Damage Assessment Report and Response Plan

2014 Afghanistan Flash Floods

(Final)

Kabul, 4 September 2014

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Afghanistan

1 Executive Summary:

In April/May 2014, the northern and north-eastern provinces of Afghanistan have been hit by severe flash flooding and landslides due to heavy rainfall and melting of spring snow, severely affecting the life and livelihood of the population in the region.

According to the latest statistics from the United Nations (UN) Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Afghanistan, on 11 June 2014, a total of 20 506 households (approx. 140 000 individuals) in 27 provinces and 132 districts have been affected. The majority of the caseload (63%, or 12 862 families) is based in 15 districts of Baghlan, Balkh, Faryab, Jawzjan, Takhar, Samangan and Sar-e-pul provinces.

The international community, in coordination with the Afghanistan National Disaster Management Authority (ANDMA) and its provincial arm (Provincial Disaster Management Committee – PDMC), have been providing support for the immediate needs of the affected population through situation analysis, initial assessment and life-saving assistance. However, there is a need to determine the extent of the damage to the agricultural sector, and to identify the potential response to support the affected population to recover and restore their livelihoods.

In collaboration with the Food Security and Agriculture Cluster (FSAC) members, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL) and its provincial counterpart (DAIL), the Ministry of Energy and Water (MEW), a rapid assessment on the damage of the agriculture sector has been planned, to be carried out as a matter of urgency. The rapid assessment focused on the key areas (agricultural livelihoods, cereal crops, perennial crops, vegetable pulses, fodder crops, livestock, forestry, posture, agriculture infrastructure to understand the extent of damages and magnitudes of impact on the agriculture sector. The assessment aims at proposing a set of recommendations to the decision makers in the fields of agriculture and food security for the implementation of programmes oriented towards the recovery and restoration of the livelihoods of the affected population.

The assessment considered 105 of the worst affected villages (6 to 8 villages per district) in 15 districts of seven provinces.

The survey has indicated that in these 105 villages, about US$136 million have been lost in the agriculture sub sector damages such as land damages, crop damages including cereal, vegetable, pulses, cash crops and fodder, orchards damages, forest and livestock losses. This requires immediate attention to provide recovery support to the affected communities in order to restore their agricultural livelihoods.

1. Background information and introduction

1.1Agriculture in the national economy Agriculture represents a key productive sector (31.4% of Gross Domestic Product in 2009/2010) in Afghanistan. About 76 percent of Afghans live in rural areas and 78 percent of the active population (2009 estimate) is employed in agriculture. About 55 percent of the Afghan households are engaged in farming, and 68 percent have some type of livestock. In

2 general, characterized as low productivity subsistence agriculture, it still plays a key role in the livelihoods of the country.

Agricultural products (including carpets and rugs) represent 80 percent of total licit exports. Major exports are dried fruits and nuts, making up 27 percent of total exports in 2010/11, while fresh fruit accounts for 7.2 percent.

Overall performance of the sector depends on cereal annual crop production, which accounts for over 80 percent of agricultural economy. Agriculture growth is volatile, largely depending on seasonal rain and snow precipitation, subject to weather fluctuations, coupled with uncertainty and deterioration of security conditions.

1.2Structure of the agricultural sector

Only 12 to 15 percent of total land is suitable for cultivation and 45 percent of the land is “rangeland”. Arable land comprises 3.2 million hectares of irrigated land (but one third is left fallow for water shortage), and 6.1 million hectares are non-irrigated (rain-fed). Over 80 percent of agricultural products are grown on irrigated land. Potential extension of the irrigable land may reach up to 5.3 million hectares. Reliable, on time and enough water supply is a major constraint to agricultural growth and food security, given the prevailingly arid to semi-arid climate. Afghanistan has an average annual rainfall of around 300 mm mainly concentrated in the winter months when there is no irrigation requirement. Precipitation is mostly in the form of snowfall in high altitudes which is a natural reserve to partly fulfill the crop water requirement in low lands during growth stage of crops. In early spring more floods and later on shortage of water/ drought hit most part of the country. Afghanistan has a lowest storage capacity per capita in the region. Out of average 57 billion m³ annual surface water resources available, Afghanistan uses only about 30 percent for irrigation with poor levels of efficiency. Traditional irrigation methods (canals, karezes, springs and wells) absorb more than 90 percent of water supply for irrigation, which allies with high wastages of water.

