17 minute read
Recommendations
Mainstreaming and Communication
Disasters drain IGAD regional economy. Floods alone determine an average impact on people and critical sectors of economy that is difficult to sustain, often determining conditions that will cause an exacerbation of food insecurity. To consistently diminish such burden DRR investments need to be planned and DRR measures must be integrated across different sectors to obtain a resilient future region. The government should therefore promote development actions that consider disaster and climate risks to reduce flood impacts across all sectors by mainstreaming the findings of the present risk assessment in all relevant policies. These recommendations assume higher urgency considering that these losses are predicted to increase with socio-economic development. Among the sectors where this mainstreaming effort should focus first, the agricultural and pastural sector figures prominently. In fact, this sector is critical, not only because of the direct economic losses that it suffers, but also in consideration of the possible effects that reduced agricultural production can have on food security for the IGAD Region. It is therefore recommended to pose even more attention into programs supporting sustainable agriculture in the IGAD Region.
Advertisement
Preparedness and Early Warning
Almost 1 million people are directly affected by floods every year in the Region. Climate change is going to exacerbate such behaviour in some hotspots and it will increase impacts in the entire region when combined with population growth. Following the current investment path, IGAD should keep in investing in Early Detection and Early Warning capability. The IGAD Disaster Operations Centre (DOC) centre is seen as a key component to increase resilience to disasters in the region. This will become even more effective when the present findings (risk knowledge) will be connected with early warning Standard Operating Procedures of the DOC and a routine impact forecast will be produced to assist Member states in their preparedness and early response actions. • IGAD should therefore continue in investing in technology, knowledge and people dedicated to the early warning for early action (EW/EA). A solid legal and institutional framework should be consolidated that supports the DOC activities and its interconnections with the National systems on the one hand and with the Continental level on the other.
•Risk knowledge produced in this risk profile should also inform forecasts-based DRF actions e.g., through parametric insurance products supporting IGAD Member States.
DRR Strategy
It is one of the objectives of IGAD to substantially reduce the number of people potentially affected by floods in alignment with the Sendai Framework and the SDG targets. To accomplish that target the regional DRR Strategy needs to be duly implemented. This risk profile enhances the understanding of disaster risk by identifying and mapping areas that have a high exposure, thus enabling the prioritisation of DRR investments, such as climate smart agriculture, which is the main objective of a DRR Strategy. By jointly analysing the PML and AALs it is possible to quantify
the resilience of countries at sub national level and to identify in the RDRRS focused measures on the most impacted sectors in order to increase such resilience. Specific attention should be placed on the Food Security issue. It is therefore recommended that the preparation of DRR plans at any level in the region considers risk profiles as the basis for evidence to guide on strategies and guidelines to reduce the expected flood disaster impacts. The DRR plans should also consider the increased losses expected in future, foreseeing appropriate investments in DRR measures including early warning information generation and preparedness for response. The quantifications included in the risk profiles should inform resources mobilisation both at regional, government level and from the international community.
Awareness Raising and Education
The risk profile is a powerful way to visualise risk and therefore can be used to increase the awareness of risk at all levels. IGAD should conduct awareness programs at the regional level and support countries for similar campaigns at national level as an integral part of preparedness and emergency response mechanisms to disasters. It is recommended to reinforce the disaster risk awareness and education programs and use the results in the risk profiles for flood as reference material.
Contingency Budget Allocation
Contingency funds cannot be considered as a stand-alone solution, but should be connected to the DRR investments; only in that way can allocation of contingency funding lead to reducing losses in the future..
The findings of this risk profile are highly relevant for the process of operationalising the IGAD Disaster Response fund. The contingency fund should be designed together with the competent public and private institutions and should consider also risk transfer options to guarantee a fast recovery of losses from floods for each sector. This should account for the fact that climate change impacts in some key sectors have a spillover effect to the other sectors. A first dimensioning of the needed resources to be stored for the most relevant sectors can be derived by the quantification of the impacts provided by the risk profiles. When these estimations are connected with the budget availability per sector, an optimal combination between contingency funds and risk transfer mechanisms can be also derived for each sector.
