_FoodAssistanceIntegrityStudy.pdfaid distribution as attracting the highest level of risk interms of achieving an effective, efficient, accountable andtransparent response. Food aid was also considered to bemore prone to risks than other ‘in-kind’ distributions, largelydue to its scale and the weaknesses in its transparency andaccountability mechanisms. For example food aid can bediverted physically through transport and storage, anddiverted indirectly through the manipulation of targetingand registration. The cash transfer programmes undertakenin Kenya were perceived as being less prone to corruption,due to the strong accountability systems in place and thereliance on electronic disbursement channels.2. The politicisation of food assistanceThe study noted that there was evidence that politicalleaders, local elites and local relief committees influencethe targeting and selection of beneficiaries, which raisesquestions about fairness. With regard to personnelrecruitment, concerns were raised about internal pressuresand political interferences towards employing staff fromcertain communities. There were also risks and challengesin the transportation of food aid, partly due to politicalinfluence in procuring the trucking companies, andtransportation costs not being adequately resourced by theGovernment thus increasing the likelihood of food rationsbeing looted and sold, or both, as a form of payment.3. Failure to respond to early warning signalsThe lack of response to early warning signals led to a late,rushed, and politically pressured response in Kenya. Someorganisations struggled to put strong procedures in place inthe limited time available for scaling up of their operations.This heightened risks of corruption—especially, but notlimited to, the recruitment and procurement of goods andservices—thus compromising the quality and effectivenessof their response.4. Weak coordination processes and policiesAnother challenge to transparent and accountableresponses was the complicated aid architecture andweak policy oversight in Kenya. The current disastermanagement and food aid structures—with multiple actorsand differing responsibilities—contributed to weakenedresponsibility and accountability mechanisms. There was aweak understanding as to “who is doing what and where”,increasing the risk of interventions not prioritising the mostneedy areas, or duplicating assistance. 105. Poor communication and information flowThis was also highlighted as a main gap, includinginadequate information on the management of thestrategic grain reserves, as well as poor communicationon forecasts of significant pipeline breaks and fooddistribution problems. A general concern is that withoutclear information on the number of actors involved, howmuch food is intended, the timeframe for receiving it, andthe responsibilities of the various actors in the distributionchain, the opportunities for diversion of food away from itsintended beneficiaries become bigger.6. Participation and accountability to beneficiariesThe study found that there are now important investmentsin beneficiary accountability mechanisms in the ASALs.These systems are not only improving programming—byproviding more transparent and accountable systems tocapture concerns of beneficiaries—but can also offer abroader range of possibilities for communities to exercisetheir rights and entitlements. There are now more creativeand innovative approaches with longer-term objectivesand a means of coordinating with other assistanceproviders (as opposed to complaints boxes or one-off postdistribution monitoring exercises), which create greaterlearning between organisations and improved ownershipamong a wide range of community stakeholders.Key recommendations from the study1. All service providers in food aid should carry out a jointanalysis of corruption-related risks regarding differentfood assistance instruments (in-kind, voucher andcash transfers), and identify mitigation measures andprocesses for joint monitoring of their food assistanceprogrammes.2. Non-governmental humanitarian organisationsshould strengthen their preparedness for scaling upinterventions, and for addressing corruption riskswith partners in advance of emergency responses. Inparticular this should include supporting better systemsfor surge capacity of contracted staff, monitoringprogrammes to increase oversight, and buildingcapacities to scale-up other aspects of programmesupport. The study also calls for better coordination ofbeneficiaries’ complaint and accountability processesto support communities in reporting diversion andmalpractices in humanitarian assistance. This will helpavoid multiple reporting structures for beneficiariesand enhance community ownership.3. The Government of Kenya should embrace the letter10 It is important to note that important reforms and policies have recently been enacted in areasof governance, ASAL development and drought management, which should lead to improvementsin coordination at the central and district/ county levels in the future.and spirit of ‘the right to information,’ as espoused inthe Constitution of Kenya (2010), in carrying out foodassistance programmes. It should adopt a proactivestance by providing more regular, accurate andtimely information to the public on the responseeffort; the resources raised and disbursed; the foodallocations; and the delays and changes in rations. Itis also imperative that the government evaluates itsresponse to the 2011 drought, to establish a baselineof performance measures, and to share lessons learnedto improve future responses.4. Donor agencies should promote transparent reportingof corruption cases and related challenges by partnerorganisations, and increase resource investmentsfor field monitoring, downward accountabilitymechanisms, and forensic audits.Next StepsIn the coming two years Transparency International Kenyais committed to continue its work with its humanitarianaid partners, including the Government of Kenya, theKenya Red Cross Society, UN agencies, NGOs, developmentpartners and beneficiaries of humanitarian aid in the ASALregions. The second phase of the programme is to buildon the key findings and recommendations of the study,structured around its three main components: advocacy,capacity building and community empowerment.A national advocacy strategy, as well as three specificcounty advocacy strategies, will be drafted in cooperationwith humanitarian partners. This will prioritise the advocacyfocus at the national level and in Wajir, West Pokot andTurkana, and seek synergies, alliances and joint tacticsamong different stakeholders.Capacity building and best practices exchange workshops,for humanitarian aid and government employees, will beconducted in the three counties in order to raise awarenessof the risk of corruption in the implementation of aidprogrammes, as well as to propose mitigation measures.This will also be an opportunity for different stakeholders toshare their experiences and tools to enhance programmingaccountability mechanisms.Finally, TI Kenya will work in partnership with local partnersto raise beneficiaries’ awareness on identified corruptionrisks, and to build their capacity to monitor aid and basicservices projects implemented in their communities.Social auditors will be trained within communities to holdservice providers accountable, and to report suspectedcases of corruption. TI Kenya will also pilot—together withhumanitarian partners, district/county authorities andrelevant institutions—integrated feedback mechanismsfor enhancing effective, timely and adequate responses tobeneficiaries. This will take place in selected sub locationsin Wajir, West Pokot and Turkana Counties.For further information please contact: nseris@tikenya.org

20 21Building ResilientLivelihoodsProgrammePracticeImproving Livestock Assets in Karamoja and Pokot through IncreasingCommunication, Coordination and Budgeting for Animal HealthLisa Baumgartner, Drought Preparedness Consortium Coordinator – Dan Church Aid, UgandaWhen appropriately supported the pastoral production systems in the dryland areas of Karamoja (Uganda) and Pokot (Kenya)can be resilient to disasters, such as drought, and can contribute significantly to livelihoods in the region. This article introducesa set of initiatives that have focused on animal health as a key determinant of resilience.Animal health interventions build resilience and strengthen livelihoodsIt is estimated that 80% of households own livestock in theKaramoja sub-region of Uganda, and that this representsapproximately 20% of the national cattle herd, 16% of thegoats, 50% of the sheep, 90% of the donkeys and almostall of the camels. It has been calculated that Karamoja, andthe 2.4% of Uganda’s population that lives there, producesclose to 20% of Uganda’s livestock output by value. 11 TheKaramoja region also acts as a conduit for cattle movementsfrom Kenya and Sudan into the rest of Uganda. Howeverthese movements can also bring disease and thereforethe region needs to be targeted for disease controlinterventions to prevent their spread into other parts ofUganda and beyond. With livestock from Karamoja playingsuch a central role in the livelihoods of the region and thenational economy, improved animal health is a necessity forthe region to develop, and for households to become moreresilient and prepared for the onset of disasters. Access toanimal health services, skilled veterinary staff, and timelyand effective livestock disease surveillance are importantcomponents for improved animal health.A Dan Church Aid (DCA) led Consortium 12 has undertakenthree initiatives that underscore the vital role that animalhealth plays in the Karamoja region. These initiatives arethe Quarterly Information Sharing and Advocacy Meetings11 All statistics in this paragraph are taken from: Behnke, Roy & Nakirya, Margaret, 2012. OdessaCentre & Uganda Bureau of Statistics. The Contribution of Livestock to the Ugandan Economy.12 The DCA Consortium is made up of C&D, ACTED, and Caritas Moroto. It has been operatingin Karamoja and Pokot since 2007.on Animal Health, 13 the creation of a Cross-Border AnimalHealth Committee, 14 and advocacy with the Ministry forAgriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries (MAAIF) formainstreaming budgets for these activities. The Institutefor International Co-operation and Development (C&D)implements the first activity, the second activity isimplemented by ACTED in conjunction with FAO, while thethird activity is implemented by C&D and DCA.The first two initiatives are similar in that they both focuson improving communication and information sharing/dissemination between and within governments (nationaland local), research institutions, academic institutionsand veterinary professionals. Through this increase inknowledge exchange and coordination, the activitiesare contributing to a wider body of knowledge that isproviding evidence for, and raising awareness about, theimportance of increasing government spending on animalhealth in Karamoja.Quarterly Information Sharing and Advocacy MeetingsOne of C&D’s main activities surrounding animal healthin Karamoja has been to build the capacity of the DistrictVeterinary Officers (DVOs) to undertake livestock diseasesurveillance (LDS) in the region. With the support of theKaramoja Veterinary Laboratory (also run by C&D andsupported with ECHO funds), C&D and DVOs were able13 Funded by ECHO14 Funded by ECHO and the EUC&Dto collect, test and analyse 5,065 samples from animals in2011. The information generated from such exercises iscrucial for ensuring early detection and control of animaldiseases, thereby facilitating the planning of appropriateinterventions and minimising potential negative impactson national pastoral economies, food security and trade.To ensure that the data collected could be discussed anddisseminated to all relevant stakeholders, C&D begancarrying out Quarterly Information Sharing and AdvocacyMeetings. These meetings brought together DistrictVeterinary Officers, District (human) Health Officers, districtChief Administrative Officers and political leaders from thedistricts, as well as representatives from MAAIF, the UgandaVeterinary Association (UVA), the National AgriculturalResearch Organisation (NARO), Makerere University Schoolof Veterinary Medicine, FAO, the Karamoja LivelihoodsProgramme (KALIP), the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM),the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), andother actors concerned with animal health.In addition to the dissemination of livestock diseasesurveillance information to stakeholders, these eventsprovided excellent forums for the exchange of ideas and thepromotion of awareness about livestock in Karamoja. Themeetings enabled a wide range of actors to recognise thesignificance of veterinary services and disease surveillancein the livelihoods of the Karimojong people. Substantialtime was devoted to debating and lobbying with politicalleaders on issues related to regional animal health andlivestock development. Many participants praised theseevents as innovative and successful, for their ability tobring together different players in the animal health andproduction sectors, for sharing information with politicalleaders, and for properly informing development andcontingency planning. Through these meetings the manystakeholders in animal health in Uganda are now betterinformed about the situation in Karamoja, and are able toplan, act and respond in more effective ways.Cross-Border Animal Health CommitteeThe Cross-Border Animal Health Committee grew out ofan initial meeting that was held in Amudat District (whichborders Kenya) in August 2011. The meeting was organizedby ACTED with support from FAO, and brought togetherDVOs from both sides of the Uganda-Kenya border todiscuss how to improve animal health through cross-borderactivities and a shared strategy. This first meeting confirmedinterest from both sides of the border in increasing crossborderactivities, planning and action. Further meetingswere held in Nairobi and Kampala, in September andNovember 2011 respectively, with ACTED and FAO support.These meeting evolved into a broader and more inclusivegroup of participants: Not only were DVOs from Karamoja,West Pokot and Turkana districts involved, but nationalgovernment actors were also present - representedthrough MAAIF in Uganda and the Ministry of LivestockDevelopment in Kenya. The meetings reconfirmed at thenational level the importance of cross-border animal healthcooperation, and led to the commitment to create a Cross-Border Animal Health Committee to focus, and strategicallydirect, communication and action on cross-border animalhealth issues at the Uganda-Kenya border.The most recent meeting was held in Kampala in August2012, and focused on finalizing a Memorandum ofUnderstanding between the Ugandan and KenyanGovernments to officially create a Cross-Border AnimalHealth Committee. The creation of this committee is thefirst step in dramatically improving the communicationbetween livestock authorities, and it is hoped it will leadto improved coordination and response to trans-boundaryanimal diseases. The MoU recognizes that both nationalpolicies and regional strategies and frameworks (includingthose supported by AU-IBAR, IGAD, EAC) mandatecommunication and coordination on cross-borderlivestock issues. There is great potential for this Committeeto improve the animal health conditions at the border andbetween countries, as well as positively impact security andlivestock trade in the region. The MoU is slated to be signedin the first half of 2013 and will mark a major achievement,committing to the animal health needs of the populationsin Karamoja, Pokot and Turkana.Animal Health Budgeting AdvocacyThe final initiative concerns increasing financial supportto animal health interventions in Karamoja. Currentlythe majority of the Livestock Disease Surveillance andlaboratory activities in the region are reliant on donorfunds. As livestock is central to the livelihoods of theKaramoja population, and has the power to be a substantialcontributor to Uganda’s GDP, having healthy livestockpopulations is critical to national economic growth. Inresponse, DCA and C&D are working with the MAAIF toensure that the financial and human resources for animalhealth, specifically for the Karamoja region, are increasedwithin the Ministry. If sustained advocacy initiatives aresuccessful, it is hoped that the Government of Ugandawill take on funding and effectively managing the animalhealth needs in Karamoja.In summary, these three initiatives are all building upon thetechnical disease surveillance and laboratory work to gofurther, and to increase and improve the communication,coordination and action on animal health issues bothwithin Uganda and between Uganda and Kenya. Healthylivestock populations are part and parcel of productive,well developed communities, and these initiatives arecontributing to just that.For more information contact: liba@dca.dk

