Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 14

The Potential of Permaculture in Addressing Food Insecurity in Karamoja District, Uganda

Anastansia Musana Namululi

INSTITUTIONEN FÖR GEOVETENSKAPER

THE POTENTIAL OF PERMACULTURE IN ADDRESSING FOOD INSECURITY IN KARAMOJA DISTRICT, UGANDA

ill ollison

Anastansia Musana Namululi Masters of Science Thesis (MSc Thesis) 30 hp Master Programme in Sustainable Development Supervisor: Girma Gebresenbet January 2011

An interdisciplinary cooperative graduate programs between Uppsala University and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences . !

ABSTRACT

Achieving food security in its totality continues to be a challenge in developing nations especially those in Africa. The root cause of food insecurity in developing countries is the inability of people to gain access to food due to poverty (Pinstrup-Aderesen, 2002). While the rest of the world has made significant progress towards poverty alleviation, Africa, in particular Sub-Saharan Africa continues to lag behind. Karamoja region is not any different from other developing regions battling with food insecurity because of poverty and unpredictable rainfall. For quite a long point in time, Karamoja region has suffered prolonged draught due to unpredictable rain failure which has inflicted a lot of misery to the people by making them food insecure because of little or no food harvests. In the dawn of climate change, the situation may further deteriorate if urgent sustainable food security strategies are not introduced in Karamoja.

The tasks of reverting Karamoja’s food insecurity to the same secure levels of the other parts of the country requires a shift from emergency relief distribution to sustainable self production planning by the people of Karimojong. This research therefore goes out to investigate the potential of one sustainable strategy called Permaculture in addressing the food insecurity at the household level for the Karamojongs. Permaculture is a practical concept applicable from the balcony to the farm, from the city to the wilderness. It is a design system for sustainable environments providing food, energy, shelter, material and non-material needs, as well as the social and economic infrastructures that support them. Permaculture means thinking carefully about our environment, our use of resources and how we supply our needs. It aims to create systems that will sustain not only our present, but also future generations (PIJ, 1999). The final result of the current paper is that according to the case study, the Karamojong practicing Permaculture are more food secure than the ordinary Karamojong. It was also found that the land in Karamoja is fertile and if sensitization and awareness of this concept is carried out, Permaculture will help in reverting the current food insecurity in Karamoja in a long run.

KEYWORDS: Sustainability, Permaculture, foodinsecurity,selfreliance;

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the guidance and the help of several individuals who in one way or another contributed and extended their valuable assistance in the preparation and completion of this study. I would like to thank The One above all of us, the omnipresent God, for answering my prayers for giving me the strength to plod on despite my constitution wanting to give up and throw in the towel, thank you so much Dear Lord.

My utmost gratitude to Professor Girma Gebresenbet my adviser whose sincerity, unfailing support and encouragement I will never forget. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my research. I would like to convey my heartfelt gratitude to my thesis committee Karin Högdahl and Ida J Ulseth for the insightful comments and critical questions.

I would like to offer my gratitude to Steve Crane the founder of the Green Warrior Karamoja, for the opportunity to explore and learn a lot about how they practiced permaculture. Not forgetting Miss Agnes Atyang. FEWS NET Representative Karamoja who gave me enough information on the food security status of Karamoja and the respondent for their time and responses.

Last but not least my family, Mr &Mrs Musana, Connie, Babra, Felista and Mark for supporting me spiritually, financially and morally during my research. Iam so indebted to you all for encouraging me from miles away and the endless phone calls whenever I was homesick, I thank you and God Bless you all.

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 6 2. LITERATURE REVIEW...... 11 2.1 Environmental Degradation and the Green Revolution...... 11 2.2 Economic Challenges in Agriculture...... 11 2.3 Definition of Agro-production Systems ...... 12 2.4 The History of Permaculture ...... 13 2.5 The Permaculture Design Principles...... 14 2.6 Nutrient and Waste Management...... 17 2.7 The Permaculture System: Differences between Organic and Conventional ...... 19 2.8 Sustainable Agriculture and Permaculture ...... 21 2.9 CLIMATE CHANGE...... 24 2.10 SELF-RELIANCE ...... 24 3. OBJECTIVE AND METHODOLOGY ...... 25 3.1 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ...... 25 3.2 Data Collection...... 25 3.3 Analytical Methodology ...... 25 3.4 EXPLORATORY RESEARCH...... 26 3.5 CASE STUDY APPROACH ...... 26 3.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY...... 26 4. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ...... 27 5. RECOMMENDATION...... 34 6. CONCLUSION ...... 37 7. REFERENCES…….…………………………………………………………………….38

APPENDICES ...... 411

FIGURES 1. Figure 1 The productive zones of Karamoja(UBOS 2008)………………………....14 2. Figure 2 The permaculture flower (Holmgren 2002)………………………………..41 3. Figure 4.1 Presents household size…………………………………………………..50 4. Figure 4.2 Presents sources of food ………………………………………………....51 5. Figure 4.3 Presents causes of food insecurity………………………………………..52 6. Figure 4.4 Presents coping mechanism………………………………………………53 7. Figure 4.5 Presents role of local government………………………………………..54 8. Figure 4.6 Presents perceptions on solution…………………………………………55 9. Figure 4.7 Presents energy sources…………………………………………………..56 10. Figure 4.8 Presents education level…………………………………………………..57 11. Figure 5 Presents 5-rings of sustainability…………………………………………...61

TABLES 1. Table 1. Zones in the Permaculture design system (adapted from Mollison, 1988)…24 2. Table 2 Differences between Organic Agriculture and Permaculture………………..36

CHAPTER ONE 1. INTRODUCTION Positioned in the northeast corner of Uganda and flanked by Kenya to the east and Southern

Sudan to the north, Uganda’s Karamoja Region is located at the apex of East Africa’s Karamajong Cluster (Akabwai, Ateyo December 2007) The region’s semi‐arid climate, the subsistence‐based livelihoods and virtual isolation of its inhabitants, and its unpredictable civil security status heavily influence its food security. While the region’s residents are often characterized as highly resilient, the direct and indirect effects of consecutive years of unevenly distributed rainfall, crop and livestock pests and diseases have contributed to general decline in their food security status and coping capacity. Furthermore, while external assistance to Karamoja Region has fluctuated for decades, this assistance is often incongruent with the livelihoods context of the region’s population and/or addresses only a portion of needs, thereby limiting its overall impact. While increases in the frequency and intensity of local coping strategies and the provision of external, largely emergency aid offset some of the current acute food security challenges the region’s population faces, continuation of the current coping‐assistance combination will not improve food security in the medium‐and long‐term. Rather, vital and durable improvements in food security in Karamoja Region need programming that goes beyond the short‐term provision of inputs and assists the region’s population in protecting and building from their remaining assets. Karamoja Region consists of six livelihood zones, each lying broadly within one of three livelihood systems: a predominately ‘agriculture’‐based livelihood system in the western part of the region, a principally ‘agro‐pastoral’ system in the region’s midsection, and a mainly ‘pastoral’ system in much of the east of the region. Regardless of these variations, this research finds many similarities in and connections among the underlying causes of food insecurity across Karamoja. In particular, drivers of food insecurity in the region include the direct and indirect effects of Climatic variability – distinctively, consecutive seasons of poor spatial, temporal rainfall distribution and endemic hazards to productivity – especially crop and livestock diseases;

These drivers are interconnected. Repeated years of below‐normal crop production due to climatic and endemic hazards has left more people with inadequate food availability and access and less coping options, led to worsening of traditional social safety nets, increased competition over and the degradation of available natural resources.

Similarities also exist among the coping mechanisms which people in Karamoja Region employ to respond to food security challenges. Given consecutive years of below‐normal crop and livestock production in the region, more people have turned to and/or intensified reliance on natural resources, including cutting trees for construction, firewood, and/or charcoal. This coping strategy is particularly evident in the region’s pastoral and agro‐pastoral areas, where timber is used to construct houses as well as the fencing that protects homesteads. In addition to higher frequency and magnitude of natural resource misuse, this research found that more households are resorting to casual labor for either cash or in‐kind payment as a major means of finding food. The casual labor usually takes the form of migration to nearby urban areas such as Iganga, Jinja, and Kampala.

Whereas the drivers of food insecurity and coping mechanisms share many similarities across the region, important differences exist in their occurrence and scale between livelihood systems and among the wealth groups residing within them. This research underscores some of these key distinctions, and, to the extent possible, investigates the potential of permaculture in improving food security for the people of Karamoja Region. Since 1964 the Karimojong have relied on relief food handouts, year in year out. The state of affairs is expensive, unsustainable, dehumanizing and unacceptable to the people of Karamoja. Permaculture will introduce multifaceted sustainable food production activities that will over a period of five years enable the Karimojong feed themselves with surplus to markets of neighboring districts to earn disposable incomes, savings and investments. Permaculture will also make food production community based and use appropriate production techniques through provision of the necessary inputs and infrastructure. Karamoja Action Plan for Food Security (KAPFS 2008),

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Karamoja region is situated in the northeast of Uganda and lies amid longitudes 33-35 East and latitude 1-4 North. It comprises 5 districts: Nakapiripiriti, Moroto, Kotido, Kaabongo and Abim Districts. The region is bordering by Kenya to the East and Sudan to the North; the inner neighboring districts are Katakwi, Kapchorwa, Kumi, Kitgum, Lira, Pader and Sironko. The sub- region covers 27 511sq.km, with a population of 1 017 400 (UBOS 2008).