Connecting Risk Profile results to Food Security: an actionable framework
In order to make the risk profile results actionable in a food security context it is necessary to determine a working framework that maps the flood impacts/risk estimates onto the dimensions of food security. The selected dimensions of food security map onto the ‘Contributing Factors’ identified in the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) methodology.
Food security dimensions Food availability: The availability of sufficient quantities of food of appropriate quality, supplied through domestic production or imports (including food aid).
Food access Access by individuals to adequate resources (entitlements) for acquiring appropriate foods for a nutritious diet. Entitlements are defined as the set of all commodity bundles over which a person can establish command given the legal, political, economic and social arrangements of the community in which they live (including traditional rights such as access to common resources).
Utilization Utilization of food through adequate diet, clean water, sanitation and health care to reach a state of nutritional well-being where all physiological needs are met. This brings out the importance of non-food inputs in food security.
Stability To be food secure, a population, household or individual must have access to adequate food at all times. They should not risk losing access to food as a consequence of sudden shocks (e.g. an economic or climatic crisis) or cyclical events (e.g. seasonal food insecurity). The concept of stability can therefore refer to both the availability and access dimensions of food security.
The scope of this mapping is to identify a way for quantifying the status of each particular dimension in relation to the risk indicator defined in case of floods. In other words, we want to assess how flood may impact a specific food security dimension in a quantitative manner, considering that we have quantified flood risk in terms of the flood risk indicators produced within this study. This will determine the impact that floods of predetermined magnitude may have on each FS dimension. Therefore, the derived indicator will only measure how a FS condition determined from a more holistic approach might ease or worsen as a consequence of a flood in the area under analysis. The following schema describes a step approach for the draft methodology to link Risk Profiles results to the Food Security Early Warning and Early Action.
STEP 3 Aggregation of Food Security Indicators in relation to flood
STEP 4 Assessing the “change” of IPC phase
The first step defines what are the indicators available from the Regional Risk Profile related to each FS dimension in an inclusion/exclusion manner by answering the following questions:
Is this risk indicator relevant for the FS dimension I’m analyzing? What is the motivation for its inclusion/exclusion from the analysis?
Economical and Physical access to Food in RURAL AREAS Flood Risk Indicator Motivation People affected by flood events related to physical and economic access People displaced due to flood events may increase the vulnerability to food insecurity related to physical and economic access Hectares of croplands destroyed related to economic access Death of animals from drowning related to economic access Loss of grazing land Related more in the long term Markets affected by flood events Physical access Structural damage to roads and rails during flood event Physical access
Economical and Physical access to Food in URBAN AREAS Flood Risk Indicator Motivation People affected by flood events related to physical and economic access People displaced due to flood events may increase the vulnerability to food insecurity related to physical and economic access
Loss of Income (GDP) due to flood reduces the smallholder productivity and can worsen food insecurity
Markets affected by flood events Structural damage to roads and rails during flood event
Related to economic Access, in Urban areas livelihood may come from different sources and GDP is used as a proxy of income. This will be used in “pro capita” terms to avoid population density issues Physical access
Physical access
Flood Risk Indicator Hectares of croplands destroyed Death of animals from drowning Loss of grazing land
Markets affected by flood events
Food Availability
Motivation Directly related to food availability related to economic access Related to food Availability in the mid term Stock losses might be related directly to food availability
Food Utilization
Flood Risk Indicator Structural damage to roads and rails during flood event
Motivation Isolation might hamper access to school and Health facilities Schools affected by flood events Food education programs Health facilities affected by flood events Related to Sanitation and health
Flood Risk Indicator
People affected by flood events
Food Stability
Motivation It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms
People displaced due to flood events may increase the vulnerability to food insecurity
Loss of Income (GDP) due to flood reduces the smallholder productivity and can worsen food insecurity
Hectares of croplands destroyed
Death of animals from drowning It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms
Loss of grazing land It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms
Markets affected by flood events
Structural damage to roads and rails during flood event
Schools affected by flood events
It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms
Health facilities affected by flood events
It is proposed to use the AAL value to assess the underling fragility/vulnerability of the area in FS terms
Based on the inclusion/exclusion mapping, the second step weights the importance of each flood risk indicator for the specific food security dimension. This enables the construction of quantitative indicators for each food security axis.