22 23Building ResilientLivelihoodsProgrammePracticeEcosystem Recovery and Climate Change Adaptation throughCommunity Based Resource Management - Ga’an Libah, SomalilandThe loss of a highland ecosystemThe Ga’an Libah highland area of central Somaliland wasrenowned for its juniper forests, bountiful wildlife, andspectacular scenery. Strategically wedged between thethree main urban centres of Hargeisa, Berbera and Burao,Ga’an Libah reaches an altitude of 1718m. The ecosystem ofthe highland plateau was maintained by moisture broughtfrom heavy mists and lengthy periods of fog that occurredmostly during the cold season. The Somali communitiesthat lived in this region followed a sustainable lifestyle:pastoralists and agro-pastoralists practiced seasonalmobility and livestock production in harmony with theenvironment and available resources, and followedtraditional use rights under tribal controls. The mountainregion was important not only to its highland communities,but also to those living in the nearby lowlands to thenorth and south, where more than a dozen villages andsettlements depended on the seasonal water coursesoriginating from the mountain. Ga’an Libah was firstrecognized as an ecologically important zone by the Britishcolonial administration in the 1950s. The administrationinitiated soil and water conservation, grazing management,forest protection and reforestation work.The highland area began to suffer with the outbreakof civil war in Somalia in 1988. As conflict engulfed theregion the resource management system (both traditionaland government) that had been in place for decades,disintegrated. Indiscriminate cutting of mountain treesresulted in the thinning of tree cover, grazing landbecame overused, and the environment became severelydamaged. The transhumance of pastoralists, which inthe past had made possible the resting of grazing land,now no longer took place. These negative effects wereworsened by the impact of increases in temperatures andreduced precipitation: When the rains did arrive, the lackGeno Teofilo, Oxfam SomaliaA resource management intervention in Somaliland has rescued a valuable highland ecosystem and seems to have reestablishedthe community’s resilience to drought. This article demonstrates how community-based rehabilitation, with only amodest budget, can make a significant impact.Although once fertile land, Ga’an Libah became increasingly arid and barren.Candlelightof vegetation resulted in an increase in run-off and soilerosion.With the ending of the civil war the communities who hadbeen displaced by the conflict returned to Ga’an Libah.They found the remaining trees and grasslands to beovergrazed by the herds of the returning pastoralists, andthose of new families. Private enclosures on the formerlyopen rangeland in the areas surrounding the mountainresulted in more grazing pressure on the mountainarea itself. With fodder becoming scarce, herds becameemaciated, and herd sizes declined, resulting in a loss ofincome and livelihoods. As a new coping strategy somehouseholds turned to harvesting the wood of the Acaciatrees for charcoal, resulting in further reduction of watereffectiveness, escalation of soil erosion, gully formationand increased desertification on the mountain. This oncethriving ecosystem saw drastic environmental degradationand the loss of its herds of natural wildlife.Environmental recoveryAn assessment of the mountain, commissioned by theWorld Conservation Union (IUCN) in 2000, comprehensivelyreported on the solutions needed to revive Ga’an Libah’senvironment. The report highlighted the need for soilerosion control measures through the construction ofbunds, and for stone terracing to minimize water runoffand increase the moisture regime. The IUCN report alsoidentified the need to revive the grazing managementsystem that had existed previously—when pastoralists hadleft grazing land to recover during the rainy season andonly reopened it during the dry season. The IUCN study laidthe groundwork for discussions with the local people andthe administration so as to empower them to manage themountain’s natural resources more effectively.In 2001 Oxfam Novib and Candlelight recognized boththe ecological and economic importance of the mountain,and that the community there was suffering. A longterminitiative was designed to mitigate the continuingenvironmental degradation of this important ecosystem. Itwould also improve the socio-economic wellbeing of thelocal community by enhancing the ecological sustainabilityof the natural resource base for resource-dependentproduction systems.Oxfam Novib and Candlelight used the IUCNrecommendations as the basis for a participatory,community–based, resource management intervention.Oxfam Novib supplied the funding, along with training andoversight; and as the implementing partner Candlelightwas in charge of social mobilization and rehabilitationactivities—working directly with the community.Candlelight began by meeting with the community eldersand discussing programme implementation. A field officewas established in the community to facilitate coordination.With Candlelight’s supervision and guidance the majorityof the rehabilitation work was done by members of thecommunity.Rehabilitation activities and their impactThe Ga’an Libah intervention area covers approximately240 km2, and incorporates the mist forest (which hasbeen receding to the northwest) where higher mist levelsare still present during the cold season. Towards theeastern side of the mountain are open grazing lands. Thehighland plateau’s northern side is characterized by rockycliffs, which fall abruptly towards the coast. The massif isuplifted limestone. The rehabilitation activities carried outin the area include: land area coverage demarcation, dirtberm (mound) construction, stone terracing, reforestation,and the creation of a camp for forest guards. A nurserywith indigenous plants and trees has also been createdto aid the reforestation efforts. As the programme hascontinued, the role of food for work (FFW) has also becomean important component—with the added benefit offilling food insecurity gaps. The programme has acted asa catalyst for further environmental rehabilitation throughsoil and water conservation activities.The resource management programme was designed asa long-term project, but it was not long before positiveenvironmental changes became noticeable. After thecommunity constructed dirt berms and stone terraces,runoff from the rains quickly built up sufficient topsoil. Afteronly two rainy seasons there was already new vegetationgrowing along the lines of the terraces and berms. As theseasons went on, additional soil built up on the terracesand berms leading to increased vegetation. The grasseswere thickened with bushes, and trees and shrubs beganto thrive again—particularly the East Africa Pencil tree(Juniperus procera), Arrow Poison Tree (Acokantheraschimperi) and Hopbush (Dodonaea viscose).The construction of terraces was expanded to continuefurther down the mountain. Livestock began to benefit fromthe improved grazing land. It is particularly notable that therecent droughts have had far less effect on the beneficiarycommunities, in comparison to other neighbouringcommunities who have not had the benefits of the project.With improved grazing leading to increased livestock bodyweight, the target community has benefitted from sellingtheir animals at better prices. Many households can nowafford to send their children to school. The water levels ofthe shallow wells on the mountain slopes have also risen.Water effectiveness has also increased as a result of thenatural barriers contributing to decreased water runoff,and increased water infiltration.Ga’an Libah is now seen to be thriving once again. Wherethe plateau used to be nearly bare, the vegetation is nowthick. Even wildlife have returned to the mountain, withcheetahs, gazelles, kudu, baboons, many bird species, andother wildlife returning to the ecosystem. For the localSomali communities around Ga’an Libah, pastoralismhas once again become profitable, and with regeneratedland now available for grazing, the herds of camels, cattle,sheep and goats have multiplied. Customary grazingmanagement has also been reintroduced.Scaling upGa’an Libah is only one community, but much of Somalilandand Somalia have similar ecosystems and similarenvironmental problems. Berm and terrace construction,reforestation, and community-based conservation are lowcost interventions, but they can provide sustainable andeffective solutions to the environmental difficulties thatface Somaliland and Somalia. The project’s most recentthree-year budget totalled the relatively modest amount of$460,000.Cyclical droughts are becoming more frequent andharder hitting than before. The common emergency reliefresponses adopted by development organizations areoften expensive and unsustainable, although necessary insome circumstances. This project, however, has proven thatcommunities with minimal support can build their ownresilience to climate change and the effects of drought.The initiative could easily be replicated elsewhere in thecountry, where communities are bearing the brunt ofthe combined effects of environmental degradation andclimate change. Environmental recovery programmesusing these methods have the potential to achieve lowcost, high impact benefits for both the environment, andfor the local communities that are dependent on it.For further information contact: Geno.Teofilo@oxfamnovib.or.ke

24 25Building ResilientLivelihoodsProgrammePracticeImproving Livestock Markets in Northern KenyaIn the ASALs of northern Kenya there are significantbarriers and obstacles to improving household income,due to climatic conditions, disabling government policies,poor services, and low terms of trade between livestockproducts and staple foods. Despite these barriers, asignificant proportion of those living in the ASALs retainvaluable and profitable assets—in the form of livestock.Pastoral communities in northern Kenya face severechallenges in the marketing of their livestock however,including long distances and poor roads in reachingmarketing infrastructure, lack of organized market days,limited connections between traders and livestock owners,and poor market awareness. FH Kenya’s livestock marketinginitiatives in Marsabit and Isiolo counties are seeking toaddress these issues through a set of key componentsthat together will contribute to greater sustainability andefficiency of the marketing system.Market Locations and InfrastructureAbandoned and dilapidated livestock markets are acommon sight across the ASALs. This is due to a varietyof factors including poor placement decisions, weak andcorrupt maintenance revenue collection systems thathave an impact on infrastructure, lack of ownership, andinsecurity.Location - It is critical that decisions on market constructionor rehabilitation take into account livestock trade routes—ensuring that markets are situated in viable locations thatare accessible to both producers and traders all year round.Jeff Arensen, Food for the Hungry, KenyaFH Kenya’s pastoralist livelihoods strategy is founded on the belief that pastoralism is a viable and productive way of life innorthern Kenya. The organisation seeks to strengthen livelihoods, and increase resilience, through a focus on improved livestockproductivity and improved marketing. This article explains FH Kenya’s progress towards creating more sustainable and effectivelivestock markets.The livestock market at KorrJeff Arensen/FHEnsuring that there is adequate demand, from both tradersand producers, for a market in a certain location is alsoessential. Critical location factors for producers include: themarket being within a reasonable trekking distance; the sitebeing accessible without infringing on other rangelands;and accessible livestock water sources are nearby. The mainfactor for traders is a road that can accommodate trucks.In addition, market placement must take into account thelocations of other markets to ensure they do not undermineeach other.Infrastructure - The key infrastructure components of asuccessful market include:• Sales yards: confined area within the market whereanimals are auctioned;• Loading ramp: sloping incline used to load animals toa carrier/lorry;• Sanitation: availability of toilets within the markets forpeople. Also a clean market environment – clean salesyards and ramps;• Water: availability of a reliable water source near themarket;• Shade: resting area for people and livestock;• Crushes: facilities for examining or isolating sickanimals.Key InstitutionsFH Kenya does not solely focus on upgrading andmaintaining market infrastructure as this would beunsustainable, but instead it utilises a holistic approachthat also strengthens key institutions and actors within themarket system.Livestock Market Management CommitteesCommunity participation is of primary importance inensuring that markets are managed efficiently and in asustainable manner. FH Kenya has been supporting thecreation of Livestock Market Management Committees(LMMCs), which are comprised of communityrepresentatives responsible for managing their markets.The first step is a meeting held with local leaders andmembers of registered groups (CBOs and other communitygroups) in the target area. The objective of the meeting isto introduce the project, assess the need for establishingor rehabilitating the market infrastructure, determine therole of the community in managing the livestock market,and assess the risks—such as environmental and conflictissues that may arise as a result of establishing a marketwithin the community. Then, through a participatoryprocess involving local community leaders, elders, youth,women and line ministry representatives, the role of themanagement committee and its members are discussed.Approximately 10-12 community members are thenselected to be members of an LMMC.The general selection criteria of LMMC members are asfollows:• Must be a member of an existing registered groupwith an interest in livestock marketing; 15• Must be a livestock owner living in the catchment area;• Must possess understanding of the dynamics of thearea and livestock marketing;• Must be mature and command respect in community;• Must have the ability to solve conflict withincommunities.In order to ensure the LMMC is inclusive, and represents arange of stakeholders, the following minimum compositionis required:• 2 livestock traders;• 1 community-based animal health worker (CBAHW);• 1 peace committee member;• 1 environmental management committee member;• 2 representatives of a registered women’s group;• 2 livestock producers.The composition represents different pastoral livelihoodgroups, or people involved in activities related to livestockproduction and markets. Traders and producers representthe interests of their groups in the marketing process.CBAHWs are important in taking care of contagious andother trade-sensitive diseases that arrive with the livestock,and for promptly alerting veterinary authorities. The peacecommittee members ensure safety of both traders andproducers in the market by working closely with securityorgans. Environmental management committee membersmonitor natural resource usage around the market area—ensuring that rangelands and water sources are not over-15 A member from a registered group will bring more experience to the LMMCs, who must alsoregister with the social services department to meet the legal requirement for LMMCs.used and advise on trekking routes to the market. Women’sgroup representatives are crucial due to the increasing roleof women in livestock marketing.Once the LMMC is selected their capacity on marketmanagement is built up through a series of trainingworkshops. The training covers group dynamics, recordkeeping (including number and type of animals sold,market fees collected), market promotion, and conflictresolution. The LMMC is then responsible for setting marketdays and promoting market awareness in the surroundingcommunities, recording sales data, monitoring andsharing market prices to avoid exploitation of livestockkeepers, promoting resolution of disputes, and overseeingmaintenance of market infrastructure.Co-management modelFH Kenya is currently strengthening the sustainabilityof the LMMC approach by promoting and piloting a comanagementmodel in two markets in Marsabit County.Here, the LMMCs and County Councils have developed arevenue sharing plan under which revenue (taxes) collectedfrom the market is shared between the LMMC and theCounty Council. The LMMC splits their portion of revenuebetween community development projects, marketmaintenance, and incentive payments to the committeemembers for their services.The co-management model promotes the sustainabilityof markets and ensures improved management as thecommunities and committee members are incentivizedto ensure that the market is run efficiently; and that taxcollection and utilisation are transparent and benefit theentire community. Community ownership and participationmakes it less likely that people will avoid markets tomake informal sales, and the existence and utilizationof well organised and managed markets increases salesopportunities—benefiting both producers and traders.An initial challenge with the model is getting acceptancewithin local government to share revenue with thecommittees. The primary incentive for County Councils toagree to the co-management model is the potential foran increase in revenue, even though it is shared with theLMMCs and communities. By involving the LMMC in revenuecollection, accountability and monitoring is strengthened,thereby increasing total revenue that benefits both thecounty council and the community living in the area ofthe market. The model is already being expanded as IsioloCounty has recently begun piloting the approach in twomarkets, and the United Nations Food and AgriculturalOrganization is promoting it across other ASAL areas.

