Achieving food security in vulnerable populations
Communities that rely on raising livestock are most
vulnerable to hunger when drought or other disaster strikes. How can aid
organisations provide effective help? Deborah Cohen investigates
Hunger and malnutrition
cause tremendous human suffering and cost developing countries billions of
dollars in lost productivity and national income. The number of hungry
people in the world rose to 852 million between 2000 and 2002, up by 18
million from the mid-1990s, and the total number of hungry people in
sub-Saharan Africa is 203 million, a third of the population.1 I visited northwest
Kenya to see how organisations work to try to improve food security in
pastoralist communities.
Food security
The 2004 annual report from the Food and Agriculture
Organization says that little is done globally to fight hunger, although
the resources needed to combat it are small compared with the benefits.
Andrew Aitchison
Kaeris reservoir was built by the community to store
drinking water for animals
Every dollar invested in reducing hunger can give from
five to over 20 times as much in benefits. The report recommends giving
priority to actions to improve food security.1
But food security is a complex issue. A country or
region is food secure when “All people, at all times, have both
physical and economic access to sufficient food to meet their dietary needs
for a healthy and productive life.”2 Food security depends principally on three variables:
availability of food, access to food and a nutritious diet, and proper use
of food to ensure maximal nutrition and hygiene.3 In turn, each of
these variables is influenced by several factors, the most important of
which is poverty; others include the national and international economic
environment, population growth, infrastructure, the climate, the level of
investment and donor commitment, access to appropriate training and job
skills, asset base, conflict and access to pasture, and the quality of
diet, health, and sanitation.
Because of the number of influencing factors, a
multilateral approach involving both the international community and
national governments is needed.
Some factors, such as economic conditions and
infrastructure, are the responsibility of national governments and the
international community as a whole. Others, such as climate, seem to be
beyond control. But droughts are a predictable natural phenomenon and
should not result in scenes such as those witnessed in Niger this year.
About eight million people risked dying from starvation in one of the worst
food crises to hit Africa. The food shortages followed severe drought and
locust swarms in the area last year, devastating crops and livestock.4 The US Agency for
International Development, Famine Early Warning Systems Network, warned
about an impending food crisis eight months before the television cameras
focused on the wasted bodies of dying children. As Grainne Moloney,
Oxfam’s regional nutrition and food security coordinator for Horn,
East, and Central Africa says, “Niger represents a failure of the
international community to act.” But funds for long term development
projects are much harder to attract.5 Because the situation in Niger had become so critical,
emergency food aid from donors was the best way of providing food for the
community. Yet, emergency food aid is not a long term solution to food
security. It’s expensive, not reliable enough, and can adversely
affect local food production through depressing market prices and
discouraging local production.
Another criticism is that it creates
dependency—a contentious issue that non-governmental organisations
have differing perspectives on.
A broader approach
To have a sustained effect on food security, food aid
should be part of a broader effort by non-governmental organisations and
the recipient country.3 Programmes should aim to maintain food security after the
non-governmental organisations leave.3 As the Food and Agriculture Organization report puts it, we
have “Ample evidence that rapid progress can be made by applying a
twin-track strategy that attacks both the causes and the consequences of
extreme poverty and hunger. Track one includes interventions to improve
food availability and incomes for the poor by enhancing their productive
activities. Track two features targeted programmes that give the most needy
families direct and immediate access to food.”1 Some communities are
more susceptible to food insecurity than others. By the nature of their
lifestyle, pastoralists tend to be the most vulnerable to extreme weather
conditions. Their main source of income and nutrition is their livestock,
which depend on pasture and water and, thus, weather conditions. During the
wet seasons, when pasture and water sources are abundant, the local markets
are thriving and livestock prices are favourable. Once drought hits and
pasture and water sources become depleted, people sell their livestock to
raise money to buy food. The sudden glut of livestock on the market,
coupled with leaner livestock, means that prices fall and people have less
money to buy food for the droughts.
One method that non-governmental organisations use to
overcome this problem is to purchase the livestock at high prices and sell
the meat at subsidised prices. Although such interventions might ensure
pastoralists can survive the drought, they too are emergency strategies. A
recent editorial in the Economist suggests that projects offering cash or vouchers in return
for work provide a solution for food security.5 These schemes, often funded by non-governmental
organisations, pay local people to work on a project to generate cash and
help them build up their assets.
But these schemes need to be well thought out. The
Turkana, a pastoralist tribe in Kenya, refer to foreign aid workers and
their government as ngimoi (enemies or strangers) after being beneficiaries
of poorly planned charitable projects.6For example, the Australian government initiative funded
planting of the drought resistant shrub Prosopis. Not only does the shrub kill livestock, it is a breeding
ground for mosquitoes, the thorns cause severe wounds in people, and the
bushiness adds to local insecurity by providing cover for bandits. Removal
of this shrub now forms an aspect of an Oxfam cash for work scheme. As
Akabwai points out, local recipients need to be involved from the outset,
and agencies should tap into their knowledge and customs rather than
deciding their fate for them.7 One of the benefits of cash for work schemes is that
they allow people to make decisions independently.
Projects need to tap into the community too. In
Turkana district, the non-governmental organisations approach vulnerable
communities and ask them to prioritise their needs and to nominate the most
vulnerable members of the community to work. These tend to be people with
lots of dependants, single mothers, and those with no livestock.
