# Presentation: 452760

## PASTORALISM UPDATE ON PLI – ETHIOPIAREGIONAL PASTORALIST PROGRAM PLAN

- 10/2006

- John Graham, Senior Policy Advisor

## OUTLINE

**BACKGROUND**
**PASTORALIST LIVELIHOODS INITIATIVE**
**EMERGENCY RESPONSE IMPACT**
**LIVESTOCK POLICY FORUM**
**REGIONAL PASTORALIST PROGRAM**

## Facts for Thought :  Pastoralist Population in Horn of African Countries

| Country | Population | Pastoralist Population |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ethiopia |  75,000,000 |   8,000,000 |  |
| Somalia |    8,000,000 |   5,000,000 |  |
| Kenya |  42,000,000 |   4,500,000 |  |
| Djibouti |       450,000 |         90,000 |  |
| Total | 125,450,000 | 17,590,000 |  |

**Notes:**
This is to demonstrate how large Ethiopia is (in relative and absolute terms) to many countries in Africa and how difficult it is to program for a national impact with a small amount of funding.  

We know that the /W folks might not appreciate when the field people talk about other countries funding allocations because they have additional criteria in fund allocations.  In so doing we are challenging them in their decisions.

## PASTORALIST LIVELIHOODS INITIATIVE

- OBJECTIVES
- BUILD LONG TERM LIVELIHOODS OF PASTORALISTS THROUGH LIVESTOCK SUPPORT AND MARKETING
- IMPROVE EMERGENCY RESPONSE MECHANISMS – SAVE LIVELIHOODS AS WELL AS LIVES
- ACHIEVE POLICY CHANGE TO IMPROVE PASTORALIST LIVELIHOODS AND ACCESS TO LIVESTOCK MARKETS

## PLI Mechanisms

**	****NGO partners on the ground**
**Consortia led by CARE, SC US, IRC, Mercy Corps with local NGO partners emphasized**
**Coordination and Policy Component**
**	****TUFTS – Famine Center**
**Long Term Livestock Marketing – ACDI/VOCA**
**Early Warning - improved pastoralist systems**
**Sanitary/Phyto-sanitary, Sheep and Goats**

## PRELIMINARY RESULTS

- PROGRAM OFFICIALLY STARTED OCTOBER, 2005
- DROUGHT EMERGENCY STRIKES – DEC. 2005
- WHAT WAS IMPACT OF PLI ON DROUGHT AREAS?

## PLI EMERGENCY RESPONSE

- Affected Areas
- Boren/Gujji zones, Oromiya Region
- Afder/Liben/Gode/Fik/Deghabur zones, Somali Region
- Activities:
- 	-  Commercial and Slaughter De-stocking
- 	-  Emergency Animal Health Care
- 	-  Maintaining Breeding Herds – fodder and water

## Participatory Impact Analysis – Supported by TUFTS Objectives

- To better understand the impacts of PLI/ENABLE emergency responses on the livelihood of the local pastoralist communities
- To better understand how inputs/income transferred to communities helped them cope with the drought
- To better understand how the activities helped to maintaining and/or rebuild the assets in communities
- To identify ways to improve future drought emergency responses (e.g., activities, targeting, timing)

**Participatory Mapping**
**Timelines**
**Focus Group Discussions**
**Pair-wise Ranking**
**Proportional Piling**
**Household survey**

- PIA Methods

## PIA – ranking exercises

## SAVE THE CHILDREN (US) INTERVENTIONS

- COMMERCIAL DE-STOCKING
- FACILITATE VISITS BY LIVESTOCK TRADERS
- REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS
- SUPPORTED BY PRIVATE BANK LOAN ARRANGMENTS WITH ACDI/VOCA
- TOTAL LIVESTOCK DE-STOCKED COMMERCIALLY:
- Cattle equivalent – 20,000 - Shoats equivalent –100,000
- $1,149,425 paid to pastoralists
- Most sales stopped when rains resumed in April

- ACDI/VOCA  Commercial De-stocking
- Total of $356,000 loaned through revolving fund (Bank of Abyssinia)
- – 7500 cattle equivalent purchased.
- -   Loan repayments – over 90% with deadline not yet reached

## Mean proportion (%) of household income by income-source during the drought (n=114 households)

## Proportional (%) use of income derived from destocking (n=114 households)

## Comparison of relief interventions using the overall preference indicator

## CARE INTERVENTIONS

SLAUGHTER DE-STOCKING/FEED FOR ANIMALS

Sale of livestock before drought intensifies and animals die-off > $$$
Skinning of hides/skins of dead animals provides income
CARE also provided hides/ skins to local cooperative to generate income
During non-drought times, dry-meat processing sheds now serve as stores for food aid; they are centrally located, reducing travel times for beneficiaries

**SLAUGHTER DE-STOCKING/FEED FOR ANIMALS**
**Sale of livestock before drought intensifies and animals die-off > $$$**
**Skinning of hides/skins of dead animals provides income**
**CARE also provided hides/ skins to local cooperative to generate income**
**During non-drought times, dry-meat processing sheds now serve as stores for food aid; they are centrally located, reducing travel times for beneficiaries**

## Analysis: Income vs. Expenditure

An income vs. expenditure analysis was conducted in 61 households in order to: 
		- determine sources of income during
            the drought period 
		- determine expenditures made using  			income secured from destocking
Respondents identified 11 sources of income
Analysis showed slaughter destocking accounts for 37.84% of income, followed by sale of livestock to traders = 33.21% of income

**An income vs. expenditure analysis was conducted in 61 households in order to: **
**	****	****- determine sources of income during**
**            ****the drought period **
**	****	****- determine expenditures made using  ****	****	****	****income secured from destocking**
**Respondents identified 11 sources of income**
**Analysis showed slaughter destocking accounts for 37.84% of income, followed by sale of livestock to traders = 33.21%**** ****of income**