The Karamoja sub-region experiences the highest poverty levels above the national average in the country, with 80% of the total population living below the poverty line (UNDP, Human Development Report Uganda, 2007). The sub-region is semi-arid with the majority of the population lead a pastoral or agro-pastoral lifestyle. Karamoja is chronically food-insecure. It is characterized by generally little rainfall distribution, reliability and soil fertility. This influences the types of activities and determines the livelihoods in the sub- region. The sub-region has been affected by repeated years of crop failure and low livestock productivity due to below normal weather conditions. Unlike the rest of the country, with two rainy seasons and two planting seasons, Karamoja has only one rainy season and one planting season. From 2001, the weather patterns have been extreme and intense in the sub-region resulting in extended dry spells every second year (2002, 2004, and 2006 see Appendix B). It is predicted that climate variability will continue to increase due to climate change (Meteorology Dep’t 2009). Karamoja Region has suffered intermittent droughts in the past decade reducing agricultural output to 30 percent of normal levels and posting worrying rates of malnutrition, according to surveys. Malnutrition (UNDP, Human Development Report Uganda, 2007).

Regrettably the Karamoja sub-region has the poorest weather and climate observatory network. Cyclical droughts and erratic rainfall have affected crop production and pasture for livestock in the sub region, thereby having a circuitous negative effect on the livelihoods of the population. The extended dry spells exert pressure on water availability in most parts of the sub-region, with average distance to water for livestock at four (4) kilometers.

Karamoja suffers extreme environmental degradation, poor infrastructure and high prevalence of diseases such as malaria and diarrhea among children, poor health practices, and poor sanitation conditions. Coupled with extreme poverty levels, the situation has worn people’s coping capacity, leaving them in an insecure vulnerability state.

Karamoja is Uganda's poorest and most marginalized region and experiences cycles of natural disasters and inter-communal conflicts mainly over pasture, water and livestock. It has also received very limited investment, perpetuating less development and hunger. The UN World Food Programme (WFP) said the region had had no decent harvest for three years and was "on the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe". That time, the government decided to treat it as an "emergency area" and WFP launched an operation to save 970 000 people from starvation. (World Food Programme 2008)

1.2 HE PRODUCTIVE ZONES OF KARAMOJA

Figure 1.Production zones of Karamoja

1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT Assumptions made in the April – September 2009 by FEWS-NET outlook and expectations of deterioration of food security conditions in Karamoja remain valid. High levels of food insecurity persist in Karamoja, where an estimated 900 000 people continue to receive food aid due to successive poor rainy seasons (FEWS-NET February 2010). Rations given vary from 40 – 70 percent of recommended daily food intake with the balance being met by

households from other sources such as market purchase and food aid, consumption of livestock products and wild foods (FEWS-NET March 2010). However, the size of the food insecure population number is likely to increase as the lean season intensifies and more households are unable to meet their food needs. These households will require external assistance. Several external assistance programs are ongoing in the region, and interest appears to be increasing among new organizations to lend their expertise to these aid efforts. However, much of the assistance currently provided in Karamoja Region is short‐term in nature and while it works to provide some needed inputs, it focuses on proximate problems and near‐term gains and rarely address underlying causes of the region’s food insecurity or builds from the dominate livelihoods context of the region. Without increased appreciation of and attention to these underlying causes and the broader physical and social context within which they occur, aid efforts in Karamoja Region will remain unsuccessful in assisting the region’s population toward recovery. The guiding premise of this paper is that without deliberate changes from the normal course of events, many of the food security problems of Karamoja region will persist and some will become worse. Action needs to be taken now to promote poverty-reducing growth and agricultural development as well as to put agriculture on to a more sustainable path. The hypothesis of the research is that modern agriculture threatens food security and health by putting the rural poor at a disadvantage, threatening their land tenure, and degrading natural resources. Therefore issues of sustainability need to take into consideration Agricultural production in the future. This suggests that households will require external assistance and the assistance in this case would be to introduce permaculture to them in order to facilitate them how to be self-reliant and inform them how to work with the nature around them not against it to solve the problem of food insecurity.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION 1) What are the current causes of food insecurity in Abim and Moroto? 2) How will permaculture counteract to the current food insecurity 3) How will permaculture improve environmental and social circumstances sorrounding Karamoja?

1.5 AIM OF THE STUDY 1) Improve the understanding of the causes of food insecurity in Karamoja. 2) Improve the understanding of the key principles of permaculture 3) Improve literature on food insecurity in karamoja Uganda. 4) Suggest the various potential that permaculture has to the region of Karamoja.

CHAPTER TWO

2. LITERATURE REVIEW The aim of this chapter is to introduce the topics that involving this research. It consists of previous literature that has been presented on the themes of permaculture, food security, why shouldn’t people adopt organic agriculture. It gives a brief summary of the environmental and economic challenges leading to its inception. The main components include the philosophy on the permaculture system, its principles and how permaculture differs from conventional and organic production The following discussion outlines the problems with conventional agriculture, defines different methods of agriculture and presents permaculture as a possible solution to the “Sustainability Crisis”.

2.1 Environmental Degradation and the Green Revolution The “Green Revolution” in the 1960’s allowed for major increases in the productivity and profitability of agricultural systems in the developed world (Matson et al., 1997). Through the use of high yielding crop varieties, chemical fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation and mechanization farmers were able to greatly increase the productive capacity of their land and hence increase global food supplies (Tilman et al., 2002). However, four decades after its adoption, the severe resultant problems are clearly apparent. Looking at the major widespread land degradation and diminishing economic returns that now appeared, many concerns have arisen over the long-term sustainability (incorporating environmental, economic and social consequences) of conventional, “chemical” production systems. At a local level, negative consequences of conventional farming have included increased soil erosion, low soil biological fertility and reduced biodiversity. Negative consequences, at the regional scale, include pollution of ground waters and eutrophication of rivers and lakes, just to name a few (Matson et al., 1997). It is now known that conventional agricultural practices deplete the soil around 8 to 80 times more rapidly than natural soil building processes. This happens when soil humus depleted without replacement, when cropping patterns destroy soil structure and when minerals are removed from soil more rapidly than they are replaced (Jeavons, 1995). At present, the pattern motivating the Green Revolution is still prevailing with scientists and farmers alike, looking upon technologies such as genetic modification and chemical no-till farming to advance the problems today, such as poor soil fertility and chemical resistant weeds. However, movements such as organic farming and permaculture have started to “take- off” at a more mainstream level and are now contributing to positive environmental externalities. 2.2 Economic Challenges in Agriculture Following the Green Revolution, the implementation of “high tech” cultivars, high yielding varieties of seeds, the use of fertilizer, insecticides, pesticides and mechanical devices greatly increased both the costs and levels of production (Bansal, 1992). For farmers, this has directly led to an increase in the costs of production per hectare, coupled with the problems of environmentally unsustainable farming methods. The increase in annual cost requirements for production and dependability on “chemical farming” has now, in many cases, reduced annual cash flow and increased farm debt (Bansal, 1992; Hooper et al., 2003; Lambeck, 2003). In the case of many farmers in developing countries the Green Revolution has meant that they have completely lost access to farmland (Madeley, 2002).

In some instances, nitrogenous and phosphoric fertilizers are approaching diminishing returns (Tilman et al., 2002). Higher levels of inp2uts are applied annually with decreasing benefits (as yield and profit returns) to the farmer. Diminishing returns of fertilizer application imply that further fertilizer applications may not be as effective at increasing yields. Taken From: Tilman et al. (2002) A, Trends in average global cereal yields; B, Trends in the nitrogen-fertilization efficiency of crop production (annual global cereal production divided by annual global application of nitrogen fertilizer) There exists a real and tangible call for widespread adoption of farm management systems, which develop the quality of degraded agro-ecosystems as well as lessen the growing cycle of high input requirements and increasing debts and liabilities.

2.3 Definition of Agro-production Systems “Traditional agriculture was labor intensive, industrial agriculture is energy intensive, and Permaculture-designed systems are information and design intensive.” (Holmgren, 2003)

2.3.1 Definition of Conventional Agriculture At the farthest, conventional agriculture can be defined as “high external input” agriculture, where the focus is primarily on maximizing production (or yield) and the soil is treated as a practically inert medium in which to grow crops (Munro et al., 2002). The main tenet of conventional agriculture is maximizing yields using mechanization and chemical farming practices. The topic of convectional agriculture is important to the study because this is the type of Agriculture that the farmers of Moroto are practicing.