Low productivity: low productivity of crops, livestock and forestry prevails, even if significant improvements have taken place, which on turn depends on other constraints. A comparison with neighboring countries shows that changes in Afghanistan are significant in overall production and yield terms but are lower than those achieved in trading competitors such as Iran and Pakistan. Major constraints are: prevalence of small per-capita holdings; inadequate regulating water resources infrastructures (reservoirs/dams); poor irrigation and water management; inadequate land management; use of obsolete technology; inadequate land preparation; inadequate use of improved seed, fertilizer and pesticides; limited crop diversification (excessive focus on wheat); inadequate crop rotation; improper use of agro- techniques;depletion of rural infrastructures; inadequate skills among herders and farmers on veterinarian treatments; insufficient production and inadequate quality of forage and feed for domestic animals; conflicts regarding traditional grazing rights and land use; low skills among input providers on contagious animal diseases and zoonotic diseases; low quality/safety control of products of animal origin and low quality of inputs (counterfeit and sub-standard medicines and vaccines); decreased pasture due to continuous drought and

3 overgrazing and breakdown/conversions of rangelands to rain-fed land for certain crops; inadequacy of social services; weaknesses of producer organizations; lack of legislative, financial and technical support.

Inadequacies in post-harvest operations, infrastructure, quality of production and food safety: improper handling, threshing and cleaning, and poor storage; lack of skills for quality processing; poor quality control, also for food safety; limited transport facilities; insufficient milling capacity; lack of good packaging or labeling equipment; inadequate hygiene practices; and lack of cold chains.

2. Assessment

Objective of the assessment: the assessment aimed at proposing a set of recommendations to the decision makers in the fields of agriculture and food security for the implementation of programmes oriented towards the recovery and restoration of the livelihoods of the affected population.

Scope of work: the rapid assessment focused preliminarily on the following key areas to understand the extent of damages and magnitudes of impact on the agriculture sector:

 analysis of the pre-flood agriculture and livelihood context;  impact on cereal crops (wheat, rice, maize, etc.), perennial/horticulture crops (fruit trees orchard), vegetables, pulses, fodder crops, oil crops (cotton and flax) etc.;  impact on livestock and  Investigate potential response options for immediate, short, medium and long term recommendations.

2.1Assessment Methodology and Data Sources

The assessment considered 105 of the worst affected villages (6 to 8 villages per district) in 15 districts of seven provinces. If sub-district statistics exist, they were used for the identification of the most affected villages, taking into account population affected over total population. In their absence, the selection was done in consultation with OCHA, the PDMC and the Food Security and Agriculture Cluster (FSAC). The 15 districts targeted by the assessment represent more than 60 percent of the affected district population.

Table 1 – Targeted districts per province (source: OCHA Situation Reports) Province District Persons killed # of affected Houses damaged & households destroyed Baghlan Pul-e-khumri 8 824 824 Baghlan Guzargah-e-Noor 81 400 420 Balkh Khulm - 639 639 Balkh Sholgareh - 585 585 Faryab Shirintagab 23 881 881 Faryab Pashtunkot 11 590 590 Faryab Dawlatabad 5 486 486

4 Jawzjan Khwajadukoh - 2,500 1,181 Jawzjan Qushtepa 30 1,154 695 Jawzjan Fayzabad - 511 - Samangan KhuramWaSarbagh - 477 477 Saripul Sar-e-Pul 28- 1,825 1,825 Saripul Sayad - 500 500 Saripul Balkhab - 383 21 Takhar Taloqan 2 611 611 Total 154 12,366 10,194

Map of flood affected districts

A taskforce group was established for the design and implementation of the assessment. Around seven to nine agencies from the government, UN and non-governmental organizations (NGO) were identified and selected based on their own interest and field of expertise to support the exercise at national, provincial district and community/household level.