26 27Building ResilientLivelihoodsProgrammePracticeTradersTraders range from small and localised to large andexternal, and play a critical and influential role in markets.The development of any new market must take intoaccount the types of traders that will most likely engagein the market and ensure they are consulted and includedin the market development process. In markets where onlya few traders are present, demand for livestock is low, andmonopolistic practices are common—reducing the pricesthat producers receive for their livestock. FH Kenya has beenaddressing this issue by introducing external traders tomarkets, resulting in increased competition and expandingopportunities for producers to make more sales. Of criticalimportance to traders is reliability and consistency within amarket. Due to the long distances that many traders musttravel to satellite markets in rural areas, it is paramount thatthey have confidence that a market will function efficientlyand consistently with an adequate supply of livestock.FH Kenya helps instil this confidence through exchangevisits, where traders establish relationships with LMMCsand producers, and are able to witness the existence of anestablished market with adequate infrastructure.Financial institutionsAnother critical issue that limits the scale of livestockmarketing in the ASALs is access to financial capital. Thelimited presence of financial institutions, lack of financialproducts suited to livestock traders’ needs, high interestrates, and lack of knowledge of financial services, have allhistorically contributed to minimal interaction and reducedopportunities to enhance livestock trade. FH Kenya hasbeen linking livestock traders to financial services andcapital through a partnership with Equity Bank, providinglivestock related loans through a unique guarantee fundmechanism. The mechanism enables livestock traders toaccess loans at a low interest rate of 13% per annum, asthe fund provides a 25% guarantee against any defaults onloans taken under the scheme. FH Kenya has successfullypiloted this guarantee fund with the bank in MarsabitDistrict over the past two years with $240,000 disbursedthrough loans, and a repayment rate of 99%. Loan servicesare also coupled with financial training for traders, whichis a key component in the high repayment rate. Loans areprimarily used for livestock purchase and transport to salespoints (terminal markets, primary markets).Table 1: Loans given via Equity Bank 2010-2012Total guarantee fund (deposit) $27,380.95Total disbursements through May 2012 $240,619.05Performing balance through May 2012 $78,771.56Non-performing $880.17Total loans 73Average loan size $2,100Involvement of other key actorsThere are also a series of other actors that influence andcontribute to a viable livestock marketing system, andit is important to involve them in market initiatives. Thefollowing list is not exhaustive and will be context specific:1. District livestock marketing councils - have the roleof lobbying and advocating on issues affecting livestockmarketing, pastoral communities and livestock. Theyconduct research, and provide livestock and marketinformation through livestock monitors placed in everymarket. They also play should also lead the developmentof market strategies, capacity building of pastoralistcommunities, and quality assurance of livestockproduce. The councils are local representatives of theKenya Livestock Marketing Council (KLMC), which is thenational coordinating body whose role is to oversee allmarketing activities in Kenya at a policy level. CountyCouncils provide livestock trading permits, allocate landand support physical planning for livestock markets, inaddition to maintaining and managing markets.2. The District Veterinary and District LivestockProduction Officers (under the Ministry of Livestock)- play key roles in livestock marketing, diseasesurveillance/control and issuing movement permits totraders.3. District Peace Committees and the provincialadministration - ensure/enforce security along stockroutes to attract livestock buyers and sellers.4. The Kenya Meat Commission (KMC) - is responsiblefor the major terminal market for all livestock and playsa critical role in the livestock value chain.Market UtilisationBy addressing the multi-dimensional components ofthe livestock market system, FH Kenya has witnessedencouraging results. Of significance were total sales worthover $2.2 million in nine markets in Marsabit and IsioloCounties during the drought affected year of 2011.Despite the increase in market activity however, thereis still a need for greater market utilisation. An FH Kenyacommissioned market study completed in 2011 16 revealedthat livestock sales are driven, mainly, by immediatespending needs, and not strategic destocking to takeadvantage of prices or off-take surplus stock. Producersperceive the market as a safety net for when they arein need. A more commercial mindset is found only withlarger sales volumes. The study also found that the onsetof drought does not necessarily play a role in the decisionto sell, and that the majority of pastoralists do not planthe sale of livestock to maximise their profits, but respondinstead to immediate cash requirements. This reluctanceto engage more extensively in livestock sales is tied tothe intrinsic role that livestock play in pastoral societiesas key holdings of wealth, prestige and influence. It also16 Clark, Ben; Kihoro, Ouma and van Binsbergen. FH Kenya: Livestock Markets Study. August2011.relates to traditional drought coping mechanisms in whichproducers with more livestock are able to cope better withshocks than those with fewer assets.Yet faced with the reality of cyclical droughts, andan increasing dependency on external humanitarianassistance, efforts are also needed to focus on pastoralistsutilising the key assets they have to strengthen theirresilience to shocks. Through community-based DRRprocesses, FH Kenya has recently begun facilitatingcommunity discussions on market utilisation. Sessionsinclude analysis of vulnerabilities and opportunities relatedto assets, and how structures and processes influencelivelihood strategies. Sessions enable participants toidentify the different roles that assets, and specificallylivestock, play in their lives as natural, financial and socialcapital. Contextualised tools provide opportunities forparticipants to explore the importance of livestock; theinherent vulnerabilities relate to not engaging with1,000,000800,000Revenue600,000400,000200,0006,792HulahulaCo-management will benefit the whole communitycommercial markets in a context of cyclical droughts. Theseprocesses are designed to act as a catalyst for participantsto start analysing their engagement in markets and whychange in traditional behaviour is necessary.The futureA significant lesson learned through FH Kenya’s livestockmarketing activities, is the long-term commitment that isrequired to develop and sustain viable marketing systems.Consistent capacity building and support to the variousmarket components is critical over a number of years, andshort-term initiatives are rarely successful. Developmentagencies and other actors involved in marketing systemsneed to ensure they can provide the required long-termsupport to ensure growth and sustainability, and designtheir strategies to accomplish this.For more information please contact: jarensen@fh.orgFigure 1: Total revenue by market in 2011386,968Jirime36,115Kalacha174,064KinnaKorrMarket55,489913,636Merille262,358Moyale103,427NorthHorr313,999SololoJeff Arensen/FH

28 29Building ResilientLivelihoodsResearchThe Cross Border Livestock Trade in Ethiopia and Somaliland- Benefits and ChallengesConisia Shumba - Livelihoods, Private Sector and Value Chains Advisor, Oxfam, SomalilandMustapha Mohammud - Senior Value Chain Advisor, Oxfam, EthiopiaThe cross-border livestock trade in the Horn of Africa is considerable, and governments in the region need to better understandand recognise its valuable contribution. It is important to local and regional economies and also crucial for food security—particularly in marginalised and drought-affected communities. This article, focused on Ethiopia and Somaliland, identifies themany challenges that the cross-border trade has to face.Livestock is the main household asset and a key productiveresource for pastoralist communities living in the borderareas of Ethiopia and Somaliland. Significant levels of crossborder livestock trade exist, but the trade is unsupportedand often actively blocked by governments on eitherside. This represents a lost opportunity for both theGovernments and the populations in the border areas.Part of the problem is that the governments focus ononly the undesirable consequences of cross-border trade:that it is untaxed; is a source of livestock disease; and thefree movement of people and goods are associated withsecurity threats. Most intra-regional livestock cross-bordertrade in the HoA is unrecorded, but estimates value itin excess of USD 60 million. However, only 10% of thiscommerce passes through the official trade channels. 17Recognizing this trade, and then gradually supporting it tobecome more organised with formal modes of exchange,will be crucial if the potential for cross border trade in theregion is to be realised.The Benefits of Cross-Border TradingVibrant livestock trading routeThe comprehensive Livestock Value Chain Analyses (LVCA),conducted in Ethiopia 18 and in Somaliland, 19 show thatlivestock trading is the main economic activity, is a criticalsource of livelihood for the pastoral Somali populations, andis an important link between the borderlands of Djibouti,Somaliland, Puntland and Ethiopia. The cross-borderlivestock trade through the Somali Region of Ethiopia intoSomaliland is one of the oldest and most vibrant crossborderlivestock trading systems in the Horn of Africa.Ethiopia’s Somali Region supplies approximately 60-70% ofthe livestock that is then exported from Somaliland to theMiddle East. Complex market arrangements and chains,involving a wide range of actors, have created a web ofcross-border trade relations that utilise clan affiliations. 20The pastoral livestock marketing in these border areasis said to be the largest movement of live animals tradedanywhere in the world. 2117 http://www.caadp.net/pdf/COMESA%20CAADP%20Policy%20Brief%202%20Cross%20Border%20Livestock%20Trade%20(2).pdf18 Ethiopia Livestock Value Chain analysis, Lante Development Consultancy PLC, 201119 Somaliland Livestock Value Chain Analysis, Muthee A, 201220 Umar 2007 Risk-taking for a Living; Devereux 2006 Vulnerable Livelihoods in Somali Region.21 Majid, 2010, Livestock trade in the Djibouti, Somali and Ethiopian border landsFigure 1: Traditional livestock trading routes (Djibouti,Berbera & Bosaso Corridors)Links to the Middle EastThe Ethiopia-Somaliland cross-border livestock trade flowsare significantly influenced by seasonal factors, that affectboth demand and supply. While livestock are exportedall year round, the most important seasonal factor is theannual Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia. Demandand prices hit their peak during the 70-day period betweenEid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha in the export markets, and alsoduring major religious festivals and holidays in the domesticmarkets. Prices are depressed during the driest period ofJilaal (January to March) because of low quality livestocksupply—due to scarcity of animal feed, consequent weightloss and poor body condition.Driving the Somali Region’s economyCross border livestock trading provides a livelihood formillions of inhabitants in Ethiopia’s Somali region, includingherders, traders, middlemen, and many other actors thatbenefit from the system. Women in particular are playingan increasing role. Its contribution can be seen in termsof the creation of direct jobs in the livestock marketingchain and in the indirect multiplier effects to other incomegenerating activities—such as merchandise trade, foodand beverages sales, transportation, hay making andanimal pen or enclosure rentals. This makes it one of thedrivers of regional economic diversification, savings andcapital accumulation, and a potentially significant longtermcontributor to the national economy.Crucial for food securityThe cross border livestock trade plays a significant role inensuring local food security, as almost all food items—especially cooking oil, wheat, pasta, rice, and sugar—areimported from the other side of the border with the profitsfrom livestock trading. The occasional border closuresresult in local shortages of key foodstuffs and majorprice rises. The food security benefits of the cross-borderlivestock trading system are of paramount importance, andresult from: [a] the higher purchasing power of livestockproducers through the income generated from favourableexport demand at higher prices; [b] the system beinginterconnected with the financing of cheaper food imports(because they are not taxed) which are then distributedlocally at reasonable market prices; and [c] householdincomes that are generated from cross-border livestocktrading and related activities being used directly for foodpurchases.An enabling environment for livestockThe key enabling environment factors for the Ethiopia-Somaliland cross-border live animal trade, and valuechain, are its proximity and access to niche markets (Arabcountries) and their preference for animals from the Horn. 22Other factors include a positive correlation between agood year and livestock prices; increased demand duringreligious festivals; and the fact that Ethiopia is a livestockproducing country endowed with huge livestock herds.Another factor is that there is increasing demand formilk as a result of accelerated urbanization, and womenusually have full control over milk sales. With 60% of themilk produced at household level now destined for sale,livestock is a key part of women’s economic growth.Figure 2: Ethiopia-Somaliland cross border livestockvalue chain22 Holleman 2002 The Socio-Economic Implications of the Livestock Ban in Somaliland, USAID;Umar 2007.The export market1. The Ethiopian five-year Growth and TransformationPlan (GTP) aims to increase annual meat exports from10 thousand metric tonnes achieved in 2009/2010, to111 thousand metric tonnes in 2014/2015.2. The domestic market provides an important outletfor women and poor producers who often supplyproducts that cannot be used for high value exportdue to quality, quantity and access constraints.3. The cross border trade to neighbouring countries(e.g. Djibouti or Somaliland) is more attractive forpastoralists living on the border, compared to parallelmarket prices in the domestic or official exportmarkets.4. The benefits from live animal export is high, butit carries high risk due to combination of sanitaryrequirements, lower competitiveness and changingdiplomatic relations with importing countries.5. On the basis of SPS requirements, meat exports aremore beneficial and less risky compared to live animalexports.Price differencesAysha communities in Ethiopia witnessed that domesticmarkets do not provide sufficient outlets for the saleof livestock and livestock products. This is becauseprices of livestock in the domestic market are muchlower than anywhere in Somaliland or Djibouti. Forexample, the price of sheep was 500 ETB in Dire Dawawhile it was 650 ETB in Dowele, or more than 900 ETBanywhere in Djibouti. Similarly, the price of sheep andbulls were 750 ETB and 4,230 ETB respectively in Jijigamarket, while the corresponding price in Hargeisawas 960 ETB and 7,650 ETB, respectively. After sellinglivestock for better prices, producers buy consumergoods and other necessities at much lower prices.Challenges and ConstraintsDespite its benefits, major market inefficiencies andchallenges exist in the cross-border trade. These include:high marketing transaction costs; high transport costs;loss of weight and condition by animals on long trekkingroutes; lack of price transparency among most marketbrokers; minimal market infrastructure; and uneven andinadequate market information. The vital contributionof the cross-border livestock trade to the livelihoods ofperipheral societies is an area of tragic neglect in Ethiopia’snational strategic schemes on food security and povertyreduction. In order to benefit from this vast trade, Ethiopianeeds to address a number of challenges.Lack of information: The limited access to market informationat the local level, and the lack of infrastructure, are the majorconstraints for pastoralists seeking to access major marketsand urban centres—where the demand for livestockproducts is growing fast. The poor and uneven access to