2.3.2 Definitions and Goals of Organic Agriculture

Organic agriculture places an emphasis on soil biological fertility, with the underlying philosophy that fostering biological cycles within the soil will lead to improvements in the farmland as well as crop quality and yield (IFOAM, 2004a). What is organic agriculture? Organic agriculture is an agricultural system that promotes environmentally, socially and economically sound production of food, fiber, timber etc. In this system soil fertility is seen as the key to successful production. Working with the natural properties of plants, animals and the landscape, organic farmers aim to optimize quality in all aspects of agriculture and the environment. The principles of organic farming are focused primarily on the following three principles (DARCOF, 2000): • The Cycling Principle • The Precautionary Principle • The Nearness Principle

However, given the expansion of organic practices and the global trade of organic products, the extent to which these principles are met, in practice, is somewhat challenged. DARCOF (2000) noted that “in comparison with earlier times, far less attention is currently being paid to societal and cultural values.”

2.3.3 Definitions and Goals of Permaculture The word “Permaculture,” broken down into its components, means “Permanent Culture1”, and implies a system that can truly sustain the needs of current and future generations. Culture, is mostly interpreted as food production culture, given the origin of permaculture. However, the permaculture movement has embodied a multifaceted view . What is Permaculture? Permaculture is a practical concept applicable from the balcony to the farm, from the city to the wilderness. It is a design system for sustainable environments providing food, energy, shelter, material and non-material needs, as well as the social and economic infrastructures that support them. Permaculture means thinking carefully about our environment, our use of resources and how we supply our needs. It aims to create systems that will sustain not only our present, but also future generations (PIJ, 1999). Defining Permaculture as a concept is as dynamic as the permaculture system itself. Since the inception of the permaculture design concept in the late 1970s a diverse range of authors, teachers and students have defined and evolved the permaculture ethos. As discussed by Holmgren (1992), “Permaculture means different things to different people… These uncertainties stem from the holistic (sic) nature of the concept and because Permaculture has always being developing.” Nowadays the permaculture Ethos involves many ethical, conceptual and technical ideas directing the practice of a world-wide movement (Holmgren, 1992). Permaculture is NOT just about gardening or buying a bit of land in the country, it encompasses many activities such as community gardens, LETS (Local Exchange Trading System) Schemes, Organic Allotment sites, and Community Composting Systems.

There is no such concept as a complete permaculture because it is also a process of development over time. Permaculture is a name given to a very old process. Ancient native cultures understood if you ever wasted a resource, you would someday run out of that supply. So there are remnant examples of permaculture in practice all around. Some people are members of the permaculture Institute, and consciously study the subject as a design discipline. Some people just do it for pleasure. A great number of people have never heard of the word but practice it every day naturally (Bell, 1992). 2.4 The History of Permaculture “Permaculture was designed as a bottom-up evolving system of agriculture which developed directly from human needs expressed at a site and a bio-region, rather than a system for modifying existing industrial agriculture. In that sense it was proposed as a truly alternative system which saw unsustainable industrial agriculture and culture as essentially doomed to collapse (Holmgren, 1992).”

Initially permaculture began as Permanent Agri-Culture, however as the Permaculture concept gathered momentum; it was increased to cover all aspects of sustainable living, not just food production. The “culture” to comprise many things from self-sufficient energy designs, houses made from natural materials to bio-intensive food production systems. In all aspects of permaculture, sustainability is clearly the prime tenet

When introduced first by Mollison and Holmgren in the permaculture One Manual (1978), permaculture was proposed as an agricultural system based on perennial plants, modeled on natural ecosystems and trangraced through the application of design. It has been suggested that permaculture emerged from the Organic Growers movement in Tasmania with its first official published documentation, 1976 in the Tasmanian Organic Gardener and Farmer Journal (Holmgren ,1992). The permaculture idea rapidly spread from Tasmania to other parts of rural and urban Australia. In the mid-1980s, Permaculture began to gather momentum as a worldwide movement. Permaculture, as it is known today, has been extended to cover all types of climates, in all countries of the globe – from profitable broad-acre farming systems to sustainable backyard food production and community agriculture programs in least Developed Countries (LDCs). The broad applicability of the permaculture design system and the persistence and obligation of founder Bill Mollison, has no doubt facilitated its successful adoption in many different contexts across the globe. Nowadays, the best examples of permaculture in Western Societies are often found in rural areas and have been created by “disillusioned-alienated urbanites” that have sought another lifestyle. However, aspects of permaculture, such as bioregional specific design models, techniques and species are gradually promising and being more widely taken up. Sheet mulch garden establishment techniques, multi-tier mixed gardens and fire resistant landscape design are examples of permaculture that have gained acceptance across a wide audience (Holmgren, 1992).

2.4.1 The Extension of Permaculture The Permaculture Design System is greatly extension based and much of the “Permaculture movement” has been paying attention on education and training, using the two weeks Permaculture Design Course (PDC). The word Permaculture is copyright and can be used by anyone adhering to the principles and ethics of permaculture. Only graduates of a permaculture Institute can teach permaculture, and they adhere to an agreed on curricula developed by the College of Graduates of the Institutes of Permaculture (Bell, 1992). Registered graduates are authorized to teach permaculture anywhere in the world.

2.5 The Permaculture Design Principles “Don’t cut the sun out as a source of energy, and keep the water running downhill; store it in the soil, and release it clean. Let heated air and water rise, as they will, and forget about pumps to force the reverse of natural flows (Mollison, 1999).”

This is relevant to the study because it shows the key principles around permaculture and the testimonial by Mollison clearly indicates the practicality of Permaculture Design Strategies (PDS) and the emphasis on working with natural energy flows, rather than against. In harnessing and encouraging natural processes the system is able to work most efficiently with the least effort (labor and energy inputs). The core criteria used in design strategies, as outlined by Mollison (1999) are: • Passive energy systems • Adequate climate control on site • Future developments planned • Provision for food self-sufficiency on site • Minimal external energy needs • Wastes safely disposed of on site • Low maintenance structures and grounds

• Water supply assured, conserved and • Fire, cold, excess heat and wind factors controlled and directed

2.5.1 Permaculture and Food Production One of the solution goals in permaculture food production systems is the design of “Food Forests” or “Edible Landscapes”. This entails creating ecosystems that mimic those found naturally, that contain a large variety of edible fruits, vegetables and herbs – essentially ecosystems designed to meet human needs. The food forest concept may be broadened to also contain plants and resources useful for building, clothing, fuel, medicine, decoration, animal fodder, etc. In mimicking the natural forest, the permaculture garden contains a high canopy of trees, lower layers of small trees, large shrubs, herb layers as well as plants which are below ground and creepers which move everywhere (Whitefield, 1997). (Example of permaculture Farm, see Appendix A)

2.5.2 Zone Analysis Zone analysis, in the permaculture design system, is the underlying factor in assessment and implementation of the principles. According to Malison (1988), using a zone analysis is “designed by the application of a master pattern.” Generally zones can be envisaged as a series of concentric circles, with the innermost circle (or nuclei of activity) as the home or dwelling, this moves outwards to the most frequently visited and intensively managed areas and finally onto the least visited areas or wilderness. Of course, in reality, the zone model is derived less from concentric circles and more from fluid areas modeled depending on the access, site characteristics (e.g. slopes and soils), local wind patterns and technical problems (such as previously existing structures) (Malison, 1988). With respect to orchards (Zone 2 or 3) and wilderness (Zone 5) areas, they may exist in the form of wedges, which penetrate through to Zone 0. Zoning is essentially determined on two criteria: 1. The number of times you must visit the plants, animals or structures. 2. The number of times the plant, animal or structure needs you to visit it.

Table 1. Zones in the permaculture design system (adapted from Mollison, 1988) Zone Number Intensity Components 0 Energy Origin The village or dwelling, attached glass- or shade- houses, vines, trellis, pot plants, roof gardens and companion animals. 1 High Elements needing continual observation, work input and visitation. Include fully-mulched or pruned gardens, culinary herbs, foods necessary for existence, chicken laying boxes, seedlings, delicate

species and quiet domestic animals (e.g. fish, rabbits & guinea pigs) 2 Medium Include larger elements such as spot mulched orchards, main-crop beds, and ranging domestic animals whose shelters or sheds may adjoin Z0 or Z1. Also includes terraces, small ponds, hedges and trellis. Forage ranges for milder climate animals (such as milk cows, poultry or goats). Some home orchards may also go here. 3 Medium to Low The “Farm Zone” for commercial crops and animals for sale. Contains natural or little-pruned trees, broad scale farm systems, large water storages, soil adsorption of water, feed- or store- barns and field shelters as hedgerows. 3 Medium to Low The “Farm Zone” for commercial crops and animals for sale. Contains natural or little-pruned trees, broad scale farm systems, large water storages, soil adsorption of water, feed- or store- barns and field shelters as hedgerows or 4 Low Areas bordering on forest or wilderness but still used for wild harvesting, forest and fuel needs of household, pasture or range and is planted to hardy, unpruned or volunteer trees. May contain water- (dams only) or wind-harvesting technology. 5 Very Low Natural, unmanaged

