Más contenido relacionado

Similar a Mekonnen B. Wakeyo_2023 AGRODEP Annual Conference(20)


Mekonnen B. Wakeyo_2023 AGRODEP Annual Conference

  1. 2023 AGRODEP ANNUAL CONFERENCE KIGALI, RWANDA & VIRTUAL Mekonnen B. Wakeyo Policy Studies Institute/PSI, Ethiopia Sponsor: AKADEMIYA2063 March 21-23, 2023 Resilience to drought and climate change in Pastoral Regions of Ethiopia 1
  2. 1. Background an problem statements 2 Drought and climate change have severe shocks on the survival of the pastoral & agro-pastoral in 4 regions of Ethiopia: Afar, SNNP, Somali, S&E Oromia March,.2017 S. Omo, SNNP Borena water source for humans , Oromia Somali (June 2014) Afar 98 sqkm; 100% pastoral 325 sqkm 100% pastoral 353 sqkm 43.1% pastoral 113 sqkm 27% pastoral
  3. Cont… 3 •Pastoralism in Ethiopia:~12million people livelihood; • About 606 Sq. km area (68.7% of the 4 regions) •Loss of livestock: e.g. Decline of per HH livestock holding: from 92 to 58 in 1990s in 10 years; 2015/2016: 80% ruminants & 40% cattle. Severe losses in 2021/22, and Boreena 2022/23. •Remote; low per capita income:~7.4Birr in 2017; no insurance; limited public services; etc. •After losses (& food aids), pastorals try to recover, but the recovery depends on their resilience capacity •Several studies on drought & CC, but not on resilience
  4. Cont… 4 Ethiopia: Rainfall as a percent of normal during March to April, 2022 [30% East to 300% West] [Source: FEWS NET/USGS] Ethiopia: Vegetation condition as a percent of average for April 16-25, 2022 [<40% to >140] Source: FEWS NET/USGS
  5. Cont… 5 •Several studies focus more on hh vulnerability (e.g.Hill & Porter, 2016; Melka et al. 2019; Kahsay et al. 2020), than resilience • Resilience better provides insights to policy (several policy variables) •Other studies on resilience in those areas are highly localized (Ambelu et al. 2017; Mekuyie et al. 2018; Melketo et al. 2021) • Regional & HH category approach adds to knowledge & policy. Jan.2022
  6. 2. Research questions, objectives 6 Research questions • Which households in which region are more resilient than others to D&CC? • Which components of resilience add to the difference in resilience? • Any difference between treated & control groups [in the 15 yrs development interventions of public services- water, education, health, …] • What are the common factors Influencing the estimated resilience? Objectives • Estimate resilience (by region, HH category; intervention groups: T&NT) • Look into the role of resilience components • Look in to differences by intervention groups • Identify the factors influencing Resilience [by region & intervention groups]. • ***Note that the study is not impact evaluation, but it is resilience R estimation.