30 31Building ResilientLivelihoodsResearchmarket information also remains a major constraint forother livestock market actors: In order to make timely andwell-informed decisions, both producers and sellers needaccess to a wide range of market information—includingup to date prices, sales volumes, disease status and thelevels of national and international demand. The marketinformation that currently exists is not readily availableto poor producers in the pastoralist areas. Exportersin Berbera and Djibouti port, being sources of marketinformation, exploit the market information asymmetry byonly transmitting their requirements to suppliers in a waythat benefits them the most. 23Restrictions on trading: Trade restrictions, due to stringentlivestock trading standards and the prevalence of transboundarydiseases, are another major constraint tointernational trade. Any movement of goods or livestockacross the Ethiopian border is considered ‘contraband’,unless it is accompanied by official paperwork.Engagement in cross border livestock or consumer goodstrade within a 15kms radius of the Ethiopian border shouldlead to confiscations and prosecution. This restrictive tradeenvironment encourages illegal cross-border trading,as reflected in the fact that only about 10% of the USD60million cross-border trade goes through the legal tradechannels.Marketing Transaction CostsExporting livestock to either Djibouti or Somalilandrequires multiple steps in Ethiopia:1. An export license must be obtained from regionalgovernments.2. A letter of credit (LC) or cash deposit of an equivalentamount in hard currency is needed. Public andprivate banks have opened banks at Tog Wachaleto facilitate livestock export. (Commercial Bank ofEthiopia, Nib International bank, Wegagen Bank andAwash International) Exporters need to start bulkinglivestock destined for export after they acquire abank deposit.3. The period of the Bank Permit expires after only onemonth. Livestock traders complain that this is tooshort to fulfil all the export requirements. As a result,some traders fail to fulfil their shipment requirementsbefore the due date.4. The advance payment system is operational inthe legal cross-border trade. The exporter has topay money before his livestock exports - 500 USDadvance payment is required per camel, 450 USD forcattle, and 50 USD for sheep or goats.Lack of reliable information for policy makers: The absenceof accurate livestock data, or the incomplete coverage ofpastoral areas, is a common feature in Ethiopian nationalagricultural surveys. Lack of commitment from the national23 Ethiopia Livestock Value Chain analysis; Lante Development Consultancy PLC, 2011authorities in maintaining an up-to-date livestock database,and unsympathetic attitudes of the political authoritiestowards informal cross-border trading operations, hasa mutually reinforcing and negative impact. Withoutaccurate data on the volume or value of cross-border trade(informal and formal), policy makers will overlook majorareas of economic development potential, and makethe wrong policies. Lack of financial and business servicessupport: The most important services that benefit poorlivestock producers are: access to non-collateral credit;the availability of veterinary services; access to marketinformation; and improved capacity in adaptive herdmanagement. Women and poor households have limitedaccess to traditional and clan-based loan arrangementsdue to their lower social position and status. Access to loanswould allow them to purchase livestock, access veterinaryservices, buy young animals for pre-market fattening, andalso avoid the loss from preventable livestock diseases. Theabsence of strong formal micro-credit support in the areaof cross-border livestock trading is also part of the centralauthorities’ perception of the “illegality” of this sector. Smalltraders, and women’s groups in particular, repeatedlyexpress the crucial need for support in the form of microcredit.One-way flow of livestock and benefits: The flow of livestock inthe cross border trade between Ethiopia and its neighboursis largely one way, with Ethiopia the major supplier oflive cattle, camels and shoats to Djibouti and Somaliland.The Ethiopian livestock that crosses these countries istransacted illegally, without the use of hard currency, but isestimated at between US$250 million and US$300 millionper year 24 , which means these animals are imported withno foreign payments to the Ethiopian government. Insteadthey generate local and foreign revenue as the livestock reexportsin other countries.Inertia: Ethiopia shares a very long border with Djiboutiand Somaliland/Somalia, and borderland communitiesoperate as one ecological/economic unit. The livestocktrade forms an economic system that underpins thesocial and political relations between Ethiopia, Djibouti,the Somaliland Republic and the state of Puntland; andit follows that Ethiopian efforts to re-direct the livestocktrade to the domestic market in the borderlands is notonly economically unfeasible but will have other negativeimpacts. The Somali region of Ethiopia is not well linked tothe central markets of Ethiopia, and so the domestic marketwould not be an alternative outlet for Somali livestock.The Way ForwardExperience from southern Ethiopia shows that marketstability, access to consumer goods, and to some extentprices—rather than clan affiliation or border control—candetermine the direction of livestock trade. 25 The Ethiopia-24 SPS-LMM, 2009 (Ethiopian Sanitary and Phytosanitary Livestock and Meat MarketingProgram)25 Ethiopia Livestock Value Chain analysis; Lante Development Consultancy PLC, 2011Somaliland milk value chain map below clearly showsthat demand-pull determines the direction of the flow oflivestock and livestock products like milk. The cross-bordervalue chain analysis and market mapping has clarified thatthe demand-pull at the consumer level creates the pullof livestock from the producer areas. Since Somaliland islinked to the external or export markets through Berberaand Bosaso ports, this creates and locates the demandcentre in Somaliland for the livestock and livestock productsfrom Ethiopia. It is estimated that 60% of both livestockand livestock products from Ethiopia cross the border intoSomaliland.Figure 3: Ethiopia-Somaliland Milk Value Chain MapLivestock trading is critical to livelihoodsThe demand for livestock and livestock products fromboth domestic and international markets is increasing, butthe scale of the poverty in pastoral areas demands thatpastoralists need to be assisted to respond to this demand.Poor women and men in particular need to be targetedthrough value chain and value-added livestock productionand marketing. Live animals and camel milk can providehigh economic returns for women, and their increasedincome can have a positive change, leading them intomore prominent leadership roles in their communities. Thevalue added sector has the potential to give a significantproportion of the pastoralist population more viablelivelihoods, and benefit the economy as a whole.Infrastructure development can be used to intervenedirectly on behalf of those afflicted by poverty. Governmentauthorities and long-term development actorsneed to improve services in pastoral areasand jointly develop basic livestock marketcentres, which are equipped with a fence,separate compartments for shoats, cattle andcamels, loading ramps, feeding and wateringtroughs and shaded areas. In developingcountries inadequate infrastructure serviceshave negative impacts on economic growthand welfare. It is crucial for the governmentto invest in infrastructure (roads, water, andanimal health), animal feeds, and financialfacilities in order to make the regional crossborderlivestock trading networks moreefficient and well-functioning—therebyguaranteeing fair and equitable benefits to allthe actors in the value chain.For further information please contact:cshumba@oxfam.org.uk or mmommud@oxfam.org.ukStuart Dunn/CARE International

32 33Building ResilientLivelihoodsInnovationThe Potential of Dryland Products as a Livelihood Option in the ASALsThe market for natural productsAt the international level the market for natural products isboth sophisticated and diverse, with a major trend towardsorganic ingredients and ethical product certification.Consumers are looking for quality, authenticity, and a‘feel-good’ factor. These market characteristics provide apotential opportunity for African dryland enterprises toharness their particular competitive advantage as a pureand unpolluted source of materials. Africa also benefitsfrom lower production costs, and in some cases lower costsfor processing raw materials into finished products. Otheradvantages include the usage of a persuasive backgroundstory—ethical trade, community empowerment, incomesfor women and families, support to the least advantaged,conservation through trade etc.The natural product market includes a consistently strongdemand for Gum Arabic and aromatic gums, resin extractsfor food ingredients, and the fragrance products market.The market for African honey and other bee products(such as wax, pollen, propolis and royal jelly) is alsoincreasing in both size and price return. The body-careand healthcare markets in Europe, the US, Australasia andJapan are becoming more diverse in character, with naturalingredients now being the most significant growth trend.There is also considerable interest in sourcing new naturalingredients, particularly those with superior health givingproperties, rather than the standard (mostly synthetic andoil based) formulas. This has created cosmetic and bodycaremarkets for equatorial tree seed oils at prices at, orover, other existing high quality ingredients of their kind.Within Africa itself the market for natural products is alsoevolving. The bulk of the natural products used in themajority of homes will either come from the traditionalindividual/family village-based small businesses (that makenatural body oils and hair oils formulated and presented ina rudimentary way), or from the larger manufacturers ofbody-care products that are often based on poor qualityingredients. Herbal medicines, largely sold as dried or semiprocessedraw materials, are also used. However, there isalso a significant number of middle and higher incomeearning consumers that now demand well formulatedand attractively presented body-care products, herbalmedicines/supplements, fragrances, and other domesticSusie Wren, independent consultantThe ASALs of East Africa and the Horn are rich in biodiversity, and there is now increasing demand from national, regional andinternational markets for products from the ASALs made from indigenous natural ingredients (honey, beeswax, healthcare,body-care and beauty products). Potentially this represents a tangible development opportunity for governments and privatesector actors to assist dryland communities. This article looks at the factors involved in developing an environmentally soundand viable enterprise based on natural products, and the challenges of making it community-driven. The added incentives arethat dryland product enterprises can encourage long-term management of critically important resources, and help diversifyand supplement declining livestock-based incomes.products. Although many of these products are currentlybeing imported, there are a few companies within thedrylands of East Africa and the Horn that are producingsmall volume, high quality, natural products—productsaimed at both the tourist industry and high income earninglocal and expatriate consumers.Current dryland products enterprises in the ASALs ofEast Africa and the HornA number of the plant-based dryland enterprises thatexist in the ASAL regions have been established with theobjective of improving rural and pastoral livelihoods,and providing incentives for communities to conservethe natural environment. Some are particularly inspiredand successful initiatives, while others have failed dueto insufficient/ineffective business planning, businessacumen or market awareness. Most of those that aresuccessful are relatively small-scale operations with lowlevels of investment.Successful bio-enterprise models include Desert Edgewithin Laikipia and Lower Samburu in Kenya, Lulu Works inSudan, Wild Living operating across East Africa, and ArborOils and Saltlick in northern Kenya and Somalia. Theseenterprises produce and market bee-products, gums andresins, essential oils, ethno-botanicals, and other non-timberforest products. They are well planned and well structuredso as to qualify for organic certification and ethical trade. Aswell as the well-known international fair trade and organiccertification standards (i.e. EU-ISO 65 and the US-NOP), newtools have now been developed that provide accreditedcertification specifically for sustainable wild harvestingsystems. The internationally endorsed FairWild Standardprovides market recognition of a product’s sustainabilitywhere they contain indigenous materials sourced fromthe ‘wild’. The FairWild Foundation is actively promotingthe standard so that compliance enables natural resourceusersto receive rewards for their management efforts, bygaining better incomes from accessing attractive globalmarkets. The additional advantages of using ‘wild’ productsis that indigenous plants tend to be more drought resistantthan introduced commercial species, providing a morerobust and reliable crop for dryland conditions.Unfortunately, although the existing dryland enterprisesestablished and developed by, or with, the private sectorhave been sustained and are growing, those that have beenestablished purely as NGO community projects (unlessthere has been involvement of independent operators oractive CBOs) have either not progressed, or have dwindledand in some cases collapsed. This is despite the initiallevel of investment in training and equipment provided toproducer groups. Community members report the maindifficulties as being: little understanding of the market; no/limited market linkages; low levels of business ownership;and lack of post-market finance e.g. for purchasing rawmaterials, investing in equipment, infrastructure etc., in thefirst few years of operation.Ingredients for a successful community drylandenterprise initiativeFor a dryland enterprise development to be successful thefollowing is crucial:• Clear ownership structure• Commercial partnerships developed from theinception stage onwards• On-going training in all technical and business areas• Organisational and financial management, traceabilityand transparency• Product design in line with market awareness andinformation• Appropriate value addition technologies, especiallythose suitable for women• Business mechanisms based on group involvement• Micro-banking and credit systemsDevelopment agents that wish to coherently andresponsibly develop community owned/led plant-baseddryland products enterprises, should have sufficientknowledge of what is entailed in setting up and developinga successful, viable and community driven business. Theindigenous dryland products must first and foremostbe marketable—including meeting quality standardsand statutory compliances. From the onset a detailedassessment of the selected product types and a feasibilitystudy must be made. Commercial trials should be conductedfor the cultivated/domesticated natural products, toprovide basic data to test the viability of the targetednatural products. Sustainable wild harvesting protocolsneed to be determined, and methodologies developed forthe collection of indigenous natural products. Enterprisesshould be developed as commercial pilots initially andmonitored over a given period. At the end of the pilotperiod the initial trial information can be built upon, andadjusted, to provide sound data for the drafting of fullbusiness plans for communities and investors to scale upinto viable enterprises.Development agents should also have sufficient capacityto provide the necessary training, extension support,infrastructure and equipment, trade finance and operatingcapital. A collaborative dryland enterprise developmentinitiative will need to take into account the main facets inbusiness development; be based on strategic partnerships;and have carefully designed support activities that aretime-framed and budgeted. As for many other similarmodels across the world, this can be achieved through acombination of public and private investment, grants andloans.A full assessment of the resources and commitment ofthe core parties should be made during the pilot phase,and full funding and implementing partnerships secured.Partnerships that can aid the successful adoption andimplementation of commercial dryland enterprise activitiesinclude: landowners; owners of existing indigenous plantbasedenterprises; resident CBOs; and other active NGOs/institutions operating in the region. Throughout the pilotperiod, training, management assistance and organisationalsupport will need to be provided to the communitiesengaged with the targeted enterprises. On-going supportwill be needed after the pilot phase, i.e. for at least for 5years, to enable effective building and strengthening of theorganisational structure of the participating communitymembers. On-going support will also be needed for thesound development of the value chain to ensure maximumeconomic returns to community groups, as well as forcontinued product development and marketing.Investing in the ASALsThe drylands of East Africa and the Horn are not seen aspromising areas for private investment. It is necessaryto have a certain level of development, or governmentdriven, assistance to these areas in order to raise theirbusiness potential sufficiently to attract private sectorpartnerships. In the absence of the private sector, initialpublic investment and support to these areas is likely tomake the difference between success and failure of anynew enterprise, and can be seen as a highly legitimateapplication of development funding. Once the conditionsare achieved for engaging commercial partnerships, careshould also be taken to ensure that these partnershipsare based on transparent and equitable agreements withlocal communities. Partnerships with relevant NGOs andgovernment departments will therefore continue to beimportant throughout the first development phase.For further information or advice in establishing anddeveloping dryland enterprises please contact SusanWren: bioent@gmail.comDomestication of indigenous species(Hypoxis rooperii) for processing into medicinal productsSusie Wren