A set of tools were designed in consultation with the taskforce members and technical experts of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) to carry out the assessment. These include: a) seasonality and context analysis through review of secondary data/information related to agricultural damage, impact and response, etc.; b) focus group discussions (FGD) with communities; c) consultative meetings with UN, NGOs and government line technical department (PDMC/Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock - MAIL/Department of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock - DAIL/Ministry of Energy and Water - MEW); and d) interviews with households. In order to conduct the assessment a total of 15 enumerators were required, to be identified by the service provider, who have good experience on agriculture based data collection at household level, with

5 experience to work with communities. In order to guide, support (including data cleaning process) the enumerators, four supervisors were also identified by the service provider. Enumerators were selected with knowledge of the communities where data collection was occurred.

An orientation workshop was organized and conducted by FAO for the service provider in Kabul for the enumerators and supervisors to train them about the household questionnaires, FGD, consultative meetings guidance, timeline, and also to clarify roles and responsibilities within their duties during data collection.A guideline/checklist with clear content and objective was developed and agreed by the taskforce prior to the facilitation on the ground. In addition, secondary data/information/report of various agencies was also reviewed to enrich the results of the assessment.

The assessment was conducted through FGDs and two to four household interviews took place in each village to triangulate and validate the data. Meetings with key informants were conducted at district and provincial levels. A total of about 105 community FGDs and 300 household interviews were conducted.

The field work took three weeks and the data entry another two weeks. The assessment report was initially planned to be released by mid-July but security issues have delayed the data collection, entry and henceforth the writing of the report. In order to carry out the survey work, FAO established a letter of agreement with a local NGO, Relief and Skills Development Organization Afghanistan (RSDOA), which was responsible for data collection and cleaning, whilst FAO and the taskforce provided technical support to design the survey instrument, enumerator orientation, data analysis and drafting the report.

Limitation:

 The survey considered the household interviews for cross checking and triangulation of information only;  The survey did not assess the whole flooded-affected area due to limited time and resources;  There were some limitations to reach some villages on time due to the unavailability of the local transport, which has resulted to get maximum people at the FGD session.  No clear data were collected on forest, posture and irrigation schemes.

The size of the interviewed affected families was of 11.9 persons per family for the 15 targeted districts, with an average of 4.1 children under 5, 4.7 between 5 and 16 years old. In all families, elderly people were also part of the households.

2.2Damage and loss estimates

Agriculture is a key sector of Afghanistan’s economy and accounts for 75 percent of employment. The recent flood (April/May) cased a big lossin the agriculture sector. The survey has indicated that around 135.84 million dollars have been lost in the agriculture sub sector damages such as land damages, crop damages including cereal, vegetable, pulses, cash

6 crops and fodder, orchards damages, forest and livestock losses as indicated in below table. This required immediate attention to provide recovery support to the affected communities in order to restore their agricultural livelihoods.

Table 2 – Overview

Sub-sectors of Total land damaged and animals Estimated loses per Total estimated loses agriculture lost in visited villages (Jerib land/# unit, reported by (USD) of animals) communities (USD) Land 168,699 1,084,250,965 19,139,470 Crop 167,573 4,347,822,487 76,748,852 Orchard 12,315 1,617,493,202 28,552,395 Forest damages 164 11,265,500 198,861 Livestock * 251,604 634,523,945 11,200,776 Total cost 7,695,356,099 135,840,355 *Livestock includes cattle, sheep, goat, donkey, horses, camel and chicken

Table 3 – Land damaged and losses Type of Land size # of man-day/hours Cost of Total cost Total cost land (Jerib) required to repair one man- (AFS) (USD) oneJerib land day/hr (manually/tractor) tractor work (AFS)

Heavy damages 118,205 4 1,075 482,867,425 8,523,697 Light damages 50,494 30 397 601,383,540 10,615,773 Total 168,699 34 1,472 1,084,250,965 19,139,470

The total agricultural land size which is heavily damaged is of 118,205 jerib (equivalent to 23,641 hectares) in the 105 villages of 15 targeted districts. The costs to repair those lands with a tractor would be of 1,075 afghani per hour for an average 3.8 hours per jerib: 1,075 x 3.8 x 118,205 =482,867,425Afghani (i.e. at an exchange rate of 56.65 Afghanis for USD1; USD8, 523,697).

The size of lands that sustained minor damages is around50,494 jerib. It could be repaired manually at a cost of 397 Afghanis per day times the average number of days to repair one jerib, which is 30. The interviewed communities confirmed that the average number of days needed for each farmer would be 30 days. The total costs of the damages is therefore of 50,494 x 397 x 30 = 601,383,540Afghani, equivalent to USD10, 615,772.