## SLAUGHTER DESTOCKING – SOURCES OF INCOME (n=64)

## 
Analysis: Income vs. Expenditure

Respondents identified 14 types of expenditures
44.46% of respondents’ income spent on purchases of food
17.75% used to purchase veterinary drugs 
15.23% used to purchase clothing
Analysis revealed some respondents spent some income to cover social costs, 
		e.g., paying dowry, supporting relatives 

DE-STOCKING PROVIDED SUBSTANTIAL SOURCE OF INCOME AND SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FOOD AID (PROTEIN)

**Analysis: Income vs. Expenditure**
**Respondents identified 14 types of expenditures**
**44.46% of respondents’ income spent on purchases of food**
**17.75% used to purchase veterinary drugs **
**15.23% used to purchase clothing**
**Analysis revealed some respondents spent some income to cover social costs, **
**	****	****e.g., paying dowry, supporting relatives **
**DE-STOCKING PROVIDED SUBSTANTIAL SOURCE OF INCOME AND SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FOOD AID (PROTEIN)**

## SOURCES OF FOOD – SLAUGHTER DE-STOCKING (n=64)

## 
Activity - Emergency Livestock Feeding

	A. Community Discussions (+ other methods)

		- 18,126 bales of feed distributed, 
			(7962 grass hay and 10164 teff straw)
		- 10,673 animals in four woredas benefited

**Activity - Emergency Livestock Feeding**
**	****A. Community Discussions (+ other methods)**
**	****	****- 18,126 bales of feed distributed, **
**	****	****	****(7962 grass hay and 10164 teff straw)**
**	****	****- 10,673 animals in four *****woredas***** benefited**

## Cont’d

## Animal Vaccination Campaigns

- Undertaken by PLI partners in cooperation with Regional Governments and FAO
- Over 3 million animals vaccinated
- Must be timely – weakened animals die
- Anthrax outbreak curtailed
- Over 2.8 million animals treated
- Extends life in drought conditions

## Cost benefit analysis – basis and assumptions 

- 10% conservative mortality estimate without veterinary care
- 5.8 million Treated/vaccinated livestock
- 	33% large stock (cattle/camels) and 66% shoats
- The $50,000 loan to traders by SCUS was fully repaid (as was actually the case)
- The meat distributed under the CARE de-stocking was valued at $2.3/kg
- Includes only Save the Children and CARE interventions with Participatory Impact Assessments

## COST BENEFIT/IMPACT ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS

| Estimated total $ benefit  | Conservative
Estimate | Direct Costs (approx)  | Total Cost Maximum |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| De- Stocking Commercial  | US $1,140,000  | $19,521  |  |
| De-Stocking Slaughter  | $25,021 (cash) 
$4,132 (meat) | 39,020 |  |
| Vaccination and treatment  | $15,315,000  | $154,000  |  |
| Breeding Herd Maintenance  |  $419,600  | 80,000  |  |
| TOTAL  | $16,903,752 | $292,541  | $1,098,000  |
| Cost Benefit |  | 1:57.78  | 1:15.4 |

| Estimated total $ benefit  | Conservative
Estimate | Food Aid – est. beneficiaries covered and costs saved |
| --- | --- | --- |
| De- Stocking Commercial  |  $1,140,000  | 32,580 x 3 months X $8 =
$782,000 saved in food aid |
| De-Stocking Slaughter  | $25,021 (cash) 
$4,132 (meat) | 6,255 p/mo 
1,041 p/mo = $58,400 saved |
| Vaccination and treatment  | $15,315,000 | 580,000 livestock saved
Subsistence for 30,333 Hh’s = $17,472,000 |
| Breeding Herd Maintenance  |  $419,600  | 7,300 livestock saved
Subsistence for 380 Hh’s = $219,000 saved |
| TOTAL  | $16,903,752 | Total $18,801,400
Potential saved in food aid/yr |
| Cost Benefit | 1:15.4
 | 1:17.11/yr |

## Additional Benefits Not Included

- ACDI/VOCA  ($356,000 revolving fund) and IRC (60,000 animals vaccinated)  because no PIA done
- Water programs provided (no PIA)
- Important long-term benefits including milk and offspring produced by livestock saved as a result of the PLI activities
- local services (shops, CAHWs) may have “gone under” as a result of the drought.
- Increases in meat exports (with value added est. at $9,300,000

## LIVESTOCK POLICY FORUM

- Institutionalizes Emergency Response in Pastoralist Areas
- Lead by Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
- Five Working Groups – De-Stocking, Animal Health, Fodder, Re-Stocking, Natural Resource Management
- Based on Preliminary Tufts Work – preparing best practice policy and procedures for future droughts

## LPF (Cont)

- De-stocking Working Group Example
- Early Warning Trigger for Immediate Response
- Emergency Response Funds Released
- Banks provide preferential loans for traders/cooperatives buying from drought hit areas – guarantees where needed
- Government removes transit fees and other barriers for movement of animals from drought hit areas
- Ongoing improved marketing scales up to absorb additional animals
- Slaughter de-stocking provides last resort/floor price

## REGIONAL ENHANCED LIVELIHOODS FOR PASTORALIST AREAS (RELPA)

- LIVELIHOOD ACTIVITIES IN MANDERA TRIANGLE
- NGO consortia integrating livestock support, other livelihoods, conflict resolution and natural resource mgmt
- COORDINATION AND POLICY
- Support/Quality control for on the ground partners
- Initiatives in Early Warning, Conflict Resolution, Livestock Trade
- COMESA
- Build capacity for regional umbrella
- Assessments of Ethiopia and Kenya