34 35Building ResilientLivelihoodsInnovationTable 1: Extracts from CARE Kenya studyPerceived constraintsCulturePopulationDonor dependencyLocal Government /CorruptionInfrastructureCostsNorthern Kenya Investment Fund: An innovative tool for investmentLand tenureSecurityFinancingVested interestsLack of informationA few quotesFarid Mohamed, Pipal LimitedThe need to engage the private sector is being increasingly mentioned in discussions on resilience in the Horn of Africa. However,successful models for promoting private investment in dryland areas are few and far between. One model that is emerging is theNorthern Kenya Investment Fund (NKIF). This article highlights some of the key findings of the studies behind establishing thefund, outlines the innovative NKIF concept, and identifies the steps needed to make the fund operational.The Northern Kenya Investment Fund has been indevelopment since 2009, when CARE Kenya, underUSAID’s Enhanced Livelihoods in the Mandera Triangle(ELMT) Programme, undertook a number of studies on theinvestment environment in Northern Kenya and the needfor an Investment Fund, in conjunction with the Ministryof Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands. 26 In the last threeyears a more detailed review on the investment potential inNorthern Kenya, and the design, development and testingof the viability of the Fund, has been carried out with thesupport of the Financial Sector Deepening Trust (FSD). TheNKIF is now ready to be presented to potential investors.Myths and misconceptions that prevent investment innorthern KenyaThe initial study on the constraints to investment inNorthern areas included interviews with major financialinstitutions, to explore their perceptions on investmentin the region. The findings were revealing as many of theconstraints identified related to myths, misconceptionsand a lack of information—rather than real barriers. Someof the constraints identified, both perceived and real, arepresented in table 1 below, together with some of thequotes from the interviewees.In contrast to these views, a new and interesting findingis that individual districts differ in terms of their ease inundertaking investments, and in fact it can be easier to dobusiness in dryland areas than in other areas of Kenya. Thisis illustrated by the recent World Bank ‘Doing Business in‘These people lack an entrepreneurial culture to commercialise the resources they’ve got’; ‘Theydon’t even allow the cattle from another clan to drink their water’‘People are always on the move’; ‘people are not educated’.‘These donors and the government are dishing out the money for free, no wonder that communitieswait for handouts rather than undertaking their own initiatives’.‘Government officials, posted from other parts have no interest in/experience dealing with locals’, ‘Ifyou create a fund and you don’t protect it well, local politicians will put all the money in their ownpockets’; ‘Local councils do not believe in the private sector’.‘Why would I go for a 15 hour drive on a bumpy road to Turkana if I can do business in Nairobi’; ‘TheGovernment needs to put the basic infrastructure in place before we consider investing’.‘For small things we have to go all the way to Nairobi’; ‘We tried to implement projects but the unitcosts are just too high’; ‘The region has poor purchasing power’;‘Title deeds are not available and the process takes years to complete’.‘I would never go up there even if you paid me. It is too dangerous’.‘Financing from traditional sources is not suitable and costs are too high’; ‘Islamic financing is notavailable’;‘Key players in the industry [livestock] do not have an interest in changing market dynamics in favourof the North, e.g. the establishment of an abattoir in the North would negatively affect business interestsin other parts of the country’‘To be honest I know nothing about that region’.Table 2: Doing Business in Kenya 2012The untapped potential of the drylandsIn addition, reviews of investment potential have foundthat there are significant opportunities for investorswanting to do business in these areas. The key sectors oflivestock/livestock products, tourism, and dryland productsare all identified as having major untapped potentialfor commercial returns, and also having the potential toincrease the incomes and the resilience of the poorest.The Overview Report on Northern Kenya’s investmentpotential elaborates on some of the advantages of NorthernKenya for private sector development:1. Strategic position: The region’s geographical locationand its social and cultural attributes make it well positionedto benefit from surplus capital in the Middle East—oneof the fastest growing parts of the world. It is also thebridgehead to a regional economy of over 100 millionpeople. Countries such as Ethiopia, Sudan and Somalia needoutlets for their products, want imports of manufacturedgoods and, in the case of South Sudan and Somalia, needmaterials for reconstruction.2. Domestic trade: The economies of the lowlands andhighlands are complementary. Opening up the north willgenerate greater demand for Kenyan products. There isalready significant movement of capital between parts ofthe north and Nairobi, which is set to grow.3. Livestock trade: As populations increase, urbanise andbecome richer, they create more demand for meat andother livestock products. Kenya is already a meat-deficitcountry. One study suggests that 400,000 jobs could becreated if 50% of that deficit were to be metby increased livestock production from NorthEastern Province alone.4. Tourism: Most of the protected areas, suchas game reserves and national parks, are foundin the ASALs, giving the region a comparativeadvantage in tourism—an industry that isusually Kenya’s highest foreign exchangeearner and contributes around 12% to Kenya’sGDP. There is an important linkage betweenpastoralism, conservation and biodiversity.Over 70% of Kenya’s wildlife is foundoutside protected areas on land occupiedby pastoralists. With the right incentives inplace there is evidence that wildlife numbersand diversity can be higher in areas adjacentto national parks than even within the parksthemselves.5. Natural wealth: Efforts to determine whether Kenyahas commercial deposits of oil and natural gas are alreadyunderway in the north and east of the country. Other naturalresources include sand and gravel for construction, a widerange of precious minerals, plus soda ash, gums, resins,and medicinal plants. Dryland soils and vegetation storecarbon, suggesting that through grasslands restorationand preservation the ASALs have the potential to generatepayments for environmental services—such as carbonsequestration.6. Urban development: Carefully planned urban developmentin the ASALs will benefit the region, particularly interms of employment creation, whilst also opening upnew economic and investment opportunities for the countryas a whole, reducing population pressure in high-densityareas and strengthening national cohesion throughthe intermingling of social groups.7. Climate change: Pastoralists have successfully managedclimate variability for centuries. Their skills and knowledgewill become more valuable as the impact of global climatechange becomes more pressing.8. Social cohesion: Social networks in the north arecomparatively strong, and provide important safety netsfor people in highly vulnerable environments. They mayalso be one factor in the region’s generally low level ofcrime.On infrastructure returns the NKIF Overview Report states:‘The potential for growth is arguably higher because theregion is starting from a lower base. Research in IndiaKenya’ Report 2012. 2726 http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/fileadmin/user_upload/drought/docs/Final%20Report%20-%20Market%20assessment%20Feb%202010%20-%20Logos.pdf27 http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/subnational-reports/kenya28 Northern Kenya Investment Fund Overview Report, Pipal Limited August 2011

36 37Building ResilientLivelihoodsInnovationand China shows that some of the highest returns toinvestments in roads, electricity and education, as well asthe greatest effects on poverty, occur in marginal, rainfedareas rather than irrigated or more fertile areas. Whathas been lacking is adequate attention to the region, aproper understanding of its needs and potential, and adeliberate political commitment to address them.’(p. 12) 28Key Features of the Northern Kenya Investment FundThe Fund will address the major challenges facing startupand expanding firms in the region, which often requiresubstantial capital and need to seek external funding.Firms characterised by significant intangible assets (e.g.professional service firms, companies with rights to developmineral resources), can anticipate years of initial negativeearnings, or have uncertain prospects, and are unlikely toreceive bank loans or other debt financing. The Fund canhelp to alleviate these problems.The focus of the Fund will be to enhance the environmentfor high potential new ventures. It will not dwell on microenterprisesor subsistence businesses, which need tobe dealt with differently. NKIF will be set up as an impactfund. Impact investments are those intended to createNorthern Kenya is renowned throughout the worldfor its marathon runnersSven Torfinn/Oxfampositive impacts beyond financial returns. As such theyalso require the management of social and environmentalperformance—for which early industry standards are nowgaining traction among pioneering impact investors—inaddition to financial risk and return. Impact investmentsare distinguishable from the more mature field of sociallyresponsible investments (“SRI”), which generally seek tominimize negative impacts rather than proactively createpositive social or environmental benefits.from philanthropic foundations, to commercial financialinstitutions, to high net worth individuals. Measuringsocial performance is complicated, expensive and can besubjective. Impact investors have therefore supportedthe development of standard reporting and socialmeasurement frameworks. The Impact Reporting andInvestment Standards (“IRIS”) provide a tool with whichto standardize social impact reporting, and facilitate thecreation of industry benchmarks.The Fund will consider investments at all stages ofdevelopment. Using a broad guideline of US$ 1m as aminimum investment and maximum equity holding of50%, the smallest pre-investment company capitalisationwill be US$ 1m (US$ 2m post-investment). At the other endof the scale, the Fund could invest US$ 10m for a minimum25% equity stake.The Fund will also take a lead role in developing projectswhere it sees a potential opportunity that would nototherwise be developed.The provision of technical assistance will be an importantcomponent of the NKIF, with assistance supplied at anumber of different points in an investment:• Feasibility studies – often entrepreneurs will lackthe funds and the technical capability to put togethera feasibility study that is of sufficient reliability anddetailed enough to convince potential investors tocommit funds.• Project implementation – the lack of even very basicinfrastructure, which is taken for granted in the moredeveloped parts of Kenya, makes setting up businessesin Northern Kenya particularly difficult. There is a casefor providing temporary implementation supportfor businesses that have to compete with companiesfrom elsewhere with better access to power, roads,communications and water supply.• Business tools - it can be expensive in countries likeKenya to access information. New companies are oftenhandicapped by a lack of market information becausethey have not yet developed the informal networkswhich longer running businesses have established.Good accounting systems, which will also be requiredby institutional investors, are expensive but areessential tools for business monitoring.The Fund capitalisation is targeted at US$50 million with anadditional technical assistance fund of US$ 5-10m.likely to become more complex with the newly devolvedgovernment structures. It is felt that the most efficientway to ensure permits are granted is to force clarity, andfor procedures to be forged through a government organwhich can advocate for the system to function.The role of the Kenyan Government and NGOsThe Government will be responsible for the followingaspects to complement the investments:General• Prepare regional development plans and identifypriority infrastructure requirements;• Publicise infrastructure development requirements;• Negotiate ‘in principle’ financing commitments withpotential investors;• Undertake preliminary evaluation and selection ofprojects against pre-determined priority measuresand regional development plans;• Determine regulatory requirements and prepareplans for regulatory compliance alongside projectdevelopment milestones;• Ensure GoK agencies comply with their commitmentsso as not to hinder project development.Commercial Enterprise Development:• Keep and update market and economic data onpriority investment sectors;• Facilitate regulatory compliance with GoK agenciesand local councils.Ministry for Northern Kenya (MNKOAL)/ASALSecretariat:• Role as focal point in the provision of permits;• Contract specialist advisors to provide services,develop working relationships with other institutionscarrying out relevant economic surveys (e.g. WorldBank, GTZ, etc.).Table 3: Regional RealitiesThe MNKOAL/ASAL Secretariat will also have responsibilityfor promoting the enabling environment for investments inthe ASALs, which will include policy recommendations toaddress the unique realities of drylands areas, as outlinedin Table 3:In addition to advocating for the recommendationsoutlined above, and developing and piloting modelsthat the Government can then upscale, NGOs can play amajor role in complementing the initiative to promoteinvestment in Northern Kenya by building local communitycapacity. Key areas include: advocating for communal landrights and compensation; business and financial literacy;local savings; promoting governance, accountability andcorruption monitoring; encouraging local governmentto fulfil its responsibilities; and ensuring social andenvironmental impact assessments for all developmentsand investments in the region.For many investors Northern Kenya will remain a placewhere the wealth potential is not immediately obvious,and the difficulties of doing business there will seeminsurmountable. But the NKIF is not designed for a‘business as usual’ scenario. With its specific focus as animpact fund the target is investors that want more thanjust a financial return. Northern Kenya is challengingand diverse, and the potential for making a differencethere in terms of commercial, social and environmentalperformance is significant. With the right investors, and theright governance and technical support, the NKIF may bejust the model that northern Kenya is looking for.For more information on the Fund please contact FaridMohamed, Pipal Ltd: farid@pipal.com, or Pauline AkinyiGogo: asalsecretariat@northernkenya.go.keImpact investing offers a new alternative for channellinglarge-scale private capital for social benefit. With increasingnumbers of investors now rejecting the notion that theymust face a choice between investing for maximumrisk-adjusted returns, or donating for social purposes,the impact investment market is at a significant turningpoint and entering the mainstream. Investors rangeThe Fund will be independently managed, but will workclosely with the ASAL Secretariat (see next article) in whichit is proposed there will be a 2-3 person support unit forhelping potential investors to navigate and acquire thenecessary permits issued by the appropriate governmentbody. This strategy will ease permit issuance, which canbe subject to unclear and difficult processes, and which is