Table 4– Crops damages Crop Cultivate Losses (in Costs of one Total losses in Total losses in d (in jerib) jeriblost (in Afghani USD jerib) Afghani)

Irrigated wheat 66,097 40,840 14,400 588,096,000 10,381,218

7 Rain-fed wheat 57,895 34,055 9,299 316,677,445 5,590,069 Vegetables* 29,763 17,474 36,931 645,332,294 11,391,567 Pulses** 22,730 12,345 46,999 580,202,655 10,241,882 Potatoes 21,505 11,742 55,016 645,997,872 11,403,316 Cotton 21,447 10,570 10,635 112,411,950 1,984,323 Melon 27,360 16,558 37,638 623,210,004 11,001,059 Water Melon 27,114 14,283 31,935 456,127,605 8,051,678 Fodder (alfalfa) 18,970 9,706 39,127 379,766,662 6,703,736 TOTAL 292,881 167,573 31,331 4,347,822,487 76,748,852 * includes onion, tomatoes, okra, spinach, cucumber, pepper, eggplant and. ** includes bean, pea and chick pea

The above table indicated that 74,895 jerib equivalent to 14,979 hectares of wheat crop (irrigated and rain-fed) were lost the 105 villages of 15 targeted districts which cost USD15, 971,287, vegetables, pulse and potatoes losses was 41,561 jerib equivalent to 8,312 hectares of land which cost USD33,036,765, cotton lost was calculated 10,570 jerib equivalent to 2,114 hectares of land which cost USD1,984,323, cash crop damages were estimated 30,841 jerib equivalent to 6,168 hectares of land which cost USD19,052,737 and fodder was estimated 9,706 jerib equivalent to 1,941 hectares of land which cost USD6,703,736. All together make 33,116 hectares of land and USD76,748,852. This will have a greater impact and increase the level of vulnerabilities of the country agricultural economy unless the comprehensive recovery measures are in place.

Table 5– Orchards damages Orchard Cultivat Losses (in Costs of Total losses in Total losses ed (in jerib) onelostjerib (in Afghani in USD jerib) Afghani) Apple 3,070 1,683 67,168 113,043,744 1,995,477 Peach 2,004 899 69,782 62,734,018 1,107,397 Apricot 5,123 2,301 86,952 200,076,552 3,531,801 Grapes 9,201 4,235 108,792 460,734,120 8,132,994 Pistachio 131 37 77,964 2,884,668 50,921 Almond 2,698 1,144 356,642 407,998,448 7,202,091 Pear 1,003 378 65,243 24,661,854 435,337 Pomegranate 2,586 1,283 157,586 202,182,838 3,568,982 Berry 30 15 82,500 1,237,500 21,845 Walnut 650 340 417,469 141,939,460 2,505,551 TOTAL 26,496 12,315 149,010 1,617,493,202 28,552,395

Damages in orchards: the survey has indicated that the damages in orchards including apple, peach, apricot, grapes, pistachio, almond, pear, pomegranate, berry and walnut were 12,315 jerib equivalent to 2,463 hectares of land and a total cost of USD28,883,808 in the 105 villages of 15 targeted districts. The damages may have greater impact to increase the prevalence rate of malnutrition status due to the reduction of food consumption and income from this sub sector.

Table6- Forest damages Total land Total number of Total rehabilitation Total rehabilitation damaged (jerib) trees lost cost (AFN) cost (USD)

8 198,861 164 27,605 11,265,500

The survey has indicated that the forest damage was smaller than other agriculture sectors, in total 164 jerib equivalent to 33 hectares of land which cost USD198,861. This impact of such level of forest damage has potential reduction of natural resources in the country.It is worth noting that Afghan forests are being progressively degraded. The present level of forest degradation is alarming and has direct negative impact on the livelihoods and food security of the poor rural population. Trees providing fruit and nuts such as pistachio are cut down for fuel wood purpose.