to Nil environments used for occasional foraging, recreation, or just let be. Mollison (1988) In permaculture, efficient energy planning is achieved through the use of the Zone Analysis, and careful placement of plants, animals (as outlined in previous section). Permaculture design recognizes that energy and nutrient systems are inherently leaky, and as a result, instruct that we should design components, elements, structures, plants to minimize, or at least reduce, the leakage from the system – be it an entire farm or just a small backyard plot. In doing so, external inputs and energy requirements will be minimized, thus reducing work, costs etc. With respect to energy relations, permaculture is primarily about reducing the amount of effort needed to meet a given end. Whitfield (1997) redefines work in the Permacultural context - “Work = any need not met by the system.” Bell (1992) notes that, in an ecologically kind of society, we need to lessen our energy expenditure and to maximize the creative and rewarding nature of our personal work. Basically, in working with nature to achieve maximum benefit (highest productivity and lowest energy expenditure) we should do less. This does not denote doing nothing at all – it means running with natural ecological processes (trophic levels, plant strata etc) and harvesting maximum natural energy (wind, sun, water) to attain the best outcome. Any element in the system is cautiously placed to reach maximum efficiency. The key question is “Why did you put that structure (or plant) there?” In permaculture, massive efforts used to “tame nature” are seen as unnecessary, energy consuming and unsustainable. Practices such as field ploughing are therefore replaced with “no-dig” beds, which minimize soil disruption, reduce weeds and require very little maintenance. The use of renewable energies (wind, sunlight) is paramount to the “sustainability” and “self- reliance” principles of permaculture. In conjunction with using wild energies, the use of Biological resources and machinery is also important, depending on the degree of adoption of the Permaculture ethos. 2.6 Nutrient and Waste Management Bell, (1992) states that “systems which pollute are wasteful, not just financially, but in that they create unnecessary work. Nature does not waste; it is a complete system in which each element produced by one part of the process is indisputably needed elsewhere as a resource.” Whitefield (1997) defines “pollution” as any input not used by the system. The Permaculture approach to nutrient management is thoughtful of its approach to energy management. Just as permaculture design strategies endeavor to achieve the maximum cycling of energy within the system, nutrients too are a resource that should not be “lost” from the system. Design strategies recognize nutrient flows and will integrate elements that can either catch or trap the nutrients before they leave the system. Ponds and wetlands are a common example of catching nutrients, as dynamic aquaculture systems can be developed to filter and utilize nutrient runoffs. Another approach is to position food or other useful crops to uptake nutrients before they leave the system.

A complex and high yielding example is the use of integrated aquaculture systems within Permaculture design. These systems are based upon traditional methods of organic waste treatment in China, and have been incorporated in many permaculture designs. Organic waste consisting of human and animal manures, crop and other food wastes are digested anaerobically to generate methane, which is then used as a fuel in household cooking. The remaining slurry is oxygenated, and then added to low ponds where it is used to grow algae, which removes a large quantity of the nutrients from the pond. The algae is used to feed fish, which are grown for human consumption, and the nutrient rich water from the algae and fish ponds (due to fish manure) is used to fertilize gardens and fields. These systems are flexible in size, and can be used for small communities, medium – large farms (with sufficient livestock to generate waste) or even towns and cities (Mollison 1988). 2.6.1 Permanence in Agriculture The utilization of perennial plants, especially trees, is a key component of a permaculture design strategy. The agro ecosystem does not have an opportunity to mature, but is kept young. Such an approach forgoes the ecological niches (opportunities in space and time for plants, animals, and people to obtain a yield) that are produced in mixed maturity ecosystems, and the stability and self-regulation that comes with development. Whilst continual cropping of annual plants every year has a greater maximum yield than a mixed maturity polyculture based upon perennial plants, much more energy and management has to be expended to gain this yield (Mollison, 1988). The immaturity of the annual-based agro ecosystem is also subject to the inherent weaknesses of young organisms – pests, diseases, and reliance on care/management. Mixed maturity polycultures are consciously designed to reflect the local ecosystem around the site, with some “tweaking” of microclimate to increase yield. This provides a wide range of benefits, including: 1) The continuity of the supply from the system (throughout the year). 2) Perennial plants mean non-tillage of the soil, therefore building soil structure. 3) Reduces weeds as ground is always covered, 4) Reduces labour involved in sowing annual crops and weeding. 5) Reduces overall management needs of the site as perennial crops, once established require little maintenance beyond harvesting. 6) Increases opportunities to create microclimate. 7) Increases habitat necessary for ecosystem services (e.g. biological pest control). 8) Increases infiltration of water into the soil due to large root penetration. 9) Slows surface flow of water, therefore decreasing erosion 10) Deposition of condensation on branches mostly runs into the ground in temperate – cold climates Mollison, (1988) 11) Production of soil conditioning biomass through leaf drop

2.6.2 Optimizing Ecological Relationships One of the important attributes of the Permaculture design system is the arrangement of structures to maximize efficiency. Spatial display of the different elements within the system (be it the whole farm ecosystem, or a microcosm on one edge of a pond) is used to optimize the ecological relationship between the components. In optimizing ecological relationships,

the utmost benefit is derived from the system, in the form of symbiotic relationships that lead to higher yields; beneficial predator-prey relations; and nutrient production. The basis of this understanding is associated to nature, in that the most productive and efficient ecosystems are those found at the interacting edges (Mollison 1978). For example, wetlands that forms barriers between marine and estuarine environments and act as filters, feeding grounds, breeding grounds etc while being highly productive. The most important mechanisms used in Permaculture to optimize ecological relationships are “The Edge Effect, Guilds and Stacking.” The following paragraphs outline these mechanisms. In Permaculture, one technique to optimize ecological relationships is the “Edge Effect”. In short, it refers to the additional productivity and efficiency that is found at the interactive edge between two (or more) ecosystems. The edge is defined as the intersection or zone that lies between two media or landscape forms; a border where materials or resources accumulate (Mollison 1991). In Permaculture design, the edge outcome is maximized through the use of non-linear borders and patterns such as keyhole shaped garden beds. Maximum edge effect is also developed by placing two converse ecosystems near each other, such as a pond near the vegetable beds. Guilds are described as “a species’ assembly of plants and animals which benefit from each other, or to a selected crop species, usually for pest control.” Guilds need to be placed in a sensible pattern for management and to affect the benefits of interaction” (Mollison, 1988 and 1991). Therefore permaculturalists are encouraged to observe which plants benefit each other when grown together. Often effective guilds are formed when these helpful plants are planted or “stacked” together. Another important mechanism used to optimize ecological relations is “stacking.” Stacking refers to the arrangement of plants to take advantage of available space, using tall and medium-sized trees with a minor shrub and herb layer. Generally, the plants are arranged to ensure that water and light competition is at a minimum (Mollison, 1991).

2.7 The Permaculture System: Differences with Organic and Conventional

2.7.1 Earth-care, People-care and Fair-shares Even though the outcome, definitions etc of Permaculture may differentiate – the key ethical basis remains the same “Earth-care, People-care and Fair Shares.

2.7.2 Permaculture and Community Permaculture is viewed by its advocates as motivated towards achieving an “information rich culture which is local, autonomous and land based (Holmgren, 1992).” More so than any other proposed agricultural system, does Permaculture integrate social, economic and cultural factors into the context of food production. Where other systems have failed to incorporate the “Triple Bottom Line,” Permaculture considers each component as equally essential as the next. One of the most critical differentials between Permaculture and conventional agriculture is the intention of the system. The intension of conventional agriculture is to yield products for an

external commodity market – influenced by many different practices such as international trade agreements, global price fluctuations etc. on the contrary, Permaculture is a design system for creating sustainable human settlements, focusing on local and community orientated interactions. Although, this must not confuse the fact that the permaculture design principles are broadly relevant and have been effectively implemented in more “conventional” contexts.

2.7.3 Permaculture, Organic farmers and Certification While the theory of permaculture has been copyrighted, at present there is no official certification agenda for permaculture farms. As a result, it is very difficult to give an estimate of the number of persons using these ideologies at a global scale. Many farms receiving ‘Organic’ and/or ‘Biodynamic’ certification are using the permaculture design system as a part of their management practices, some intentionally and others not. In addition to production-based farms, the permaculture system is also utilized by home gardeners, hobby farmers and community gardeners – thus indicating the broad scale applicability of the Permaculture system and its “common sense” principles (Holmgren, 1992). Given that the greater part of people practicing Permaculture (for profitability) are certified organic farmers, the line between the two “alternative” management systems is somewhat blurred. However, if the two systems are compared by looking at the organic certification values and the permaculture design principles, it can be said that permaculture takes the values of organic agriculture one (big) step further. The next table provides an outline of the main distinctions between Organic and permaculture farm management systems. NB. As previously mentioned there are also many similarities between these two systems. These have been omitted in order to focus on the differences. Organic farmers may, in some cases, use permaculture principles however the above points are not explicitly included in the Organic Certification criteria.