3839Coordination, CapacityBuilding and AdvocacyNewsKenya’s ASAL Transformation Secretariat: coordinating development inKenya’s arid and semi-arid landsHelen de Jode 29This article looks at the institutional framework that has been established in Kenya to track development in the arid and semiaridlands. Initiated in 2010, the ASAL Secretariat provides the leadership to deliver coordinated development in the ASALs. Withthe National Policy on Sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands that provides the legal basis for theSecretariat having recently been approved by Cabinet, the article pre-empts some key questions on the Secretariat’s role andfunction, and why it is crucial for all ASAL stakeholders to become involved.Figure 1: The Institutional Framework4. What will the ASAL Secretariat do?The ASAL Secretariat has three functions:KnowledgemanagementPolicy coherenceTo strengthen the use ofevidence in policy-makingand the flow of knowledgebetween stakeholders.To evaluate all policiesagainst best practice andensure their alignmentwith the ASAL Policy.Cattle are an essential part of Kenya’s economic wealth1. Why do we need an ASAL Secretariat?A rebalancing of regional development is now seen ascritical to securing social justice, economic prosperity,and national stability. This rebalancing is part of Kenya’sVision 2030—the government blueprint for mediumtermdevelopment from 2008 to 2030—and also Kenya’sConstitution of 2010 which guarantees the social andeconomic rights of marginalised groups, includingpastoralists.The objective of the Ministry of State for Developmentof Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands (MDNKOAL) isto fast-track the development of the region and reduceregional inequality. However, the structure of governmentwill change after the elections in March 2013 so it ispossible that the MDNKOAL may be lost. A more secureinstitutional framework for championing and coordinatingASAL development is thus required, which ensures thatcommitments made by all sectors and stakeholders arefollowed through and build resilience in the ASAL region.2. What is the ASAL institutional framework?The framework has four elements.i. Cabinet-level oversight of the progress madeacross government in delivering the National Policyon Sustainable Development of Northern Kenyaand Other Arid Lands (the ‘ASAL Policy’). An ASALCabinet Sub-Committee has been constituted,which will be chaired by the President or DeputyPresident, and supported by an inter-ministerialii.iii.iv.Jane Beesley/Oxfamcoordination committee that will hold each sectorto account.Specialist institutions to ensure that the ASALsare given the attention they require within eachsector. Most are now established while othersare in development. They include the NationalDrought Management Authority (and associatedcontingency fund), the National Council forNomadic Education in Kenya, which is providedfor within the Basic Education Bill currently beforeParliament, and the Livestock Marketing Boardunder the Ministry of Livestock Development.Some of these institutions are independentof government, such as the Northern KenyaEducation Trust registered in 2010, and theproposed Northern Kenya Investment Fund (seeprevious article).Stakeholder coordination through the ASALStakeholder Forum (ASF) and related networks(such as the ASAL Alliance of NGOs, and the ASALdonor group now in development). The ASFprovides a single platform for dialogue betweengovernment, UN agencies, development partners,NGOs, the private sector and ASAL citizens.An ASAL Secretariat, to support all thesestructures and ensure stronger integration ofpolicies, institutions and practices for povertyreduction and growth in the ASALs.All the elements of this framework are now in place.However, they will need support and capacity developmentin this early stage of their evolution and as they navigatethe transition to the next government.3. What will the ASAL institutional framework deliver?The ASAL institutional framework has three particularqualities, each of which addresses a limitation that hasundermined ASAL development in the past.The ASALs have a major comparative advantage in livestock,tourism, and renewable energy, and are strategicallylocated as the bridgehead to new markets beyond Kenya’snorthern border. The new approach offered by thisinstitutional framework increases the likelihood that thispotential will be harnessed for the benefit of the region andthe nation as a whole.Until now, policy has been insufficientlynuanced. The same models have beenapplied across Kenya with little regard forthe diversity of production system, ecology,culture or society. The failure to recogniseand support pastoralism appropriately hasbeen a particular concern. The ASAL policyseeks to protect and promote the mobility andinstitutional arrangements that are essentialto productive pastoralism, and effectivelydomesticates the African Union’s PolicyFramework for Pastoralism.Different approaches have been tried inthe ASALs at different times, using a varietyof mechanisms (projects, departments,ministries). There has been no sustained andcoherent approach from one government tothe next. This matters because poverty andinequality can not be reduced within thelifetime of a single parliament.Most activities in the ASALshave been in humanitarianresponse or the food securitysector. The ASAL policyand institutional frameworkembraces the full range ofsectors essential to the region’sdevelopment.CoordinationTo promote strongerharmonisation of actionsacross sectors and bydifferent stakeholders.In delivering these functions the Secretariat seeks tocomplement, rather than compete with, what others aredoing. Its aim is to amplify their efforts by sharing and usingspecialist knowledge or by mobilising additional resources.Through its coordination mandate it wants to see that:• Plans and programmes respond to the uniqueconstraints and attributes of the ASALs, particularlymobile pastoralism;• Service providers adapt their practice to the distinctneeds of the region;• Resource allocation is more equitable and allows ASALcitizens to enjoy the same rights as others;• Organisations are committed to collaboration,learning, and change;• Participation is improved so that community prioritiesare clear and the collective power of ASAL citizens isstrengthened;• The region is secure and at peace within itself and withothers.5. What are the benefits of the ASAL Secretariat forASAL stakeholders?The ASAL Secretariat is now the principal reference pointfor all stakeholders working in the ASALs. For non-stateactors the Secretariat provides a way in to government,and a ‘one-stop-shop’ through which to access the rangeof sectors represented in the ASAL inter-ministerialstructures.A key institution for non-state actors is the ASALStakeholder Forum (ASF). Until now, NGOs have lacked amechanism through which to coordinate and harmonisetheir efforts beyond the humanitarian sector. The ASF isa platform through which non-state actors working onany issue can now engage with each other, with potentialpartners and supporters, and with both the national andthe county level governments, in order to strengthentheir practice. Membership is open to any organisationor institution working in, or interested in working in, theASALs, or supporting development in the region.29 Based on information provided by the ASAL Secretariat in the Ministry of State for Develop-Based on information provided by the ASAL Secretariat in the Ministry of State for Developmentof Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands

40 41Coordination, CapacityBuilding and AdvocacyNewsThe ASF has four roles:Networking and coordination: sharing informationand learning between members to improve the qualityof ASAL development policy and practice; to strengthencoordination of stakeholder activities in the interests ofefficiency, effectiveness and impact; and to encourage jointaction.Joint action: maximising the collective voiceand influence of ASAL stakeholders by planning,implementing and evaluating joint activities.Advocacy and resource mobilisation: advocating theinterests of the ASALs to those with power, influenceand resources—including governments, media,investors, and development partners.Accountability: building consensus about effectiveapproaches to ASAL development based on a.greedstandards and best practice, and thus mutuallyensuring compliance.The inaugural meeting of the ASF was held in July 2012. Itis made up of a national forum and county forums, eachwith a steering committee. 30 A National Coordinator, workingclosely with the ASAL Secretariat, will support the ASF.The ASF is now seeking partners willing to finance thisposition.6. What can you do to support the work of the ASALSecretariat?The ASAL Secretariat would like to see that all stakeholdersreflect on their work in light of the five key messagescontained in the ASAL Policy:• Think differently about the ASALs, accepting themfor what they are instead of seeking to turn them intosomething else. Look at the ASALs as an opportunityrather than just as a problem.• Act differently in the ASALs in recognition of theunique realities that underpin them, in terms of theirecology, economy, population distribution and socialsystem, and the important role of mobility.• Build the foundations for development in theASALs by investing in the structures and systemsneeded to spur innovation and productivity: namelysecurity, infrastructure, human capital, and disasterrisk management.• Rethink the way planning is done for ASALdevelopment by improving participation andaccountability, mainstreaming climate adaptation, anddeveloping common plans; planning beyond smalladministrative or project boundaries is vital for longtermsustainability of rangelands; and• Rethink institutional and financing mechanisms inorder to improve the coordination of inputs, reorientthese towards risk reduction and resilience, establish30County forums will be established after the elections in March 2013and the advent of the county governments.new institutions where necessary to address theunique needs and opportunities of the ASALs, andsupport regional and transboundary approaches.7. Challenges and needsThe ASAL Secretariat and the broader ASAL institutionalframework offer new hope for the region. However, theframework is as yet unproven, and many challenges lieahead. It will be important to guard against complacency.i. New institutions need the right skills and resourcesto function effectively. Various donors, includingDFID and Danida, are offering technical assistanceand other finance. This support must be usedstrategically in ways that strengthen the capacityof the framework and deliver its goals.ii.iii.iv.The core costs of the Secretariat, and other partsof the institutional framework, need to be met bygovernment. While the ASAL Policy charts a newpath it will only result in change if the necessaryfinance is secured.There is still significant misunderstanding aboutASAL development (and particularly aboutpastoralism) – for example, an assumption that itconcerns only the productive sectors. All sectorsare important, and all have a contribution to make.The ASAL Secretariat in particular should belocated in a place in the next government whereit can work effectively with all sectors and accessthe resources and authority necessary to ensurestrong coordination. Given this, the MDNKOALproposes that its optimum location will be theOffice of the President or Deputy President, whereresponsibility for the coordination of governmentbusiness will lie.v. Kenya is going through a process of transition, withmajor institutional reforms taking place at both thenational and the county levels. The various parts ofthe ASAL institutional framework, particularly theSecretariat and the Stakeholder Forum, will needto navigate this period and ensure that the focuson the ASALs is not lost in the transition to the nextgovernment.The ASAL Secretariat can be contacted at: asalsecretariat@northernkenya.go.keWhat has happened to the African Union’s Policy Framework forPastoralism?Odokorach Shanty Francis, Oxfam Uganda and Achiba Gargule, REGLAPThe AU Policy Framework for Pastoralism 31 lays out a vision for the development of Africa’s drylands in which extensive livestockproduction plays a key role. The policy framework resulted from over three years of consultation and studies of the evidenceby experts and drylands dwellers, and provides a strong basis for country and regional implementation strategies. This articleoutlines recent attempts to promote its roll out, and highlights the urgent need for more resources and efforts to promote theframework as part of the resilience agenda for the HoA.Cary FarleyExtensive livestock production plays a key role in the framework’svision for the development of Africa’s drylands.Since the approval of the AU Policy Framework forPastoralism in Africa by African Heads of State in January2011 very little evidence of impact has been seen at countrylevel in the region. It has been mentioned in several IGADdeclarations relating to the ending drought emergencyinitiative, 31 and in the associated Kenya Country ProgrammePlan the East African Community has expressed its support.Various NGOs and CSOs have also carried out targetedawareness raising including, in Uganda, in relation to theproposed Rangelands and Pastoral Policy for Uganda.However there is not yet a coordinated strategy for rollingout the framework, or its monitoring, either nationally orfor the continent as a whole. In an attempt to address theissue the African Union Commission’s Department of RuralEconomy and Agriculture (AUC-DREA) hosted a stakeholdersmeeting in Addis Ababa in August 2012, to present aproposed implementation strategy for the framework andto articulate a mechanism for stakeholder participation. Themeeting also validated the draft institutional and resourceMobilization Strategy Frameworks.The meeting resolved that:1. Focal points for the AU Policy Framework for Pastoralismshould be established at the continent wide level (AUC-DREA, Regional Economic Committees), and at thenational level, in order to support the coordination ofimplementation activities.2. A Pan-African Pastoralism Forum should be formed topromote the implementation of the framework and31 See article below on IGAD31 See http://128.121.86.38/~au/en/dp/rea/sites/default/files/Policy%20Framework%20for%20Pastoralism.pdf and http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/fileadmin/user_upload/drought/docs/FINAL%20AU%20FLYER.pdfbe linked to existing regional and national pastoralcommittees and programmes.3. Priority issues for supporting the AU Policy Frameworkfor Pastoralism at continental, regional and nationallevels should be mapped and documented.4. A Pan-African Pastoralism Funding Facility shouldbe established under the framework of the Pan-Africa Pastoralism Development Fund to support theimplementation of the policy framework.5. The resource mobilization process should link directlywith other existing programmes and initiatives at thecontinental, regional and national level (includingthe Comprehensive Africa Agriculture DevelopmentProgramme – CAADP process, Regional EconomicCommunities’ initiatives, and national governmentsand non-state actor’s processes).6. The AUC-DREA should coordinate and facilitatethe development of a communication strategy tosupport and ensure the implementation of the PolicyFramework for Pastoralism, and also knowledge sharingof pastoralism development best practices.These recommendations help define a strategy for roll outof the framework, although resources and structure forimplementation are still required. It is clear, however, thatthe AUC alone is not in a position to ensure implementationat country level, and this requires much more action bygovernment agencies, RECs, donors, and civil society.The Policy Framework for Pastoralism outlines a holistic,multi-sectoral and multi-partner view of developmentin the drylands, and therefore responds to many of theelements in the newly emerging resilience agenda. TheIDDRSI process and support from the Global Allianceprovide opportunities for encouraging the domesticationof the framework, although much capacity building andadvocacy to government line ministries, and developmentpartners, will be required to help translate the frameworkinto locally appropriate actions.For further information, please contact Odokorach ShantyFrancis (Uganda): fodokorach@oxfam.org.uk or AchibaGargule (Regional): agargule@oxfam.org.uk