Role of conflict
The Turkana’s proximity to the pasture lands of
neighbouring ethnic groups, coupled with the increased competition for food
and water through more frequent droughts, puts them at particular risk of
conflict and cattle raids. This adds to food insecurity through loss of
livestock and by putting richer pastures and fish abundant parts of Lake
Turkana out of bounds. A local peace building group, Riam
Riam—Turkana for coming together—initiates negotiations about
access to land between neighbouring ethnic groups. Without such
initiatives, non-governmental organisation projects are
jeopardised—conflict is one of the main reasons for food insecurity.
In turn, some projects help assuage the risk of
hostilities. Akom Esekon, a committee member of the Kaeris water pan
project, says, “Most of the community had moved away to find water.
Now the community has moved back, and people are no longer forced to go on
to Dassenach [Ethiopian ethnic group] territory. This means we’re
less at risk of conflict and cattle raids.”
Andrew Aitchison
A woman clears bushes to create a market place in
Lokitaung
Value for money
Other schemes work to directly enhance the economic
profile of the surrounding area, such as by creating a market place.
Margaret Lokoel, one of the beneficiaries of such a scheme in Lokitaung, a
larger settlement in northern Turkana, says that she hopes the sale yard
will boost the local economy and reduce poverty. “It will attract
traders from outside. People will be able to set up other businesses to
cater for the needs of the traders,” she says. “The community
will grow, and this might then encourage the government to invest in health
and education.” Despite this optimism, poor roads continue to hamper
economic activity by making it difficult to get goods to the market.
Cash for work schemes have other pitfalls. The money
is intended to be used to buy assets to support long term development and
not to be a quick fix. However, if people don’t receive food while
they are working, they have to use their salaries to buy food rather than
assets. For people to get the most out of these schemes, projects need to
be coupled with food aid.
They also need to be supplemented by education
programmes. One concern is that land management is non-existent in pastoral
districts, leading to accelerated land degradation and raising questions
about the viability of pastoralism as a livelihood. Pastoralists may need
to diversify, as dependence on a single enterprise has made them more
vulnerable to food insecurity.8 If people have resources and other skills, they are
better able to cope with adverse conditions.
Several non-governmental organisations in Turkana
support mobile schools to teach other skills, such as literacy. They also
teach sanitation and hygiene, which improves nutritional status and
influences food security by improving health. In Kenya, provision of
primary education boosts food security and helps to prevent malnutrition
because the government supplies primary schools with free food.
But education should not just focus on children. If
market places are developed, sellers need educating about marketing
livestock, how to invest the money earned from cash for work schemes, and
how to diversify trade and open up businesses. Organisations such as
Merlin, Oxfam, and World Vision also provide education for influential
members of the community, such as traditional birthing assistants, nurses,
and patient attendants. With the right training, they can promote hygiene
and sanitation in their communities, recognise outbreaks of disease, and
learn when people need referral to medical services.
Health care also needs investment. The relation
between health and food security is complex. Not only can medical services
treat severely malnourished people, they can stop illnesses from becoming
prolonged, which affects the ability to work. If people are unable to look
after their livestock and crops or are unable to search for wild fruits,
they become more vulnerable, further compromising food security and health.
Sustainable solutions
If food insecurity is going to be overcome, the focus
needs to shift away from emergency measures and last minute appeals for
money. What’s more, investment in early warning systems will not work
unless national governments and the international community respond to the
information.
Food security is a complex problem. Patching up the
problem with goodwill isolated interventions without consulting the local
community is prone to failure. A coordinated, multistranded approach
is needed involving organisations from different sectors. Ultimately,
improving food security will help governments achieve the millennium
development goals. Not only will it help to eradicate hunger, it will help
to reduce child mortality and improve maternal health. But, most
importantly, it will help to break the cycle of poverty.
Competing interests: DC’s trip was organised, but
not subsidised, by Oxfam.
This article was first published in the BMJ (2005;331;775-7).
Deborah Cohen, assistant editor
Email: BMJ dcohen@bmj.com
studentBMJ 2005;13:397- 440 November ISSN 0966-6494
- Food and Agriculture Organization. The state of food insecurity in the world. Rome: FAO, 2004. www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file = / docrep/007/y5650e/y5650e00.htm (accessed 20 Sep 2005).
- US Agency for International Development. Policy determination: definition of food security. Washington, DC: USAID, 1992. www.usaid.gov/policy/ ads/200/pd19.pdf (accessed 20 Sep 2005).
- US Agency for International Development. Food aid and food security policy paper. Washington, DC: USAID, 1995. www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/pnabu219.pdf (accessed 20 Sep 2005).
- Odigwe C. Aid agencies appeal for help against famine. BMJ 2005;331:255.
- Hunger in Niger. Economist 2005 Aug 18.
- How to make aid work. Economist 1999 Jun 24. www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID = 215635 (accessed 20 Sep 2005).
- Akabwai DMO. Extension and livestock development: experience from among the Turkana pastoralists from Kenya. London: Overseas Development Institute, 1992. www.odi.org.uk/pdn/papers/33b.pdf (accessed 20 Sep 2005).
- FEWS Net. Kenya monthly food security update: August 17, 2005. www.fews.net/centers/innerSections.aspx?f = ke&m = 1001709& pageID = monthliesDoc (accessed 20 Sep 2005).