Table7– Damaged pastures Size before Losses (in # of available days of 2014-2015 Winter floods (in jerib) jerib) pasture needs Pasture 57,889 29,777 41 100%

The damages in pasture indicate that 29, 777 jerib (5,955 hectares) out of 57,889 jerib (11,578 hectares) were lost which indicating the deficit of fodder for the coming winter. It is also find out that the available pasture will only cover for 41 days which will be over before winter.

The herders will need urgent support in regard to animal concentrate feed to keep their livestock alive during the winter.

Table 8– livestock overview

Livestock # Avg unit # of # of Avg unit % Total losses To before cost dead animals cost after losses (AFS) tal floods before animals sold floods on unit los floods during after (AFG) cost ses (AFG) floods floods after (in floods US D) Sheep 127,638 7,097 30,230 26,174 6,255 11.90% 4,1 76, 236,580,818 18 4 Goat 46,620 5,601 9,141 12,912 4,219 24.70% 1,2 18, 69,043,125 76 7 Cattle 25,693 5,455 5,750 24.52% 201,917,892 3,5 64, 30 36485 27537 5 Horse 2,717 76,447 645 638 48,333 36.80% 1,1 87, 67,245,047 02 6 Donkey/Mul 13,912 5,425 4,053 5,177 4,629 14.70% 46 e 26,108,417 0,8 72 Camel 1,745 49,294 81 313 28,000 43.20% 18 10,657,836 8,1 35

9 Chicken 343,200 254 81,071 69,964 220 13.30% 40 22,970,810 5,4 86 Total 130,676 120,928 24.10% 11, 20 634,523,945 0,7 76

Livestock is a main source of livelihood for the rural population.The survey has indicated that the livestock was severely affected by the flood in the 105 villages of 15 targeted districts. Refers to the above table 39,371 sheep/goat dead and 39,086 were sold at lower price after disaster which make the total losses of USD5,394,951, also 5,455 cattle were dead and 5,750 were sold at lower price after disaster which makes a total losses of USD3,564,281, horses which is the main transportation source in the rural area, 645 horses were dead and 638 were sold at lower price after disaster which make the lost USD1,187,031.Chicken are counting as asset for female in the rural areas, the survey has indicated that 81,071 chickens were dead and 69,964 were sold at low price after disaster which makes the losses of USD405,485.

3. Overview of the response and vulnerabilities

3.1Disaster response

So far, the response has been limited to emergency responses such as food distributions, food for work, cash for work and cash transfer, with limited responses to resuming farming activities with wheat seeds, mung beans and hand tools distribution.

Table 9– FSAC response – as of 31 August 2014 Achieved Organizatio Total Activity Unit Beneficiaries n QTY (HH) 162 WFP Unconditional food distribution 4,056 MT ,603 SHPOUL Food for work 18,590.25 kg 648 SHPOUL Unconditional food distribution 1,407.278 kg 155 AfghanAid Unconditional food distribution 81,794 kg 1,309 AfghanAid Other Food Security Activities 777 Kit 777 AfghanAid Cash for work 28,800 Afs 72 AfghanAid Unconditional food distribution 8,200 kg 100 NRC Unconditional cash distribution 10,647,000 Afs 1,390 NRC Cash for assets 11,807,500 Afs 254 SFL Unconditional food distribution 66,820 kg 1,028 FAO Mungbean seed distribution 3,000 kg 600 FAO Hand tools distribution 2,350 Kit 2,451 FAO Wheat seed distribution (plan) 212,500 kg 8,500

10 3.2Vulnerability and risk

The assessment results show that the recovery of the affected families will be a great challenge, especially through the winter months for the animals. There will be an increase of vulnerabilities with poor families, food insecure, having animals as assets. The food insecurity will most likely increase which will lead to an increase of the malnutrition prevalence rate and an increase of the poverty rate in the affected zones. The agricultural production and productivity will be reduced and income will be low.

4. Recovery Strategy

4.1Guiding Principles for Recovery The assessment results will feed into the Food Security and Agriculture Sector response and recovery plan and as well into the Strategic Response Plan for Afghanistan through the FSAC platform.