Table 2 Differences between Organic Agriculture and Permaculture

Criteria Organic Agriculture Permaculture Prime Tenet of the System Non-use of chemicals Conscious design for minimizing external requirements and maximizing efficiency, leading to sustainable resource use. Farm design Not explicitly designed Consciously designed for maximum efficiency

Site and Bio-region No Yes specific* Permanence of the system Very low, annual or bi- High, permanent crops (i.e. annual changeover. Nuts) intercropped with annuals Attempts to mimic natural No Yes ecosystems Soil Disturbance (ie. Yes, as weed management Strictly no tillage Tillage) Fossil Fuel Use Mainly fossil fuels i.e. Mainly uses biological Tractors for tillage, sowing energy sources i.e. People and harvesting and horses Water Harvesting Not explicitly mentioned Uses ‘keyline’ farm plan with swales etc to maximize water efficiency

Encourages reduced No Yes personal consumption Training required Can be done but not always have a PC design necessary certificate Community Involvement May have farmers markets Incorporates urban agriculture, community education (i.e. primary schools) and farmers markets. Certification Yes No

2.8 Sustainable Agriculture and Permaculture

2.8.1 Definition of Sustainability Sustainability is an ecological, social and economic concept. As defined in the Brundtland Report, it most often refers to “meeting” the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

2.8.2 Permaculture as Sustainable Agriculture The Eco-crisis is largely a consequence of the way that we in the West consume. Permaculture is about recognising this and taking responsibility for our actions and for our planet, and turning changing behaviors of consumption and exploitation so that we can recreate a world without destruction and pollution (Burnett, 2000). The capacity for current “conventional” or “chemical-based” agricultural systems to meet these sustainability goals is limited (EA, 2002). Without a large-scale shift in paradigm, leading to major changes in the operation of our farming production systems, the mentioned outcomes of sustainability will not be achieved (EA, 2002). The combined effects of soil erosion, desertification and salting may mean that agriculture has to feed twice the world’s population on half the present arable land by the year 2020. Much of the lost land will be in food exporting countries, like the USA and Australia (Whitefield, 1997). Matson et al. (1997) noted that ecologically driven management strategies, such as permaculture, can increase the sustainability of agricultural production while greatly reducing off-site consequences.

Permaculture offers practical solutions to the aforementioned problems. Soil erosion can be changed to soil creation by adopting no-till methods and by growing tree crops or other perennials on steep slopes. Desertification is being addressed by introducing people in arid areas to gardening, as a less destructive form of food production than extensive cropping or grazing. Re-establishing trees in arid areas is also a permaculture specialty and, once they are established, trees make their own rain (Whitefield, 1997). As suggested by Tilman et al. (2001) and Whitefield (1997), ecological farm management strategies may be a means of society accomplishing dual objectives of improving yield levels and of preserving the quality and quantity of ecosystem services provided by land and water resources. Given the land design considerations and emphasis on biological diversity, the permaculture philosophy has, in theory, a much higher capacity to meet new sustainability agendas in food production, than both conventional and organic systems (Jevons, 1995; Holmgren, 2003).

2.8.3 Why not organic farming? A primary objective behind any “Ecological Farming” ethos is to maximize the activity of soil micro-organisms and utilize their ability to make soil nutrients available for plant growth (Mader et al., 2002). The increased microbial activity of the soil can increase the soil fertility and increase the availability of nutrients therefore leading to improved nutrient uptake of plants (Mader et al., 2002). This undoubtedly leads to spill-over environmental and production based benefits. However, it is important to clarify that organic agriculture is a method of growing – a technique - whilst permaculture is a design system – an overall strategy. To a certain extent they complement each other, each providing an essential component in an overall system. However, there are a few distinct differences between the two, leading to different strengths of the sustainability of the systems. Organic farming is based on crop rotations, growing a different crop on each piece of land each year. Permaculturalists, on the other hand, prefer to grow a diversity of crops on the same piece of land at the same time, some constituting annuals while others are perennials and stay permanently in the system. A second difference is that permaculture places a strong emphasis on no-till methods. This philosophy, derived from (Fukuoka 1978), is central to permaculture and is absent from most organic farming techniques. No-Till is seen as an essential element of a low energy and “soil building” strategy for the future (Fukuoka, 1978; Whitefield, 1997). In the No-Till farming system, a combination of tree crops, mulch and green manure is used to build soil fertility. Weeds are controlled by slashing, mulching, browsing or flooding (Mollison, 1991). Fukuoka’s Four Principles of No-Till Farming (Fukuoka, 1978) 1. No ploughing or other forms of cultivation which disturb the delicate soil balances 2. No added fertilisers – soil naturally maintains its fertility in harmony with nature’s cycles 3. No weeding – native plants are an important element in building soils 4. No pesticides – when healthy crops are grown in a healthy soil, diseases and insect pests are naturally kept in check

While the General Principles of Organic Farming, as outlined by IFOAM, are inclusive of environmental, economic and social criterion, the actual recommendations for the certification standard do not include these aspects of sustainability (IFOAMb, 2004). While environmental, best management practices are indeed a step towards increasing the

environmental sustainability of agro-ecosystems, they do not, in themselves, meet the necessary economic and social criterion for complete Sustainability. Permaculture systems are the result of using design methods to determine how to manipulate or influence the elements in the system based on the permaculture ethics and design principles. This is a constantly evolving process that can be applied to a myriad of circumstances and scales as depicted in the permaculture flower (Figure 1.3). The permaculture flower depicts how the ethics and principles can be used to weave beneficial relationships among the various domains of sustainable human culture. Around the outside of the flower are various systems associated with and consistent with the permaculture philosophy. In permaculture design, all things are connected and energy wasted in one area is a missed opportunity to use it in another area (e.g. fuel used inefficiently in transportation, is fuel that could have been used in agriculture). Permaculture design emphasizes a bottom-up approach to change (i.e. grassroots); it focuses on pre-industrial sustainable societies and natural systems as models and prioritizes existing pools of wealth as sources for restoring natural capital (Holmgren 2002).

FIGURE 2 The permaculture flower (Holmgren 2002).

Although permaculture is more than a horticultural practice, the remaining focus is on the principles of permaculture that are most relevant to horticulture. The land and nature stewardship petal of the permaculture flower (Figure 2). 2.9 CLIMATE CHANGE

Assessing the effect that climate change may have on global food security is the subject of an abundant literature. Some researchers argue that the overall effect of climate change on food supply is expected to be negligible on a global scale. This argument is based on the assumptions that farmers will take the necessary measures to adapt to climate change, and by the beneficiary effect of the additional CO2 on yields (Adams and Hurd, 1999). However other researchers such as Grechen et al (1990) suggested that climate change will have a devastating effect on agriculture and the human population. He predicted that several hundreds of millions to a billion people could die of hunger in future decades because of climate change.

2.10 SELF-RELIANCE As it forms a vital part of the circumstances by which communities retrieve some control by global forces, a focus on self-reliance is explicit within the this study. Nozick (1992:43) provides an expressive explanation of the concept of self-reliance: Self-reliance starts with the idea of people in communities producing the things they need for themselves, rather than getting them through exchange. A self-reliant economy is the contrast of a global import/export economy, which relies upon external producers to supply localities with excess goods and far-flung markets to purchase items, which communities specialize in producing. A self-reliant economy aims to give roots to local economic activity by tying it to local markets and production to serve community needs. Localism advocates for proximate self-reliance aimed at both social and ecological sustainability. As Kloppenburg et al (1996: 38) explain, a community that depends on its human neighbors, neighboring lands, and native species to supply the majority of its needs must ensure that the social and natural resources it utilizes to fulfill those needs in order to remain healthy. A result of proximate self-reliance is that social welfare, soil and water conservation, and energy efficiency become issues of urgent practical concern. There is a sizeable literature relating to the idea of self-reliance.

Similarly, Shuman (2000: 6) explains that localism “does not mean walling off the outside world”, but rather emphasizes the nurturing of locally owned businesses, the sustainable use of local resources, the employment of local workers at fair wages and the provision of goods and services to primarily local consumers. Hines (2000) argues that localism is not against trade, but that trade should be local wherever possible. In economic terms, Bridger and Luloff (1999) and Campbell (1997) point out that localism does not ignore larger economic structures, but that self-reliant communities are less dependent on and consequently less vulnerable to external market forces. It is important to distinguish between self-reliance and self-sufficiency. Kloppenburg et al (1996: 38) make the distinction between self-reliance and self-sufficiency by pointing out that “self-reliance implies the reduction of dependence on other places, but does not deny the desirability or necessity of external trade relationships”.

Similarly, Bellows and Hamm (2002: 275) state that, “local autonomy…does not reflect the isolated process of self-sufficiency. Instead, it is defined by the ability to negotiate power and needs from a local starting point across geographic scales…as well as across borders of socially constructed difference”.

CHAPTER THREE

3. OBJECTIVE AND METHODOLOGY Data Collection and Analytical Methodology 3.1 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY The objectives of the research project are to: 1. Examine the factors responsible for the current food insecurity of the region. 2. Investigate the potential of permaculture in addressing food insecurity. 3.2 Data Collection Primary data for the study was collected from two sub counties namely Abim and Moroto sub county from the three livelihood regions of Karamoja district (Agricultural zone,Agropastrol zone and Pastrol zone) during August –December 2010, respondents were asked about their food security status during the period December 2010. The districts for the survey were selected based on the following Criteria: • Food security status (chronic, transitory, stable) of the district, based on the categorization in a 2010 study on food security. (FEWSNET, 2010) • Geographical location by region, to ensure the sample was district representative • Agricultural and agro-ecological zones within which the counties are located, to capture the different farming systems in the District.