IPC TECHNICAL MANUAL VERSION 3.1 In step 3 all the axis are combined in order to obtain an indicator summarising all aspects considered:
The indicator is then categorised to determine the impact of flood on the FS conditions using a standard scale of severity:
The final step intends to link the assessed impact to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) methodology. IPC is an innovative multi-partner initiative for improving food security and nutrition analysis and decision-making. By using the IPC classification and analytical approach, Governments, UN Agencies, NGOs, civil society and other relevant actors, work together to determine the severity and magnitude of acute and chronic food insecurity, and acute malnutrition situations in a country, according to internationally-recognised scientific standards. The main goal of the IPC is to provide decision-makers with a rigorous, evidence- and consensusbased analysis of food insecurity and acute malnutrition situations, to inform emergency responses as well as medium- and long-term policy and programming. There are three IPC classifications that distinguish Acute Food Insecurity, Chronic Food Insecurity and Acute Malnutrition, as specific decisions are needed to address each condition.
1.1 WHAT THE IPC IS
Figure 1: What the IPC is The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) is a common global scale for classifying the severity and magnitude of food
The IPC is: Access insecurity and malnutrition. It is the result of a partnership of various organizations at the global, regional and country levels dedicated Availability Utilization • a process to build an to developing and maintaining the highest possible quality in food evidence-based technical security and nutrition analysis. Increasingly, the IPC is the international consensus among key standard for classifying food insecurity and malnutrition. stakeholders; • an approach to The IPC is a ‘big picture’ classification focusing on providing information that is constantly required by stakeholders around the consolidate wide-ranging world for strategic decision-making. Nuanced information may also evidence to classify the be needed to inform particular decisions or answer certain questions.
The IPC provides the essential information needed in a wide range of contexts in consistent, comparable and accountable ways. severity and magnitude and to identify the key Food Security Indicators drivers of food insecurity and malnutrition; The IPC communicates actionable information for strategic • a path to provide decision-making. It analyses and consolidates complex food security and nutrition information and presents it in a simple and actionable knowledge for accessible form. The IPC provides the evidence base for assessing strategic decision-making; the situation by asking the following questions: how severe, how • a platform to ensure a many, when, where, why, who, as well as the key characteristics. rigorous, neutral analysis. Together, these questions form the basis for situation analysis and help inform decision-making, which is the focus of the IPC (Figure 1).
NEGLIGIBLE LOW The IPC estimates the number of people affected at different MODERATE SEVERE VERY SEVERE severities of food insecurity and malnutrition and communicates the key drivers and characteristics of the situation, providing decisionmakers with key information to support response-planning. The IPC distinguishes between acute food insecurity, chronic food insecurity and acute malnutrition since different interventions are needed to address each situation. Furthermore, understanding their co-existence and relationship is invaluable for strategic decisionmaking. The IPC is a platform for presenting the linkages between food insecurity and malnutrition, as well as acute and chronic food insecurity, to support more integrated and better coordinated response-planning. Figure 2 details the focus of each classification scale and the action that they inform. Figure 2: What the three IPC scales do
IPC Scale
Identifies areas and populations with: Identify the need for urgent action to: Acute Food Insecurity food deprivation that threatens lives or livelihoods, regardless of the causes, context or duration. decrease food gaps and protect lives and livelihoods.
Chronic Food Insecurity persistent or seasonal inability to consume adequate diets for a healthy and active life, mainly due to structural causes. Acute Malnutrition a high prevalence of acute malnutrition accompanied by high or increasing levels of morbidity or individual food consumption gaps. address underlying factors and potentially implement safety net programmes.
scale up acute malnutrition treatment and prevention for affected populations.
Due to the ephemeral nature of Floods it is proposed to analyse first its implication along the direction of acute Food Insecurity that might arise of worsen because of a flood. However, it is evident that effects produced by the flood can be long lasting and depending on the underlying ICP phase in the analysis area they might have consequences on the Chronic food insecurity aspect and the Acute Malnutrition aspect as well.