42 43Coordination, CapacityBuilding and AdvocacyResearchLearning from West African Policy and Practice Towards Reform inEthiopia’s DrylandsAbay Bekele, Senior Pastoral Program Manager, Oxfam, EthiopiaThe Ethiopian Government and the dryland development community in Ethiopia have embarked on a mutual learning processover the past year in order to develop an improved understanding of the dryland system. An experience-sharing visit to WestAfrica and a national debate have identified valuable inputs to the on-going pastoral development efforts in Ethiopia. Thisarticle identifies some of the key lessons identified and the outstanding challenges ahead.Niger values pastoralism and recognises the need for pastoral mobilityBackgroundIn November 2011, 36 people drawn from across Ethiopia,Somaliland, Uganda and Kenya visited Niger and Mali tolearn from the land and resource management reformsin West Africa. Lessons that could be of relevance wereexplored in three areas: the policy and legislation designprocess; the content of the legislation; key issues groupedunder four themes of legislation, rangeland development,mobility and livestock services.In March 2012 a consortium of Government ministries,NGOs (including Oxfam) UN agencies, and donors(including USAID and Pastoral Forum Ethiopia) organizeda National Workshop on Pastoral Development in Ethiopia,held in Adama, the regional capital of Oromia region. Theworkshop aimed to share lessons from the West Africa visitamongst 100 participants representing local communities,ministries, civil society organizations, donors and theGovernment’s Pastoral Affairs Standing Committee. Theworkshop consisted of presentations and group discussionson the West Africa visit based on the four key themes.Reports were also given from participants who took partin a learning route across Kenya and Tanzania on ‘MakingRangelands Secure’ (supported by InternationalGlenn Edwards/OxfamLand Coalition and partners) and a visit just prior to theworkshop to the Fentale Irrigation Scheme, located westof Addis Ababa. Lessons were contextualized into theEthiopian situation through group discussions. The Adamaworkshop concluded with an agreement on eight keylessons and action points.Land and resource management reform in West Africain particular is providing an overarching institutionalframework at regional and local levels, which has thepotential to support national and regional economicgrowth and improve pastoral livelihoods under conditionsof climate change. A major innovation has been thepassing of specific pastoral laws at national levels thatexplicitly address pastoral land use, livestock mobility,conflict resolution, and crop-livestock integration. Bilateralagreements have also been established between Nigerand its neighbours that govern and facilitate livestockmobility. These laws reduce the risks associated with crossborder mobility and shifting investments to enhance theviability of pastoral livelihoods, as well as to increase theircontribution to the national economy.Extracts from paper presented at Adama workshop‘Mobility and Cross-Border Trade in Niger’• Niger values pastoral mobility internally and recognizesthe need for trans-boundary mobility.• To avoid conflict between pastoralists andagriculturalists, the land use of the country hasbeen divided into clearly demarcated pastoral andagricultural areas through the Rural Code.• The government owns the land in the pastoral areas,but individuals can acquire ownership over the land inthe agricultural area.• All the 15,000 villages in Niger have a ‘Village LandCommittee/Commission,’ which ensures that livestockmigration corridors are not encroached by farmers.• The Government has developed a clear strategy tosupport pastoral mobility – the Pastoral Code.Core lessons learnt from the visit to West Africa andtheir implications for Ethiopia1: Pastoral issues can best be addressed through a specificpastoral policy.The experience from Niger shows that pastoralism is acomplex system that requires its own specific policy withina holistic framework that supports pastoral livelihoods andtheir resilience to disaster risks. Positive progress towardsa pastoral policy is starting to emerge in Ethiopia with theMinistry of Federal Affairs now responsible for pastoraldevelopment and pastoral affairs, although as yet there isno specific pastoral policy to guide regional policies. At theregional level, Oromia and SNNP (Southern Nations andNationalities) have designated a Pastoral Commission thatcoordinates the various government sectoral ministriesconcerned with pastoralism, but Afar and Somali regionshave no such arrangement. All pastoral regions have nowformulated land policies and related legislation, and Somaliregion is in process the doing so. However, improvementsare required in terms of the quality of discussion and thelevel of community participation towards harmonisingcustomary and formal legal frameworks.2: Recognition and protection of mobility, and investmentin essential services along migration routes, are critical inmanaging risk.The manner in which crop-livestock integration is designedand implemented in Niger offers key lessons for theEthiopian drylands. The land use plan (zoning) of Nigerallows pastoralists to access farmlands after harvest,promoting synergy between pastoral and agriculturalzones. At the regional level ECOWAS (Economic Communityof West African States) transhumance agreementsrecognize seasonal mobility within and between ecologicalzones and across national borders, whilst also providingthe framework for a more coordinated delivery of essentialservices to manage risks associated with mobility. Forexample, the bilateral agreement between Mali and Nigerauthorizes cross border mobility in the dry season, notexceeding 30 days, through specific entry/exit points andalong specific routes, and requires pastoralists to inform ingood time the authorities in ‘welcoming areas’. In Ethiopiaallowing livestock mobility between ecological zones andacross national borders would be a rational and productiveform of land use, if supported and guided by a specificpolicy and clear bilateral agreement. It would also allowsecure access to strategic water resources and dry seasongrazing lands in the dry season and during periods ofdrought.3: Legal recognition of the cross-border livestock tradingsystem provides a more ‘productive’ use of pastoral land.The livestock trade is a factor that binds drylandcommunities in Ethiopia with their counterparts inneighbouring counties, but it lacks national policy supportcompared to that of West African countries. A comparisonbetween Mali and Ethiopia, which are both landlockedcountries, demonstrates the difference. Mali has managedto regulate the cross border livestock trade by establishingbilateral agreements 32 and shifting its investmentstowards enhancing the economic viability of its pastoralcommunities across the border, and thereby enhancingtheir contribution to the national economy. Implicit in thiseffort is improved access to markets while simultaneouslysupporting market places and services. By contrast thecross border trade along the Somaliland, southern Somalia,Kenya, and South and North Sudan borders of Ethiopia isconsidered illegal, even though it is estimated at US$300million per annum. 33 In West Africa the common currencyand harmonised taxes, which do not exist in East Africa,provides an additional incentive to pastoralists to trade.But, despite the lack of a common currency in East Africa,there are still opportunities for Ethiopia and its neighboursto exploit the cross border livestock trade if they build onthe economic integration of the East African Community(EAC) and opportunities presented by such as IGAD, andengage in bilateral agreements.4: Legal recognition of customary land management, basedon nested rights of access and the protection of pastoralresources from encroachment, is essential to maintainecosystem services.Both Niger and Mauritania have laws with specific provisionsthat outlaw the privatisation of pastoral resources. Theyalso recognize the changing conditions and the set ofconsequences that are pushing the poor to turn towardsmore intensive use of the rangelands, as they requireviable alternative livelihoods for their survival. A muchcontestedprovision within these laws is that the state willcompensate pastoralists when they lose their land to publicinterests. Tanzania’s Land Use Planning Act (2007), VillageLand Act (1999) and Regulation 2002 (No. 26-35) providethe legislative framework for villages to secure and manage32 Mali has cross-border agreements with Burkina Faso, Niger, Mauritania, Senegal and Coted’Ivoire.33 COMESA (2009) Hidden Value on the Hoof: Cross-Border Livestock Trade in Eastern Africa.Policy Brief.

44 45Coordination, CapacityBuilding and AdvocacyResearchtheir land communally under the authority of villagecouncils. And opportunities exist within this legislativeframework for cross-village sharing of resources, and theprotection of livestock corridors. All these internationalexperiences can provide lessons for Ethiopia on managingthe variability of its drylands environments, better securingresources for rangeland users, based on reciprocal resourcesharing between user groups within and across borders.ECOWAS transhumance certificateBoureima Dodo, reproduced from Modern and Mobile (2009) IIED and SoS Sahel UK (http://pubs.iied.org/12565IIED.html)5: Awareness-raising on policy provisions, and negotiationand consensus building using local institutions at differentlevels, are the basis of conflict resolution.Other features of the West African experience that provideuseful lessons for Ethiopia include: their investment in crossborder information exchange; communication outreachand the training of paralegals; and the development ofoperational guidelines for consensus seeking betweenlocal institutions in different countries to lay the foundationfor mutual co-existence. The international pastoralgathering that the visiting East African group attended atHigo, Niger—attended by pastoralists from Niger, BurkinaFaso, Nigeria, Mali and Chad—was a good example ofconsensus building between communities for peacefulcoexistence across borders. The cross border CMDRM/Elders Forum between Ethiopia and Somaliland has asimilar objective, but is only informally recognized by bothgovernments. CMDRM could be a first port of call and guideexternal assistance towards more coordinated cross borderdevelopment.Further challenges within EthiopiaWhile the engagement of the Ethiopian Government andthe dryland development community in these learningexperiences and the Adama workshop is encouraging,there are still some critical issues in Ethiopia that must beresolved: 34• Contradictions between different livelihoods are reducingformer levels of ecosystem services such as pasture andwater. There is an enormous diversity of interestsamong the dryland communities based on wealthclasses (better off, medium and poor), gender(men and women), and livelihood groups (herder,agro-pastoral, and charcoal producers)—and allrequire access to rangeland resources. Customaryinstitutions may need to become more inclusive,transparent and accountable in their decisions inorder to deal with the interests of all these.• The clash between local practice and formalpolicy must be reconciled. The two systems needto be studied and harmonised so that there isgreater clarity in the way resources are regulated.Experience from West Africa demonstrates theimportance of reconciling the twin objectives ofenhancing national economic growth and tryingto improve local livelihoods within the frameworkof the formal policy. For example, the Ethiopiangovernment aims to promote export trade forlivestock but the dryland communities prefer crossborder trade to selling in the domestic market. At thelevel of national policy, strategies for export trade inpastoral areas is based on the ways in which formalexport trade is perceived and defined by the centralgovernment ministers. However, these indicatorsare mostly drawn from an understanding of nonpastoralsettings and try to impose these policieswithout recognizing the informal nature of crossborder trade. As a result the Ethiopian governmentloses the tax revenue that could be generated frommore than 300million dollars of trade annually,and people’s livelihoods are compromised due toconfiscation and the long bureaucratic processes thatneed to be followed to engage in formal export.• Coherence between the different governmentdepartments in support of pastoral livelihoods is critical:Dryland development in Ethiopia is not containedwithin a single government department, rather itrequires a constant interaction between multiple lineministries. While the various humanitarian and sectorfocused task forces or platforms (including such asSustainable Land Management) could take on therole the Pastoral Areas Development Commission ofOromia plays, the Somali and Afar Regions in particular34 This experience links to the findings of the cross border dynamics analysis that Oxfam carriedout in Medeweyn, Ethiopiamay need an innovative coordinating body that bringstogether the various bureaus supporting pastoralistsin line with their priorities and aspirations. (Currentlya Pastoralist Working Group is being established aspart of the RED&FS Agriculture Growth TechnicalCommittee in the Ministry of Agriculture. This couldprovide a new opportunity for doing this.)• Cross border interaction carries risk unless there is crossborder risk management: Often communities’ resilienceto drought is linked to their ability to move acrossborders and secure resources. However cross bordermobility in its current form carries a number of risksthat compound the consequences of drought—such as livestock diseases. Government and nongovernmentalorganization’s interventions can reducerisks when essential services are coordinated across theborder, and community institutions are strengthenedto negotiate their use.ConclusionsEthiopia’s regional pastoral land use policies still needto be fully developed but opportunities now exist toimprove them. Currently Afar’s policy and a draft SomaliPastoral Land Legislation already exist. Dialogue on thesereforms, based on experiences gained from West Africaand elsewhere, is now needed to strengthen the legalprovision, such as those related to aligning local practiceswith the legal framework. A broad based dialogue withkey stakeholders, such as community representatives fromdifferent livelihood groups, local and regional bureauPeuhl walking the animalsheads and ministries such as Ministry of Federal Affairsand Ministry of Rural Development, is required to bring allactors together on the same page.Cross border programmes need to be promoted urgently. Anumber of cross border programmes exist with the capacityto create incentives, including Oxfam GB’s Ethiopia andSomaliland cross border Community Managed DroughtResilience Project. These projects are piloting a number ofinnovations that could encourage national governmentsto implement reforms. For example, a recent preventivelivestock vaccination campaign in the Somali region ofEthiopia has been synchronized with one in Somaliland,where more than 14 million shoats are found. There are alsoexamples of cross-border landscape level planning bothwithin and across ecological zones.Experience from West Africa helps highlight the potentialand challenges ahead for Ethiopia. The way forwardlies in Ethiopia linking together the four themes in acoherent manner: rangeland management, livestockservices, mobility and legislation. The contradictionsbetween local practices and policy context, the interactionbetween different government departments, and the risksassociated with unregulated cross border mobility, are allkey challenges. But in the final analysis providing adequatesecurity of tenure and alternative livelihoods will be acondition for, and a means of achieving, disaster resilience.For further information please contact: abekele@oxfam.org.ukGlenn Edwards/Oxfam