The study included both quantitave and qualitative data collection to test the validity of the results. Primary data was collected from a total of fourty respondents. Questionnaires and interviews were first tested with collogues and when proved to answer research question were administered with the help of an interpreter to the respondents. The respondents included 10 ordinary Karamoja residents, 10 Moroto Farmers and 10 Abim Permaculture adopter also referred to as the Green warriors. At sub-county level, households were selected randomly, except that care was taken to include households headed by females. Secondary data was collected from a total of 10 respondents from District and Sub country officials on production, population, etc and other global literature on food security were obtained from several publications, both national and international.

3.3 Analytical Methodology The definition of food security used in this study was based on the households' perspectives. The major food concern of a household is to have something to eat, at all times, basically having enough (in terms of quantity and availability) to feed the household. The issue of quality (nutritional content) is secondary. For example, if a household has a plot of cassava (a starchy food) that forms the main component of the diet, and can sustain the household from one season to the next, the household considers itself to be food secure. Yet, from a nutritional point of view, the household could be food insecure because such a diet would be deficient in proteins, oils and vitamins. It is this very basic definition that this study adopts, and household data collection was based on the concept of “enough” as perceived by the household. Therefore, a household is food secure in a given season if it has enough food to provide its members all the usual meals in a day, for the entire season. Otherwise, the household is food insecure

3.4 EXPLORATORY RESEARCH Permaculture is a relatively new and unexplored area of interest, particularly in the region of Karamoja, and calls for an initial exploration of perceptions, ideas and relationships in order to start a foundation for further research development. The multi-dimensional and unexplored Nature of the concepts and context of this area of inquiry situates this study within the parameters of exploratory research. According to Palys (1997), exploratory research aims to gain familiarity or achieve new insights into a phenomenon and its dynamics. The focus on Permaulture in Karamoja places this study within the realm of exploratory research as very little information is available on permaculturalist in this area, their views and opinions, or their potential role in local food system development in Karamoja District.

3.5 CASE STUDY APPROACH

Yin (1994) writes that a case study methodology is suitable for use in studies where the Phenomenon under study is not readily distinguishable from its context. The intention of the case study approach is to optimize understanding of the case itself, rather than generalization beyond (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). The exploration of the concepts of permaculture and Ordinary Agriculture lends itself naturally to a case study approach. Because discussion of these concepts is rooted in the context of growing food to try to address food insecurity, the study of these concepts cannot be separated from its context.

3.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY The time allocated for the study was not enough since the researcher used two weeks to visit both Abim and Moroto case studies. The security status in Karamoja was not good since Karamoja boarders Northern Uganda that has recently pulled through from 20 years nursing rebel group Lord’s Resistance Army and threats from attacking cattle raiders. There was rumor from time to time of attacks that didn’t enable the researcher stay longer. Secondly the area is very large and it was impossible to do research the whole region alone this limited the researcher to just two regions Abim and Moroto that were considered very relevant for the research because respondents from these areas have relevant information for the study.

CHAPTER FOUR 4. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS In this research, I have defined permaculture, and presented an example of how it is applied in Abim district by the Green warriors and I also explored the farmers of Moroto that are practicing convectional agriculture. Of course, it not a “perfect” system – since each system had its strengths and weaknesses. After the collecting the data from the research using the various methods I mentioned in chapter 3, I went on to analyze my data using a computer programme called excel ,I was able to portrays them specifically using graphs and pie charts to present the results. 4.1 PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS The Age of the respondents for the Ordinary Karamojong was between 15 years to 40 years that of the Abim permaculturalists was between 1 year to 40 years and for the Moroto Farmers was between 18 years to 56 years. The sex of the Respondents was not a factor in this survey but it must be noticed that since it is a traditional society mostly men came out to answer the questions because they are considered the household heads. In regards to the house hold size the 60% of respondents reported having a house hold size of between 5-10 people as shown in figure 4.1. This is not surprising because it typical of extended families that is so typical of a karamojong home.

Figure 4.1 Household size

4.2 Source of Household Food The results of household survey on sources of household food are presented in Figure 4.2 as shown below. The majority of the Moroto Farmers (50%) ranked food aid as the main source of household food consumption. Followed by 14% of the Respondents with picking wild fruit. The percentage of respondents that relayed on their production was 10%, the Percentage of Karamojongs in Abim that exchanged labor for exchange of food were 10%, 5% bought food from the market and finally a less significant source was receiving gifts from relatives 1%. From the figure 4.2 it clear the state of food availability since the respondents still relay on food aid majorly in Moroto among the farmers , not many have enough money to buy food from the market therefore many of them resort to picking wild

fruits and even exchanging labor just to make sure they get a meal for the day. As for the Green warriors in Abim majority of them are relaying on their gardens for food and also farmers in the areas have adopted Permaculture and are reaping good harvest. This is important because it shows that permaculture may be able to provide household food security to those depending on food aid because it gives recommends solution to the food aid that will not be short-lived.

Figure 4.2 Sources of food

4.3 Causes of Food Insecurity According to the results obtained, (see Figure 4.3) majority of the respondents (50%) in both Abim (Permaculturalists), Moroto (ordinary farmers) and the Ordinary residents gave weather-related problems (Unpredictable rainfall) as the most important reason for food insecurity in both regions. The second most important cause of food insecurity in both periods was pests and diseases (30%). Other significant Contributors to household food insecurity were inadequate crops and tools (10%), not growing enough food during the season (2%) and soil infertility (8%), with varying importance in both seasons. Figure 4.3 gives a summary of the causes of food insecurity in Abim and Moroto sub county Karamoja district. From the above data it is clear that there exists potential for more farming to take place since the soils are fertile, the option would be to help rectify the biggest problem of unreliable rainfall during the season. Permaculture would have potential in Karamoja because it offers various strategies to help reduce the intensity of food insecurity such as methods of home gardens that will enable the Karamojong have at least food at home they can harvest for their households.

Figure 4.3 Causes of food insecurity

4.4 Coping Strategies Figure 4.4 gives summary of coping strategies covered by the study, majority of rural households (50%) derive their food consumption from selling labor to get some income to buy food and 30% of the respondents resorted to reducing the number of meals or ration, while during times of food scarcity most Permaculturalist (50%) in Abim depend on their own gardens as a source of food. if season are bad and there is no harvest the majority (40%) of the farmers of Moroto relay on exchange of labor for food. Other coping strategies include donations from relatives and neighbors and sale of livestock However, research data indicate that in both regions, the garden for the permaculuturalists (green warriors) and selling of labor by the ordinary household and farmers are by far the largest source of household food in times of food shortages. Figure 4.4 is very relevant because it shows some of the strategies that go along side permaculture and how extreme they are, it actually shows the urgency of permaculture since it will enable the Karamojong to resort to their home gardens as the source food.

FIGURE 4.4 Coping Mechanisms 4.5 Ensuring District Food Security In order to understand Respondents were asked what they thought should be the role of local government in ensuring food security. Three major roles were identified namely: providing information through seminars and extension services (30%), provision of credit and supply of improved Seed (.25%) Other roles expected of local governments are summarized the Figure 4.5 below. This data is important because firstly it shows what the local government initiatives are and secondly it points out if some ideas of permaculture are being carried out unknowingly. From the figure it is clear that the people of Karamoja are ignorant of what needs to be done and long for information on how to work towards food security. This is importance because the local government can use this to sensitize the people on permaculture and in the long run they can reap from it.

FIGURE 4.5 Role of Local

4.6 PERCEPTIONS ON SOLUTIONS One of the key questions in the research was about respondents’ views of what needs to be done to ensure that Karamoja is a food secure district. For the key strategies, the results almost tally with those for household strategies for ensuring food security at the local government level. Farmer education on Permaculture (80%) Mechanizing production (60%) availability of improved crop varieties and provision of credit were given as the three major strategies for ensuring food security in Uganda. This figure is important because it portrays that not all respondents looked at permaculture as a good incentive like the Green warriors did, some of the farmers thought that the permaculturalist were competitors in farming. If the farmers are actually informed that permaculture could help them improve on their harvest by using various strategies of water harvesting, pest control in a long run it could be adopted by Farmers thus increasing the level of food supply in the market and checking food insecurity.

FIGURE 4.6 Perception on solution 4.7 ENERGY SOURCES Another important theme that was tackled by the research was the source of Energy for the people of Abim and Moroto, the majority 100% of ordinary residents, 90% of the Moroto farmer and 70% of the Abim Permaculturalist answered firewood as the main source of energy especially from forests for purposes of cooking, light and also sell for a sources of income. In this era of Global warming and climate change we are trying to control the amount of carbondioxide released on earth, permaculture comes along with alternative sources of energy that if adopted by Karomoja could possibly reduce their reliance on firewood that leads to deforestation and loss in the natural forests. Other insignificant sources are shown in figure 4.7 below.

FIGURE 4.7 Energy sources

4.8 Education and Food Security Figure 4.8 summarizes the result survey related to education and food security. Most Respondents in the research had primary education, followed by ordinary level education. 80% of the farmers, 70% of the permacuturalist and 60% of the ordinary households have children going to primary school because of Universal primary education. There does not seem to be a specific pattern that indicates that the higher the level of education of the head, the more food secure a household will be. However, households headed by people with no formal education at all were food insecure in both regions. This may possibly mean that while some level of education is important to household food security, its marginal contribution beyond primary education is very small. But it also indicates that there is a possibility of impacting education of permaculture to the younger generation, maybe it could be added into the curriculum so that children can grow up knowing how to practice it.