The IPC Acute Food Insecurity (IPC AFI) classification provides strategically relevant information to decision makers that focuses on short-term objectives to prevent, mitigate or decrease severe food insecurity that threatens lives or livelihoods. In particular, the IPC Acute Food Insecurity classification provides: • Differentiation between different levels of severity of acute food insecurity, classifying units of analysis in five distinct phases: (1) Minimal/None, (2) Stressed, (3) Crisis, (4) Emergency, (5) Catastrophe/Famine. Each of these phases has important and distinct implications for where and how best to intervene, and therefore influences priority response objectives; • A snapshot of the current severity of acute food insecurity situations as well as a projection of future conditions. This information over two time periods provides stakeholders with an early warning statement for proactive decision-making; • A food insecurity situation analysis that combines international standards - including food consumption levels, livelihoods changes, nutritional status, and mortality - and triangulates them with several contributing factors (food availability, access, utilization and stability, and vulnerability and hazards) analyzed within local contexts; and • Identification of key drivers of acute food insecurity.
IPC TECHNICAL MANUAL VERSION 3.1 Figure 25: The IPC Reference Table – General profile of the elements for each Phase
First-level outcome Food consumption (focus on energy intake)
Livelihood change (assets and strategies)
Phase 1 None/Minimal Phase 2 Stressed
Adequate Minimally adequate Moderately inadequate Very inadequate Extremely inadequate
Phase 3 Crisis
Phase 4 Emergency
Phase 5 Catastrophe/ Famine
Sustainable Stressed Accelerated depletion Extreme depletion Near collapse of strategies and assets
Second-level outcome
Contributing factors Nutritional status Minimal Alert Serious Critical Extreme critical
Mortality CDR: <0.5 / 10,000 / day CDR: <0.5 / 10,000 / day CDR: 0.5 - 0.99 / 10,000 / day CDR: 1 -1.99 / 10,000 / day or >2 x reference
CDR: >2 / 10,000 / day
Food availability, access utilization and stability Adequate Borderline adequate Inadequate Very inadequate Extremely inadequate
Hazards and vulnerability None or minimal effects
Stressed livelihoods and food consumption Results in assets and food losses Results in large food assets and food losses
Results in near complete collapse of livelihood assets
The information derived by the present analysis is intended to influence the contributing factors and specifically the assessment of the different dimensions of FS. The proposed analysis is only related to the stress imposed by floods and needs to be linked with the overall IPC assessment that considers the overall conditions in the area under analysis. It will therefore determine a transition from a one assessed phase to the other on the basis of the additional stress exerted on the system by the flood that occurred or might occur in the near future. This can be applied both to current conditions in the post disaster assessment phase and monitoring phase or in a forward looking mode in anticipation of a flood that might occur in a preparedness context. (Image adapted by http:// www.ipcinfo.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ipcinfo/manual/IPC_Technical_Manual_3_Final.pdf)
Phase 1: None/Minimal
Households are able to meet essential food and non-food needs without engaging in atypical and unsustainable strategies to access food and income.
Priority response objectives: Action required to build resilience and for disaster risk reduction.
Phase 2: Stressed
Households have minimally adequate food consumption but are unable to afford some essential non-food expenditures without engaging in stress-coping strategies.
Priority response objectives: Action required for disaster risk reduction and to protect livelihoods.
Phase 3: Crisis
Households either: • Have food consumption gaps that are reflected by high or above-usual acute malnutrition; • Are marginally able to meet minimum food needs but only by depleting essential livelihood assets or through crisis-coping strategies.
Urgent action required to: Protect livelihoods and reduce food consumption gaps
Phase 4: Emergency
Households either: • Have large food consumption gaps which are reflected in very high acute malnutrition and excess mortality; • Are able to mitigate large food consumption gaps but only by employing emergency livelihood strategies and asset liquidation.
Urgent action required to: Save lives and livelihoods.
Phase 5: Catastrophe/ Famine
Households have an extreme lack of food and/or other basic needs even after full employment of coping strategies. Starvation, death, destitution and extremely critical acute malnutrition levels are evident. (For Famine Classification, an area needs to have extreme critical levels of acute malnutrition and mortality).
Urgent action required to: Revert/prevent widespread death and total collapse of livelihoods.
TRANSITION determined by the stress imposed by floods
cm