46 47Coordination, CapacityBuilding and AdvocacyNewsIGAD’s Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative (IDDRSI):Towards a New Partnership on Ending Drought Emergencies in the Horn ofAfricaThe need for a partnership frameworkFollowing the 2010/11 drought in the Horn of Africa, whichaffected over 13.5 million people mainly in the drylands,various organisations came together to collaborate onan initiative dubbed ‘Ending Drought Emergencies’ inthese areas. A series of meetings were held with nationalgovernments, donors, IGAD and the AU to develop what isnow called the IGAD Drought Disaster and SustainabilityInitiative (IDDRSI). It was agreed that IGAD would lead theinitiative and support member states to develop CountryProgramming Papers (CPPs) and investment plans tohighlight national investment priorities, and a RegionalProgramme Framework (RPF), which is to focus on regionaland cross border interventions.To complement and coordinate this initiative and tolink demand driven research to sustainable action fordevelopment, USAID funded the Technical Consortium forEnding Drought Emergencies and Building Resilience toDrought in the Horn of Africa. This consortium is led by theInternational Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) on behalf ofthe CGIAR centres, in partnership with the FAO InvestmentCentre, and provides expertise in investment planning.In addition a Global Alliance (GA) for Action on DroughtResilience and Growth has been formed by developmentpartners to co-ordinate support for resilience building inthe HOA, while a Regional Donor Sub-Group for TechnicalAssistance has been established to coordinate capacitybuilding support to IGAD.Achiba Gargule, Policy and Advocacy Advisor, REGLAPIGAD’s Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative raised expectations that significant progress could be made inending drought emergencies in the drylands of the HOA. This article looks at some of the challenges the initiative has alreadyfaced in the development of Country Programming Papers and the involvement of non-state actors.Responding to drought disasters with emergency interventionAndy Hall/OxfamThe CPPs follow a Common Architecture for Resiliencefocusing on: Natural Resource Management, DisasterRisk Management, Access to Markets and Trade Issues,Livelihoods and Access to Basic Services, KnowledgeManagement and Research, and Conflict Resolution andPeace-building. A series of Technical Briefs was developedby the Technical Consortium on these issues to providethe technical rationale and evidence base to support thepriority interventions emanating from the CPPs. The CPPsfor Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda among others, were developedand reviewed by a range of experts, most have now beenfinalised and adopted by their respective governments.Although the plans show a new commitment by IGADmember states to promoting resilience in drylandareas (unlike parallel initiatives such as CAADP: theComprehensive Africa Agricultural Initiative, which aremuch broader), there are a number of critical concernswith the CPPs:1. The plans are insufficiently transformative in theircontent and do not address the underlying causesof vulnerability or ensure time bound progress onthe fundamental building blocks for developmentand resilience. These should include providingaccess to appropriate education to all childrenin the ASALs; protection of community rights toland and adequate compensation mechanisms;economic empowerment of vulnerable groups(including ICTs, business training and financialservices) in order that they can take advantageof infrastructural development and new marketopportunities; and civic education on rights,services, and resources devoted to the ASALs.2. There are no guarantees that all investmentswill be appraised for their socio-economic andenvironmental effects to avoid negative impactson the resilience of vulnerable groups and thelack of compensation witnessed recently inenergy, mineral and crop agriculture investmentsin the ASALs in the HOA.3. There are no mechanisms in place to ensure thatcommunities are engaged in determining theirlocal development priorities and visions for aresilient future.4. There are no public transparency, accountabilityand monitoring mechanisms outlined to ensurethat all funds devoted to the IDDRSI are addressingthe priority issues and benefiting vulnerable ASALcommunities.Despite the commitment to CSO consultationthroughout the process, the first Non-State Actors(NSA) consultation meeting was only organisedin October 2012. Member States invited nonstateactors, many of whom had little or nounderstanding of the drylands and virtually nodryland community representatives were invited.In the end, the NSAs present agreed in theirdeclaration that:1. NSAs at regional and national level should be involvedin the design, implementation and monitoring of theinitiative in future.2. IGAD should continue to consult with NSAs on theIDDRSI including a more systematic and widerrepresentation of relevant non-state actors includingcommunity representatives.3. All member states carry out national levelconsultations on the country plans and that communityinput into defining resilience priorities be included aspart of their implementation.4. Transparency and accountability mechanisms areput in place to monitor use of funds devoted to theinitiative and country plans.Whether these suggestions will be taken forward is yet tobe seen. However at the moment there is little evidence ofcommunity consultations at national levels and most of theCPPs and investment plans have already been approved,although there are still opportunities for communityinput in the design of detailed implementation plans forinvestments as long as this is prioritised by all involved.The IDDRSI process will now depend on the commitment ofmember states and donors to maintain the essence of theinitiative by ensuring community consultation, referringto the evidence base contained in the Technical Briefs andprovided by the Technical Consortium and IGAD and toaddress the concerns outlined above.For further information please contact: agargule@oxfam.org.ukIDDRSI’s aim is to create a vision for development in the ASAL regions based on reducing vulnerability and promoting economic growthAlejandro Chaskielberg/Oxfam

48 49End WordsEnd WordsThe recent frenzied debate around resilience has beenbewildering both in the way in which so many organisationsfeel the need to develop their own frameworks, and in theway that there has been so little clarity of what practicalvalue these frameworks bring. With the new DFID, WorldBank and USAID discussion paper on ‘Enhancing Resilienceto Food Security Shocks in Africa’ 35 there finally seems to besome coalescence in terms of what is meant by the conceptand some of the principles that are fundamental to it.The DFID/World Bank/USAID paper defines resilienceas: ‘the ability of countries, communities, and householdsto anticipate, adapt to, and/or recover from the effectsof potentially hazardous occurrences (natural disasters,economic instability, conflict) in a manner that protectslivelihoods, accelerates and sustains recovery, and supportseconomic and social development’. (p.1) The TANGOconceptual framework has been chosen to illustrate theprocess. This clearly integrates a livelihoods, disaster riskreduction and climate change adaptation approach,reinforcing the link between relief and development as wellas promoting more coherence among different disciplines.Figure 1: Resillience Assessment FrameworkResilience in PracticeVanessa Tilstone, Monitoring, Learning and Communication Manager, REGLAPThe paper outlines some key principles that are widelyaccepted in the development community but are seldomseen in practice. Much work remains to be done toensure that these principles are put at the forefront of the‘resilience agenda’:1. Putting communities and their main duty bearers(local government) at the centre of development andhumanitarian efforts;2. Recognising and responding to the different needs,capabilities and aspirations of different individuals,households and communities;3. Understanding and focusing on social and ecologicalsystems rather than individual components of thosesystems.4. Promoting integrated multi-sectoral approaches;5. Increasing emphasis on longer-term investments andaddressing the underlying causes of vulnerability.Putting communities at the centre of resilience effortsrequires respect for communities, their institutions andknowledge systems; and a spirit of mutual learningbetween development partners and the communities.Considerable capacity building will be required to bridgethe gap in understanding between communities anddevelopment actors, including local government.A fine balanceThe importance of understanding the dynamics andrationale of the ecological and livelihoods systems indrylands is particularly relevant in resilience, given howmuch this is being ignored even within recent initiativesthat are being labelled as ‘resilience building’ (e.g.inappropriate crop agriculture promotion). Dryland areas,because of their unique aridity and climate variability, aremost productive when managed as an ecological andsocial system. Extensive livestock production in the pastbalanced the use of scarce resources over vast areas toensure survival and expansion during drought and plenty.However, when more productive areas are converted fromdry season grazing areas to crop agriculture, or mobility isconstrained and traditional management undermined, thissystem no longer functions.In a situation where the ecological and social system hasalready been permanently impaired, the redefining andbuilding of productive and resilient systems needs muchthought and effort. Given that alternative livelihoodsoptions currently available have little chance of supportingall people involved in livestock production in the shortterm [Heady’s analysis suggests that at most irrigated cropagriculture can support 3% of the dryland population inthe HOA 36 ], the protection of remaining dry season grazingareas and key migration and marketing routes is a firsturgent step in slowing further damage.Coordinated visionThe recognition that resilience has to be built across sectorsand scales in order to have impact is highlighted as criticalin the DFID/World Bank/USAID paper. Obviously oneorganisation cannot address all the levels and componentsrequired (see Figure 2 below), however by promotingco-ordinated planning, particularly of the governmentwhere priority interventions are addressed and linkedto a common vision, this can be improved—with donorsplaying a critical role.Figure 2: Building Resilience Across Sectors and ScalesTaking a resilience approach will involve much more thaninserting the word into debates and discussions. NGOs anddonors have already started to re-brand their programsas resilience building with little or no change in content,often with narrow social welfare measures such as socialprotection and cash transfers being put forward as keyresilience building mechanisms. The concept will onlybecome useful if it translates into a wide and consistentunderstanding of the priorities and processes forimplementing it; i.e. the promotion of locally defined andowned visions of resilient futures that everyone contributesto.The promotion of integrated planning processes is difficultand challenging, and will require major strengthening ofcommunity and local government capacity to ensure thatlocally appropriate and co-ordinated planning happens. 37There are multiple planning processes taking place bothwithin and outside government: land use planning,contingency planning, community planning and a wholerange of sectoral planning processes—few of which linkto or recognise the existence of other processes or havereference to a holistic vision of the future of the drylands.Embracing differenceThere is much talk about innovation and doing thingsdifferently in resilience discussions. Innovations thatincorporate lessons from the past, prioritise and strengthenthe delivery of universally accepted goods—education,governance, community organisation and voice—andaddress the underlying causes of vulnerability, are essential.But doing things differently for the sake of it, bringinginnovations without understanding why efforts have failedin the past and ignoring local context and perceptions area recipe for disaster.35 http://www.fsnnetwork.org/sites/default/files/discussion_paper_usaid_dfid_wb_nov._8_2012.pdf36 http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01176.pdf37 See ‘Promoting Promoting integrated planning in dryland areas, a review of experiences and opportunities,REGLAP (forthcoming)

50 51End WordsRegional Learning and Advocacy Programme for Vulnerable Dryland CommunitiesOne of the problems that the drylands has always had toconfront is the assumption that technological solutionsdesigned for highland areas and cultures can automaticallybe transferred. There are many useful lessons and goodpractices from the highlands, however there is a need tocombine these with local knowledge and realities to identifyopportunities for impact. Embracing the differences ofdryland populations present a major challenge to us all,particularly governments in the region. As Duncan Green(2012) states:‘Pastoralism, with its strong emphasis on family and clanloyalties, and on common, rather than individual, ownershipof land and forests, throws down a profound challenge tomany of the assumptions that underlie ‘modern’ governance.Whether such visions can co-exist is a test of the ability ofgovernments and societies to recognise and encouragepluralism, rather than uniformity’ pp.223.This difference is particularly important in discussionsaround measuring resilience. Local perceptions andquantitative measurements are essential in order toascertain where or if resilience is growing or declining.But the multi-dimensional nature of resilience means thatcurrent national measures fail to capture some of the mostimportant issues affecting resilience e.g. governance, peaceand security.Tume Racha carries waterThe way forwardDonors regularly raise the issue of cost effectiveness whendiscussing which resilience interventions they should fund.However, the value for money argument should alwaysconsider the alternative, which is the repeated and evergrowing costs of humanitarian relief. We must also notforget that globally we have agreed to fundamental rightsto education, health care etc. and should focus on findingthe most cost effective and innovative ways to deliver thesebasic needs, rather than questioning whether we should beproviding them at all. What’s needed from both donors andNGOs is a greater focus on long-term programming andthe flexibility to adapt to changing realities and differencein needs. The tricky underlying issues which NGOs oftenavoid/leave to government—power, land, governance andbasic service provision—must also be tackled.The articles in this journal provide a range of interventionsthat need to happen within the new resilience agendain the drylands: understanding community perceptions,promoting governance and accountability, planning atscale and across borders, engaging with the private sector.There are other issues mentioned that also need to be betterunderstood e.g. successful initiatives to build the capacityof local government and communities to prioritise and planresilience interventions that take a systems approach andrecognise different needs. It is now up to us individuallyand organisationally to ensure these issues are prioritisedin our ‘resilience’ programming and in the resilience agendamore broadly.Geoff Sayer/OxfamThe Regional Learning and Advocacy Programme (REGLAP) for Vulnerable Dryland Communities is a consortium thatpromotes lesson learning and good practice documentation on strengthening dryland resilience (in Ethiopia, Kenya andUganda) and advocates to governments, NGOs and other stakeholders for improved policy and practice.The REGLAP programme has been operating since June 2008 and is funded by ECHO. It is now its 4 th phase, which willoperate from Jan 2012 to June 2013.REGLAP 4 has the following structure:Regional Learning Groups on key issues for DRR in the drylands to develop good practice models and guidance andstrengthen the evidence base for dryland resilience promotion:1. Community based approaches to DRR (CARE, VSF-G, Cordaid, COOPI, ACTED, FAO): CMDRR, cross borderapproaches, conflict sensitive programming, PNRM.2. Water development for DRR (IUCN, Oxfam, FAO): developing and promoting good practice models forintegrated water planning.3. Strengthening the evidence base for DDR advocacy (Save, ILRI-TC, FAO, CARE, Mercy Corps): analysingavailable research, promoting/filling research gaps to get clearer and shared understanding of resilience inthe drylands, promote joint messaging.Country Advocacy Groups advocate on the key constraints to resilience building for the drylands to governments andother key actors.1. Kenya: (Cordaid, PDNK, RECONCILE, FAO, ISDR, Oxfam): ASAL Policy and structures, NDMA roll out andestablishment of contingency fund, communal land bill.2. Ethiopia (Oxfam, Save, CARE, Cordaid, FAO): woreda level integrated planning, land use, cross border coordination.3. Uganda (DCA, C&D, ACTED, COPASCO, Oxfam, FAO): DEWs, livestock disease surveillance, pastoral code/rangeland management policyThe REGLAP Secretariat provides overall co-ordination and supports the country and learning groups; publishes abiannual journal, good practice principles and technical briefs; and oversees targeted strategic studies to strengthen theevidence base for advocacy.The REGLAP consortium currently includes: CARE, Cordaid, Dan Church Aid, IUCN, Oxfam GB and Save the Children, andcollaborates with a range of local CSOs and networks, governments, research organisations and ECHO DRRAP partners.For further information please contact:Vanessa Tilstone, MLC Manager: vtilstone@oxfam.org.ukAchiba Gargule, Policy and Advocacy Advisor: agargule@oxfam.org.ukREGLAP Organogram

Irina Fuhrmann/OxfamThe project is funded by the European Commission Humanitarian Aid and CivilProtection Department (ECHO)Copies of this newsletter and other REGLAP outputs can be accessed at:http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/east-central-africa/reglap