FIGURE 4.8 Education

CHAPTER FIVE 5. RECOMMENDATION

In this chapter, I attempt to synthesize my thinking process and merge what I have discussed previously, in order to assess 1) the theoretical sustainability of permaculture, 2) the potential of permaculture in addressing the food security problem of Karamoja, 5.1 SUSTAINABLE 5 ZONE RING Basing on the results presented in Chapter 4, the research showed the Green warriors of Abim are a step ahead in regards to addressing household food security. They are more food secure basing on the fact that at least they are liable to having a meal since many of them now produce food at their home for consumption and incase of surplus they sell it to gain a little income to meet the daily needs. It is therefore from the Green warriors strategy of Sustainable 5Ring Zones that I draw my recommendation. For Karamoja to move forward to food security(refer to Appendix C for conceptual framework) , the government ,non government organization should consider adopting the 5 rings Zones of Sustainability because it advocates for low external input within the area as explained below,

5.1.1 RING 1 HOMEGARDENS Home garden provides food for the households, increase supply of food for the market. Considering that they grow good home gardens they would have the possibility of solving health problem (nutritional problems) as well as food security problems. Home gardens should consist of a diversity of vegetables within which creates surplus that flows into the local market and also creates income that never existed before when the households sold their food to the markets.

5.1.2 RING 2 VILLAGE

In the villages like those in Karamoja the first thing to control would be the cattle that are moving around in the village. Stop them from invading people’s gardens and eating up residents’ food. The Karamojong can still use the animal dung for the manure used in the home gardens, they can then have street trees in the village that are multi functional, food tress, fruit trees, shelter trees and those trees used specifically for firewood all through the village. It should look like a forest. In the village since there is universal primary education and majority of children are enrolled, they can have a permaculture demo garden where they can harvest food for sell and also take home vegetables to complement their diets. Since there is free labor the children can also have nurseries where they grow the trees for all the zones to be planted in the village. In turn the children will learn about techniques of low external input agriculture that permaculture entails.

5.1.3 RING 3 SMALL FARMS AROUND VILLAGES The Karamojong should increase the capacity of each farm by teaching them better permaculture strategies. Instead of food being brought in from other external sources like food aid, the people will be able to produce their own food and improve food security. Besides increasing the food being grown the surplus can be sold to the Market to increase the variety of healthy food in the market and also the villages can now earn money from selling their crops to have some disposable income. The food grown in these areas can be used to help the regions that are still battling with food insecurity, since healthy food can be readily available in their markets.

5.1.4 RING 4 EDIBLE FOREST This will mainly include practices of reforestation only that there is diversity of what is being grown; this may include flowers, food trees, medicine trees and more. This edible forest will also be relevant for purposes of animal’s breeding the villages can come once in a while to pick food from the village. This will also help to control the level of deforestation and in turn avoid further deterioration of the natural resource and capture carbondioxide thus reduce.

5.1.5 RING 5 ECO ZONE This is the area that humans do not go into anymore. Every village will have an area that will be left to regenerate for wildlife use. Zone 5 is where animals breed up and move back to zone 4 and leave there.

oone

orestry

Small arm in dierent illages

illage

omeGardens

Figure 5.5rings of Sustainability

CHAPTER SIX 6. CONCLUSION

Whatever the impressions are of food aid as it has been implemented in the region of Karamoja to date, it is crucial that decision makers more closely scrutinize the multiple needs of the region when planning the next steps of assistance. It is highly recommended that food aid distributions not be completely phased out especially to the areas of acute food insecurity but that they more closely target food insecure households so that they can reach households/communities in need reliably and consistently. It is also vital, however, that such organizations should consider that food insecure households with only food assistance will help to address shortterm food needs. It does not, nonetheless, offer them with any strategy by which they might begin to improve upon and rebuild their livelihoods and their resiliency).

The penalties of conventional farming have negatively impacted across environmental, social and economic circles. This includes soil erosion; low soil biological fertility; reduced biodiversity; loss of income for farmers; superior dependence on agribusiness corporations; increases in malnutrition and famine; increases in agricologenic disease as suffered by the Karamojongs.

However from the interview with Agnes Atyang. FEWS NET Representative Karamoja she remitted that less than 30% of subsistence farmers’ use improved seeds/breeds, farmers in Moroto are not involved in the prioritization, implementation, testing and impact assessment of research, technologies are not adequately tested and demonstrated under farm circumstances, technologies are disseminated without complementary packages leading to poor farm level performance and there is limited socio-economic input into technology assessment and selection.

Therefore rather than just introducing good technology for agriculture, providing aid, omitting chemicals from the system and focusing on the soil as the means to improving the overall biological functionality, there is need for the Ugandan government to incorporate permaculture to the whole system design into farm management in Karamoja. In doing so, the permaculture system attempts to maximize beneficial interactions between plants, animals, energy and nutrient cycles and other on-farm factors, such as topography and hydrological features. Permaculture also attempts to maximize off-farm factors such as local markets, local employment, investment in community resources and development of local infrastructure. This may potentially enable land managers to make better use of their yields and obtain a more satisfactory and environmentally benign lifestyle. Karamoja is a rich district when looking through the lens of Permaculture. Karamojongs should make use of the whatever assets already exist by mimicking the ecological processes, interactions and services of its ecosystems while using appropriate science and technology to enhance agricultural understanding and production. The result, as it has been for some permaculture adopters, will be an agriculturally productive, diverse, and environmentally benign food system that will allow for a healthy labor force and true “bottoms-up” development.

REFERENCES. ACF International. Food Security and Livelihoods Assessment, Kaabong and Moroto, Karamoja. September 2008, updated May 2009 Agyare-Kwabi P. (2003), Women and Food Security in West Africa, a paper presented at a seminar on Women, Integrated Farming Systems and Food Security in West Africa, held in Accra from 25 – 28 November 2003, pp. 17 Allen, P. (1999). Reweaving the food security safety net: Mediating entitlement and entrepreneurship. Agriculture and Human Values Vol:16 pp117-129 Association, Vol. 50, No. 2. 93-97. Association, Vol. 50, No. 2. 93-97. Bach, H., Christensen, N. & Kristensen, P. (ed). (2001). State of the Environment in Denmark, 2001. National Environmental Research Institute, Ministry of the Environment. Copenhagen, Denmark. Background Documents. World Food Summit 1996 Rome Bansal, M. R. (1992). Cost Benefit Analysis in Agriculture. Friends Publications, Meerut, India Bell, G. (1992). The Permaculture Way – Practical steps to creating a self- sustaining world. Thorsans Publishers. London, UK. Bridger, J.,C., & Luloff, A., E. (1999). “Toward an interactional approach to sustainable community Burnett, G. (2000). Permaculture – a Beginners Guide. Land and Liberty Press, Essex, UK. Campbell, C. C. (1989). “Community based nutrition monitoring”. Journal of the Canadian Dietetic Campbell, C. C. (1989). “Community based nutrition monitoring”. Journal of the Canadian Dietetic Campbell, D. (1997). “Communtiy-controlled economic development as a strategic vision for the Denzin, N., K. and Lincoln, Y., S. (Eds) (2000). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Second Edition.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. development”. Journal of Rural Studies, 15. 377-387. EA. (2002), State of the Environmental Report – Agriculture. Environment Australia, Commonwealth Government of Australia, Canberra. Ellis,F and S.Biggs.2001 Evolving themes in rural development 1950s-2000s Development PolicyReview 19 (4):427-448 FAO (2001), Handbook for Defining and Setting up a Food Security Information and Early Warning System (FSIEWS), Rome, Italy, pp.128 FAO (2002a), Anti-Hunger Programme : Reducing Hunger through Sustainable Agricultural and Rural Development and Wider Access to Food, Second Draft, Rome, Italy, pp. 36 FAO (2002b), Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, Rome, Italy, pp. 252. FAO. (1996a), Food Production : The Critical Role of Water, in World Food Summit, Volume 1 , Technical background documents 6-11, Rome, Italy, pp. 62

FAO. (1996b), Food Production : The Critical Role of Water, in World Food Summit, Volume 2 , Technical background documents 6-11, Rome, Italy, pp. 62 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation (FAO) 1996. Technical Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C. Food Security Issues, Vol. 2, No. 2 Fukuoka, M. (1978). The One-Straw Revolution: An Introduction to Natural Farming. Rodale Press Inc, USA. Gottlieb, R. (2001). Environmentalism Unbound: Exploring New Pathways for Change. Cambridge: Government of Uganda (GOU). 1998. Poverty Trends in Uganda 1992-1996. Hines, C. (2000). Localization: A Global Manifesto. London: Earthscan.

nd Holmgren D (2002), Permaculture-principles & pathways beyond sustainability, 2 edition, Holmgren design services, Victoria, Australia, P. 286. Holmgren, D. (1992). “Uncommon Sense”. In Permaculture International Journal: Green Economics. Issue No: 44 Sept-Nov 1992. Holmgren, D. (2003). Permaculture: principles and pathways beyond sustainability. Holmgren Design Services, Victoria, Australia. Hooper S., Barrett D., & Martin P. (2003). Australian Grains Industry 2003: Performance and outlook. Australian Bureau Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE). http://www.abare.gov.au IDRC. IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements) (2002) Principle Aims of Organic Agriculture. In: Basic Standards for Organic Production and Processing. IFOAM. Lambeck R. (2003). Farming for the Future: designing agricultural landscapes for conservation and production. Pacific Conservation Biology, Vol: 9. pp68-82. MacRae, R., Mougeot, L, & Welsh, J. (Eds). For Hunger-Proof Cities (pp. 30-36). Ottawa: McGranaham, G. et al (1999) Environmental Change and Human Health in Countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, pp. 214 Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development. Discussion Paper MIT Press. Mollison, B. (1988). Permaculture, A Designers’ Manual. Tagari Publications. NSW, Australia. Mollison, B. (1991). Introduction to Permaculture. Tagari Publications. NSW, Australia. Mollison, B. (1991). Introduction to Permaculture. Tagari Publications. NSW, Australia. Mollison B. (1999). Permaculture Two: Practical Design for Town and Country in Permanent Agriculture (First published 1979). Tagari Publications. NSW, Australia.