  7. 3. Theoretical framework 7  Resilience is the capacity of HHs to absorbing negative shocks and getting back to the previous status (Alinovi et al. 2008; GWPEA, 2016; FAO, 2019). Adopted from Alinovi et al. 2008
  8. 4. Methodolgy and data 8  Resilience is not observable; its components are unobservable too (latent variables).  Two-steps:1)Estimating the components; 2)Estimating RI (by region, household category, T&C) o Estimates Resilience on 0.0 to 1.0 scale: 0.0 is least resilient and 1.0 is the most resilient.  Unobservable- estimate the components. Method: Factor Analysis 𝑹𝑰𝒓𝒊𝒉𝒊 = ∅𝒊𝒇𝒂 𝑰𝑭𝑨𝒊 + ∅𝒂𝒑𝒔𝑨𝑷𝑺𝒊 + ∅𝒔𝒏𝑺𝑺𝑵𝒊 +∅𝒔 𝑺𝒊 + ∅𝒂𝒄 𝑨𝑪𝒊 + ∅𝒂𝑨𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑻𝒊 + ∅𝒓𝒎 𝑭𝑪𝑰𝑯𝒊 [RI: resilience index; IFA: income and food access; APS: Access to public services; SNN: social Safety net; S: stability ; AC: Adaptive capacity; ASSET: Asset ; FCIH: Finance and cash -in-hand]
  9. Cont…. 9 Components & selected variables for Factor Analysis (William et al 2010) Component # Selected Variable selected variables Income & food access/IFA 7 dpci, dpcc, measure of food insecurity, food diversity, income source diversity, … Access to public Services/APS 8 Minutes of walk to health centers, security, mobility(infra), info on coming drought, ….. Social Safety nets/ SSN 6 response time Govt, NGO’s, community; aid freq … Stability S 6 # yrs. of school, experience, location #yrs,… Adaptive Capacity/ AC 9 #assist sources, less meal in a day, livestock diversity, memberships, … Asset/ASSET 10 Selling durables TLU, rain-fed land, irrigated land, breeding technology, Finance and Cash- in-Hand/ FCIH 10 SACCO member ,saving, loan repaid, income from IGA, …
  10. 10 Data Region Household All Regions (Aggregate) Afar SNNP Somali Oromia T NT T NT T NT T NT T NT ALL HHs 1836 920 523 251 263 143 527 263 523 263 Pastoral 747 380 397 167 3 35 211 131 136 47 Agro-pastoral 986 493 90 64 250 96 263 121 283 212 NPNA (Non-pastoral Non-Agro-P) 103 47 36 20 10 12 53 11 4 4  Data collected in 2017 (baseline survey); 39 woredas [sub- districts], 2576 HHs interviewed (MoFA & MoA) for Treated & Non-treated/control households;  Not a panel data.
  11. 5. Results 5.1 Estimated Resilience 11 Estimated average Resilience by household category, region & T-C groups HH Categor y All-Regions Afar SNNPR Somali Oromia Regional Average T NT T NT T NT T NT T NT T NT All hh 0.12** 0.46** 0.72** 0.41** 0.41*** 0.33** 0.38** 0.35* 0.46*** 0.38** 0.49 0.37 Pastor al hhs 0.56*** 0.54*** 0.49** 0.40*** 0.36 0.55*** 0.39* 0.49*** 0.45*** 0.49** 0.42 0.48 Agro- past 0.37*** 0.47** 0.46*** 0.48** 0.32* 0.32*** 0.43** 0.51** 0.44*** 0.49*** 0.41 0.45 NPNA hhs 0.32** 0.48* 0.90* 0.43** 0.45** 0.42** 0.46* 0.37** 0.48*** 0.33*** 0.57 0.39 Average 0.34 0.49 0.64 0.43 0.38 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.46 0.42 0.48 0.42
  12. Cont…. 12 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 AR_T Afar_T SNNP_T Somali_T Oromia_T AR_C Afar_C SNNP_C Somali_C Oromia_C Est. Reseilince R All households Pastoralist Agro-pastoral NPNA
  13. Cont… 13 Estimated Resilience for the treated groups • Ranges from 0.32 to 0.90 • The est. R of NPNA for each region is higher than that of other HHs • IFAs, APS, FCIH enhance the estimated R of NPNA • The 15-years APS project is development oriented than R enhancing, but it contributed to the estimated R at least in some cases. • Pastoralists: higherRthanagro-pinAfar,SNNP, Oromia; lower in Somali Estimated R for the non-treated (~control) groups • Ranges from 0.32 to 0.55 • Reflects the natural resilience, if synergy from the interventions is zero, but synergy is very likely in the traditional pastoralists. • Due to synergy or other reasons, APS contributed to the estimated-R of the untreated groups in all regions, but in Oromia(Borena & East).
  14. Cont… 14 Estimated Resilience: National •More robust at regional than at national level, yet: 1) The est. R is lower than the R estimated by regions; 2) Pastoral hhs have highest R in z treated(not true for regional estimates) Estimated Resilience: Regional • NPNA have the highest est. Resilience for all regions. • NAPA: less dependent on weather- handicrafts, traders, forestry (consistent with Mekuyieetal.2018); easier mobility during drought • Afar, SNNP & Oromia have similar pattern of estimated R by household category in the Treated: NPNA < Pastoralist < Agro-p; • In the control groups, Afar, Somali & Oromia, the est. R for Agro-p are highest; followed by NPNA. • The interventions seem to benefit Pastoralists & NPNA than agro- past.
