existing PSNP beneficiaries. In particular, the PSNP successfully scaled up during the Horn of Africa drought in 2011, supporting an additional 3.1 m beneficiaries for 3 months, and extending the duration of transfers for 6.5<sup>11</sup> million of the existing 7.6 million beneficiaries<sup>12</sup> . The PSNP’s response to the drought occurred within two months, contrasting with a time lag between the availability of early warning information and a response based on HRD appeals of up to eight months<sup>13</sup> . The PSNP’s response to the 2011 drought was widely credited with preventing the worst impacts of the drought, leading to comparatively less severe drought impacts within Ethiopia relative to its neighboring countries<sup>14</sup> .

Due to the high frequency of droughts in Ethiopia and concomitantly large number of food insecure households, drought response also relies on the issuance of humanitarian appeals to cover those needs that are not met through the PSNP. The Humanitarian Requirements Document (HRD) is developed by the GoE on the basis of bi-annual needs assessments following the main harvest seasons _meher_ and _belg_<sup>_15_</sup> _._ The Government regularly issues emergency appeals requesting emergency assistance to secure the consumption needs of vulnerable people due to the continued negative effects of the failure of _meher_ and _belg_ rains. PSNP contingency budgets are typically already used earlier in the year to provide a rapid response. While Ethiopia’s 2016 US$1.4 billion appeal has received over US$758 million from the Ethiopian government and the international community, leading to a coverage of the appeal by 54%, significant life-saving gaps remain across all sectors<sup>16</sup> .

Responding to drought effectively has been a priority within the GoE, and has been advanced at the policy and institutional level as well as through the establishment of the current drought response framework. Progress is promoted, in particular, through Ethiopia’s 2013 National Policy and Strategy on Disaster Risk Management (NPDRM), which looks to further enhance Ethiopia’s resilience against natural hazards and to mitigate the harmful effects of droughts. In line with these objectives, a key factor in protecting household welfare from the impacts of drought shocks is the timeliness of drought response. In particular, research by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)<sup>17</sup> has shown that responding early during the onset of a drought can be up to three times as cost-effective as responding late.

The availability and use of robust, accurate predictive tools can greatly enhance the timeliness of drought response, facilitating early action during the onset of a drought. It is the objective of this paper to provide an overview of the existing EWS in Ethiopia, to delineate connections between different EWS, with a view to identifying possible enhancements in the existing drought response framework that could lead to increased timeliness of drought response. The paper will argue that an early intervention is less costly in terms of protecting lives and livelihoods than a late intervention, and can be achieved through greater – or renewed – use of existing early warning tools. The paper will argue furthermore that the

> 11 Slater and Bhuvanendra (2014).

> 12 FDRE Ministry of Agriculture, Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector, Food Security Coordination Directorate (2011).

> 13 Hobson and Campbell (2012).

> 14 World Bank (2011).

> 15 Throughout the year, three to four government-led multi-agency needs assessments are conducted (see Haan, Majid and Darcy, 2006).

> 16 UN OCHA (2016).

> 17 Clarke and Vargas Hill (2012).

2