Opio Fred. 1997. “ Structural Adjustment, Growth and Poverty in Uganda” in Palys, T. 1997. Research Decisions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives. Toronto: Harcourt Brace. Pelletier, D., Kraak, V., McCullum, C., Uusitalo, U., & Rich, R. (1999). “Community food security:

st PIJ. (1999). Permaculture International Journal: 21 Birthday Edition - Sustainable solutions from the city to the wilderness. Issue No: 72 Sept-Nov 1999. Power, E. M. (1999). “Combining Social Justice and Sustainability for Food Security”. In Koc, M., Publications. Salience and participation at community level”. Agriculture and Human Values. Vol. 16. 401- Stites, Elizabeth, Darlington Akabwai, Dyan Mazurana, and Priscillar E. Ateyo. Angering Akuju: Survival and Suffering in Karamoja. Tufts University Feinstein International Center. December 2007. Structural Adjustment and Poverty in Uganda. Economic Policy Research Bulletin, sustainable agriculture movement”. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, Vol. 12, No. 1. U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) 2002 Food Security Crisis in Ethiopia and Eritrea, USAID Fact Sheet Washington, DC November 13, 2002 http://www.state.gov/p/af/rls/fs/15208.htm UBOS Uganda Beaurea of Statistics Population Programme Report 2008 Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS). 2008. Statisticalabstract UBOS, Kampala, Uganda UNCDF (1995), Poverty Reduction, Participation and Local Governance: The Role of UNCDF - A Fund for Community & Local Development, UNCDF Policy Series, Vol.1. UNDP, Human Development Report Uganda, 2007 UNEP (2002), Africa Environment Outlook : Past, Present and Future Perspectives, UNEP, Nairobi, pp 422. Van Braun, Joachim, Howarth Bouis, Shubh Kumar and Rajul Pandya-Lorch. Vol.3. No.1 (April 1997). EPRC, Kampala, Uganda. Wagner, P. A. & Warren, G. L. “Addressing food security issues in the community”. Hunger and Whitefield, P. (1997). Permaculture in a Nutshell. Permanent Publications, Hampshire, England. World Food Programme, 2002 Country Programme—Mali (2003–2007) WFP/EB.3/2002/8/1, 12 September 2002 pp27 Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

APPENDIX

APPENDIX A: PERMACULTURE DESIGN OF A FARM

(From Introduction to Permaculture, Mollison, 1994)

APPENDIX B: SEASONAL CALENDER AND CRITICAL TIMELINE

APPENDIX C:PERMACULTURE MODEL

0809:;;:<&=>! ?:@A>9 ! !

"3#4! BC80>BC=D !

=,E/'! %"#'+(4(+5 ! =,E/'! %7##$ !

!"//$ %!+',)-./'+ ! !7//$ ! F34+(G,+(/) !

!

! !:;

7##$! !"#'+(4(+5 ! !C)!",'JM!!!!!!!!!!",44/1 ! !

!+',)-./'+ ! !+',)-./'+ ! !+',)-./'+ !

!C)!",'JM!!!!!!!!!! "//$! "/'#-+ !

!+',)-./'+ ! This conceptual framework shows the strong flows and linkages between different components of the system.The box identified as “sustainable market” represents all off farm activities and resources, hence it includes products sold or labor going off the farm as purchased inputs and household items. The household is the core of the Permaculture farm system, most importantly it derives food security from the animals and crops to meet house hold needs. This focus is related to what Ellis and Bigg (2002) called the the ‘small-farm first’ paradigm as the engine of growth and development. It is therefore from this that I draw the recommendation to of permaculture addressing household foodinsecurity.The household contributes labor use for the farm, it derives household income from selling crops and animals to the sustainable market and through waste can contribute to the manure used on the farm.

Secondly is the Animals that act as a source of food and if sold income to the household, they also help with on farm transport. Manure can be derived from their waste that is used on the crops to ensure good growth. The crops are also a key component in the system because they are a source of food to the household and to the animals. When sold to other households and to the sustainable market are sources of income to meet daily needs. Finally the foodforest is an important component of the system, it provides fuel to the household it also acts as a source of regeneration where many trees can be replanted. The foodforest is one that can also provide food for the animals to feel on. The components in this system interplay with one another sustainably and complement each other to create a self reliant system.

APPENDIX D: PICTURES FROM GREEN WARRIORS ABIM

The Green warriors are Permaculturalist led by Australian Permaculture expert Steven Crane. They are situated in Abim district and started growing food at a training center but have carried what they learnt to their homes. In order to address nutrition related illnesses, Steve Crane expanded his teaching curriculum to include the importance of diversified diet- as the Karamojong diet consisted of nearly three-quarters plate processed maize meal. He soon discovered that when advocating for diet diversification, one must also include the practical problem of access to a diverse food base. In response to poor access to diverse foods and the national focus on staple crop production, the Steve crane began looking for methods and approaches to agriculture that increase farmers access to nutritious food, reduce dependency on maize and external inputs, and could be cultivated on a small plot of land. In their search, the Steve found that all of the resources needed for a nutritious and healthy lifestyle were growing indigenously in Abim and that it was only in the past one hundred years that Uganda began to have nationwide problems with hunger caused by soil infertility and volatile environmental factors such as drought and flooding. In their search for a holistic, assets-based approach to improving the nutrition status of the population of people served by the Transform Uganda, the Steve Crane found Green warriors of Abim sub county Karamoja district Permaculture offers a means for the average Karamoja Green warriors to diversify his/her diet and increase their health with only a small amount of land and without relying on external inputs to improve soil fertility. In addition, Permaculture offers a strategy for bottom-up development by creating a healthy, nourished labor force free from the barriers of food and nutrition insecurity and expensive agricultural inputs. Seeing Permaculture as a response to their immediate concerns in Abim well as to other barriers to development that Karamoja faces, Steve crane contributed significantly to establishing Permaculture to Kara.moja the Green warriors are nearly one hundred members, many of whom are organizations that serve thousands of Karamojongs. Permaculture is slowly gaining recognition in Karamoja (and Nationwide) as a form of sustainable agriculture that holistically addresses issues of food and nutrition insecurity as well as decreased soil fertility, dependence on external agricultural inputs, deforestation.

Stee rane

Group of Green warrior women weeding the garden.

Stee Crane

The Greenwarriors setting up the zones in the training center.

Stee Crane

The model of the planned training center that was build by the Green warriors

Stee Crane

Some of the Green warriors looking at the garden of cabbages

Stee Crane

The Gree warrior young girls watering the plants

Stee Crane

A strategy by the green warriors to control flooding.

Stee Crane

Steve Crane with trees to be planted and the equipment used on the farm.

Stee Crane

Steve addressing the Warriors before a hard day’s work on the farm

Stee Crane

The warriors nurturing the plants.

Steerane

The water harvesting strategy used by the green warriors

C S SS STRUCTURED QUESTIONAIRE

Karamoja people (Households)

OBJECTIVE: Obtain general information on the food insecurity and Permaculture

Questions: Your name, please.

What is your Sex Please • Female 7 • Male 3 What is your household size? • 1-5 1 • 5-10 6 • 10- 15 3 What sources of energy do you use? • Hydro 0 • Solar 0 • Firewood10 How many school going children do you have • Primary 6 • Secondary2 • Tertially2 • University0 Do your harvested crops meet your domestic requirements? • Yes4 • No6 Is water available throughout the year? • yes 3 • No7 What do you do for a livihood? • agro pastoralist 3 • Trader 2 • unemployed 5 • agriculture What is the source of your food? • Your garden 3 • Market 2 • Food aid 5 • Gather from the bush How many times do you have a meal in a day? • Once 5 • twice 3 • thrice2 What is your typical meal for dinner and what are the components? • Posho and beans 9 • Posho ,beans and Vegetables 1 • Posho,beans ,vegetables and beef0 What is your relationship with your neighbour? • Good 7 • Bad 3 What do you think is the solution to the household food insecurity? • Permaculture 5 • Continued food aid 1

• Helping farmers 4 How many dependants do you have? • 1-4 3 • 5-10 7