  15. Cont… 15 ● Agro-pastoralists: in Afar, Somali & Oromia, the est-R is less than that of pastoralist in the treated group. ● Thus, Agro-P may not guarantee resilience as often suggested. They often face crop failures. ● Low IFA & SSN in agro-p hhs of all the 3 decreased R. ● Better APS &Asset (livestock, irrigation) increased R, but low. ● Unlike the 3 regions, estimated-R of agro-p in SNNP is lowest in both the treated & control groups. ● Crop failure is highest in SNNP than the other regions, which decreases the est R. ●In Somali, IFA is ‘+’ &high unlike in Oromia. ● The trade to Somalia add more income than case of Oromia. ●Av. PCI in Somali exceeds that of Oromia ● AC contributes to R consistent with Ambelu et al. 2017; Belay, 2005
  16. 5.2 Factors influencing the estimated resilience 16
  17. Factors influencing the estimated … 17 Two advantages: (1) Identify policy variables, as usual; (2) viability/ robustness of the routinely estimated R (after 280 FA estimations); Variables that consistently explained the estimated R in both T& C hh (Poisson): -The # of months of drought -Separated water source for humans and livestock -% of dairy food,; -%age food grown -School feeding -Dissatisfaction with the # of livestock buyers. -Some remarks: -Dependency on dairy foods decrease R during drought when supply falls -Dissatisfaction in # buyers of livestock decreases R as expected -Increasing # of drought months consistent in all (-ve) decreasing R - Increased credit in two yrs.
  18. Cont… 18 Factors of the estimated Resilience R ●School feeding : two advantages: 1) Decreases drop outs in education 2) improves resilience ● Percentage of grown food crops…increases R ●Dairy food: less resilient during drought ●Access to public services/APS & Asset in all hh categories (in agro-pastorals in particular) contributed to the R ●Livestock and crop growing can be supported with technologies (fertilizer & seed), irrigation (given big rivers flowing across those areas), forage growing, and market to improve resilience.
  19. Conclusions 19 -Factor Analysis : over aggregation is a problem. -IFA, APS, SSN, S, Asset increased the estimated R. -Consistent with the fact on the ground, FCIH boasts R. -The current policy seem to favor food aid than transformative investments, e.g. irrigation -Transformative investments enhances development *Market fails: travel 1.5 -8 days to sell livestock *Coordination failure in Investment (private sector) on the top of the ‘public investment challenges’ Gradual transformation vs. SSN & adaptation investments Hard drought periods are short/from 3-12 months; may show controllability, but, inadequate attention. That is why we hear the frequent drought news from Ethiopia. Investment in adaptation is limited, the government rather focuses on health, education investments & food aid.
  20. Policy recommendations 20 IFA role in R: promote diverse income source Agro-technologies (e.g. crop, breading) to diversify; Diversification lowers risk Market & credit: market disincentive lead to contraband/resilience; cash improves R; credit: cash in hand. School feeding; efficiency in food-aid decreases hunger & losses. Information- early warning weather, drought, market, finance; Separate water sources for human and livestock Short-Run Medium to long-Run * APS has role of Govt. and NGOs in upgrading resilience. *SSN: pastorals than Agro & NPNA. Do not suddenly change it! Transformative (e.g. irrigation & forage/feed growing): The private sector vs. public failure in irrigation, infra (dams on rivers). Establish agro- processing: win- win advantage Increase livestock feed in the vast and fertile land/feed strategy.
  21. Policy….: land & water abundance in the pastoral regions 21
  22. Thank you for your attention! Acknowledged: ACADEMIYA2063 sponsored this presentation. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark/DERG financed this study. wmekonnen_bekele@yahoo.com 24/24 22