evaluation of general food distribution in northern uganda: gulu ...

7.2 Project Objective 2To protect lives by providing humanitarian food assistance to IDPs to meet theassessed average net food gapBased on improving indicators, the assumption made by WFP to reduce the food rations forNorthern Uganda in 2005 has been that ‘the IDP population will be able to contributesignificantly to their food needs with improvements in security and access to land’ 76 . WFPanticipated that with the improved security the IDP population of 1,6 million people woulddecrease by 321.500 in 2005, 643.000 in 2006 and 275.000 in 2007. ‘The residual caseloadof 45.900 will not be targeted with relief assistance because it is assumed that most of themwill have access to land for cultivation’ 77 .However today we know that the process was different, especially in the Acholi region. Withthe delay in the peace talks and signing of the peace agreement, the continued threat ofKaramojong raiders from the east, seasonal floods and general trauma and fear of movinghome immediately, the return movement of IDPs and their ability to cultivate their land hastaken longer than anticipated. Although movements out of the camps have been pickingpace (50% of IDPs left camps in Acholi sub region by Ma rch 2008) as described in Section3.2 on peace process and return, statistics show that many out of the original 1.102.438 IDPsin Acholi are still in camps or have otherwise settled in transit sites, and may never moveback to their original homesteads. Agricultural production is still taking a slow pace, as labourand farm inputs are few. Moreover, markets are not that easily accessible and other incomegeneration activities are few.Nevertheless changes in the food supply were made to all camps in late 2005. The rationalebehind the reduction in food rations was that IDPs from 2005 and onwards would be in abetter position to cover their net food gap 78 .7.2.1 The Evidence Base for Ration ReductionsIt is said that “food aid has historically been resource driven, not analysis driven” 79 . Onlyrecently has it been common that information systems for food aid capture morecomprehensive pictures of the context in which the actors are working 80 . In the case ofNorthern Uganda, Emergency Food Security Assessments (EFSA) and nutritional surveysprovide the context analysis and a broader basis for guidance and decision -making for foodration reductions as well as indications of peoples’ ability to cover their net food gap.NRC commonly participates together with WFP, other food security actors and the DistrictDisaster Management Committees (DDMC) in the Emergency Food Security Assessment.This section summarises the key findings of the EFSA of 2005 and 2007 81 .76 WFP, PRRO, 2005-200877 Ibid78 Net food gap is the difference between what IDPs and refugees can produce or access through market channels and theminimum recommended daily allowance (RDA) of 2100 kcal per person per day (WFP PRRO, 2005-2008)79 “Global Trends in Food Aid”, Daniel Maxwell, 2006, p. 680“Rethinking Food Security in Humanitarian Response”, Maxwell et al, 200881 The level of food assistance is determined through assessments. WFP piloted an emergency food need methodology in2000 including both primary and secondary data from HH levels. Between 2000 and 2003 the EFNA was used to determinefood aid needs. Today the EFNA has changed to the Emergency Food Security Assessment, EFSA, which employs a processof random sampling and more comprehensive data sources and variety. The plan has been to carry out an EFSA twice a year,however this does not always materialise. In stead a rapid food security review takes place. Source: EFSA 200530