4.2Recommendations/ Recovery needs/ Response Plan

4.2.1 Time critical needs In view of the agricultural seasonality and other critical needs, the most critical interventions for addressing immediate recovery needs are as follows: a. Land rehabilitation and restoring productive capacity in flood-affected areas. Some 33,000 ha of arable lands have been inundated and damaged (to be rehabilitated as soon as possible) – urgent needs equivalent to USD29 million; b. Support to flood-affected wheat and maize producing farmers. More than 22,000 flood-affected households will not have access to cereals ( the 2014 autumn season needs to be targeted; and to continue for the 2015 spring season) – urgent needs for USD5 million; c. Emergency support to livestock production and health. Almost 50,000 farmers owning animals have lost their stock, and stock of fodder. Fodder and animal concentrate feed for the 2014-2015 winter is a priority – urgent needs for USD12 million.

4.2.2 Medium and long-term needs

The medium term needs for rehabilitating the agricultural sector focusing on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), agricultural infrastructure, machinery and equipment, service delivery and restoring some productive capacities in agriculture, as follows: a. Rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructures damaged by the floods. Irrigation systems have been heavily damaged and 33,000 hectares of land is rendered unproductive. b. Rehabilitation of protection walls and drainage systems that have been destroyed, and/or build protection walls and drainage systems; c. Micro-watershed management through integrated farming systems, using the newly developed concept in Afghanistan of farmer field schools. Capacity building of MAIL/DAIL staff;

11 d. Mainstream DRR in agriculture-crop diversification, conservation agriculture. Current agriculture practices are more vulnerable to weather conditions with high risks to lives and livelihoods.

4.3Costs and Financing

The survey did cover only 105 villages in 15 of the most affected districts. It indicates that around 135.84 million dollars have been lost in agriculture sub sector damages such as land damages, crop damages including cereal, vegetable, pulses, cash crops and fodder, orchards damages and livestock losses as indicated in below table.. The total affected areas by the 2014 flash floods require immediate attention to provide recovery support to the affected communities in order to restore their agricultural livelihoods.

The immediate needs amount to USD46 million.

The medium and long-term needs are not quantifiable with this survey, but in order to mitigate effects of disasters the given recommendations are potential starting points to long- term projects in the surveyed areas.

5. Implementation and Capacities

The implementation of the response plan will depend on the level of funding received. The FSAC will be the main coordinator of the response plan. It will be included in the Strategic Response Plan for Afghanistan under the FSAC sector.Thecluster is a forum that seeks to provide the basis for effective, coherent and complete humanitarian response by all actors that seek to intervene during an emergency.FSAC will facilitate adequate reporting and information sharing on early recovery response activities, both within the national FSAC and with other clusters (through inter-cluster coordination mechanisms) such as FSAC 3WS, dashboard and financial tracking system.

The government through the ANDMA, MAIL and MEW, will take a primary leading role in the implementation together with UN agencies, NGOs and other stakeholders or any other regional inter-governmentalregional/international support depending on the scale and impact of the disaster

12 Annexes:

1. ToRSurvey tools 2. FGD Questionnaire 3. HH Questionnaire 4. Key information Questionnaire 5. List of survey areas/ province and district

13 Annex 1- ToR:

Rapid Damage Assessment on Agriculture Sector for Flash Floods affected areas in Afghanistan Terms of Reference Introduction and background information Afghanistan is extremely susceptible to recurring natural disasters, due to its geographical location and years of environmental degradation.Since 2001, the country has been regularly experiencing flooding, landslide, earthquakes, and drought in addition to other man-made disastersresulting in the frequent loss of lives, livelihoods and property, contributing to high levels of poverty across the country. In April/May 2014, the northern and north- easternprovinces of Afghanistan have been hit by severeflashfloodingand landslides due to heavy rainfall and melting of spring snow, severely affectingthelifeand livelihood of the population in the region. According to the latest situation report (series no. 9, dated 1June 2014) of OCHA Afghanistan, a total of 19,565 households (approx. 140,000 individuals) in 27provinces and 132 districts have been affected. The majority of the caseload (62%, or 12,100 families) is based in 15 districts of Jawzjan, Faryab, Sar-e-pul, Balkh, Baghlan, Takhar and Samangan provinces. The international community, in coordination with the Afghanistan National Disaster Management Authority (ANDMA) and its provincial arm (Provincial Disaster Management Committee – PDMC), have been providing support for the immediate needs of the affected population through situation analysis, initial assessment and life- saving assistance. However, there is a need to determine the extent of the damage to the agricultural sector, and to identify the potential response to support the affected population to recover and restore their livelihoods. In collaboration with the Food Security and Agriculture Cluster (FSAC) members, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL) and its provincial counterpart (DAIL), the Ministry of Energy and Water (MEW), a rapid assessment on the damage of the agriculture sector has been planned, to be carried out as a matter of urgency.

