Download PDF - ReliefWeb

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