Scope of Work The rapid assessment will focus on the following key areas to understand the extent of damages and magnitudes of impact on the agriculture sector, specifically:

 analysis of the situation on the agriculture and livelihood context;  cereal crops (wheat, rice, maize etc), perennial/horticulture crops (fruit trees orchard), vegetable, pulses, fodder crops etc.;  livestock, fisheries, and forestry/NRM;  agriculture infrastructure, irrigation system, market, etc.;  investigate potential response options for immediate, short, medium and long term recommendations.

The findings of the assessment will guidedecision makers to designaprogrammethat would support the affected populationsinrestoringlivelihoods, and improvingtheir food and nutrition security situation.

Objective and output The assessment aims at proposing a set of recommendations to the decision makers in the fields of agriculture and food security for the implementation of programmes oriented towards the recovery and restoration of the livelihoods of the affected population. The final report, with sets of recommendations for recovery and restoration of agricultural-based livelihoods, including Disaster Risk Reduction components (DRR), will be presented and circulated by earliestmid July 2014.

Assessment coverage areas Though there are a total of 27 provinces and 132 districts affected, the scale of damage differs greatly. Hence, considering the limited availability of resource, capacity and timeframe, the assessment will be carried out in the worst affecteddistricts.The following table shows the proposed districts to be considered for the assessment (to be finalized in in consultation with the MAIL, DAIL, MEW and FSAC members).The assessment will consider about

14 105 worst effected villages (6-8 villages per district) in 15 districts of 7 provinces. If sub-district statistics exist, they will be used for the identification of the most affected villages, taking into account population affected over total population. In their absence, the selection will be based in consultation with OCHA, PMDC and FSAC. The 15 districts in the sample represent 62 percent of the affected district population. The assessment will be conducted through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), 2-4 household interviews per village to triangulate and validate data, and meetings with key informants at district and provincial levels. A total of about 105 community FGDs and 300 HH interviews will be conducted. The enumerators will decide the most appropriate way to have interviews with key informants (all together or individually).

Houses 12 Province District Persons killed # of affected HH damaged& destroyed Jawzjan Khwajadukoh - 2,500 1,181 Sar-e-Pul Sar-e-Pul - 1,825 1,825 Jawzjan Qushtepa 30 1,145 695 Faryab Shirintagab 23 881 881 Baghlan Pul-e- khumri 2 824 824 Balkh Khulm - 639 639 Takhar Taloqan 2 611 611 Faryab Pashtunkot 11 590 590 Balkh Sholgareh - 585 585 Jawzjan Fayzabad - 511 - Sar-e-Pul Sayad - 500 500 Faryab Dawlatabad 5 486 486 Samangan KhuramWaSarbagh - 477 477 Sar-e-Pul Balkhab - 383 21 Baghlan Guzargah-e- Noor* 1 135 134 Total for 15 Districts in the assessment 74 12,092 9,461 Total for 6 Provinces in assessment Grand Total (all affected districts included) 175 19,565 16,471 * Numbers for Guzargah-e-Noor are much higher, following a flash flood on June 6th. Updated figures are not included.

Methodology At first, to steer the assessment, a taskforce group will be established for the design and implementation of the assessment.Around 7 to 9 agencies from Government, UN, and NGOs will be identified and selected based on their own interest and field of expertiseto support the exercise at national, provincial district and community/household level. A set of tools will be designed in consultation with the taskforce members and technical experts of FAO to carry out the assessment. These include: a) Seasonality and context analysis through review of secondary data/information related to agricultural damage, impact and response etc, b) Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with communities, c) Consultative meetings with UN, NGOs and government line technical department (PDMC/DAIL/MAIL/MEW),andd) interviews with households. In order to conduct the assessment a total of 15 enumerators will be required, to be identified by the Service Provider, who havegood experience on agriculture based data collection at household level, thus will require the experience to work with the communities. In order to guide, support (including data cleaning process) the enumerators, 4 supervisors will also be identified by the Service Provider. Enumerators will be selected with knowledge of the communities where data collection will occur. An orientation workshop will be organized by the Service Provider contracted by FAO in Mazarfor the enumerators and supervisors to trainthem about the HH questionnaires, FGD, consultative meetings guidance, timeline, and also to clarify roles and responsibilities within their duties during data collection.A clear guideline/checklist with clear

1 In consultation with OCHA, the Province of Badakhshan has not been included in the area for the damage assessment. According to reports from various UN sources, the area has been the focus of considerable support, as results of the 2 ndMaytragedy (landslide in Argo District) and the following political and media attention.

2 The selection of provinces is based on the single criterion of “affected households”. It is assumed that there is strict correlation in the magnitude of damage to agriculture and the criterion used.

15 content and objective will be developed and agreed by the taskforce prior to the facilitation in the ground.Inaddition, secondary data/information/report of various agencies will also be reviewed to enrich the results of the assessment.

Timeframe An estimated time frame of 6 to 7 weeks will be required for the assessment. In order to inform the decision makers, the assessment is expected to be completed by 15 July 2014. However, the completion will also depend on a stable security situation in the country during the timeframe, and cultural sensitiveness as the holy period of Ramadan. In case of any deviation in the planned timeframe and activities due to insecurity, the plan and timeframe for the assessment will be adjusted accordingly.

Management A taskforce will be established by FSAC andled by FAO for coordination of assessment among the FSAC members. FAO Kabul will facilitate administrative arrangements (communication, identifying the service provider, meeting/workshop, invitation, logistics etc.). The tool will be formulated by FAO and the taskforce, and the data collection from the field, data cleaning and data entry will be carried out by FAO contracted service provider. The analysis and reporting will be produced by FAO in close consultation with the taskforce.

Reporting FAO,withsupport from the taskforce, will be responsible for the preparation of the assessment report, with technicalassistance and guidance by the FAO HQ and Regional offices. The report and the presentation should be made and submitted in English. A Dari version of the presentation and report will be prepared in support with the FAO/FSAC contracted translator.

Budget Item Projected cost (USD) Orientation workshop for the enumerators/supervisors (travel, DSA, 4,000 lunch, stationeries etc) DSA for field work (20 x USD 33 x 7 days) 4,620 Travel cost for the enumerators and supervisors 2,000 Data entry operator cost @ USD 250 x 4 1,000 Other incidentals 1,500 Total 13,120

Given the relative small amount of the contract, FAO will make individual enquiries with potential partners to seek interest and availability. No call expression-for-interest will be published.

Proposed work plan Activity Deadline Responsibility Consultative meeting with FSAC on the agreement on the 18-30 May FAO tools, methodologies and plans Setting up of a Task Force 25 May FSAC Development/Finalization of ToR 2June FAO, Task Force Development of assessment tools 3 June FAO,Task Force Assessment tools translation into Dari 5 June FAO Identification ofservice provider 10-12June FAO, Task Force Identification of enumerators and supervisors 12-15 June Service Provider Orientation workshop for the enumerators/supervisors of 15-17June FAO, Service Provider Service Provider on data collection and cleaning process Data collection and cleaning/quality management 18 June - 1 July Service Provider Database development 1 July FAO Data entry and cleaning 2-4 July Service Provider Data analysis 4-10 July FAO, Task Force

16 Preliminary assessment findings presentation to FSAC 7 July FAO, Task Force Drafting assessment report 8-13 July FAO, Task Force Finalization of the assessment report 15 July FAO

17 Annex 2 – FGD Questionnaires:

معلومات عمومي GENERAL INFORMATION Number of Date of Participant Province تعداد :interview s ول يت اشتراک کننده تاريخ مصا حبه گان Name of Nr of HH تعداد Facilitators in the District : community ولسوالي خانوار در اسم تسهيل کننده Nr of Cell phone Population nr of Village/Co in the facilitator mmunity community قريه /انجمن نمبر تيلفون تعداد نفوس در تسهيل کننده اجتماغ

Nr of Nr of Nr of people houses families killed damaged affected تعداد فاميل تعداد منازل تعداد افراد هاي متاثر شده خساره مند کشته شده TOTAL AGRICULTURE LAND IN THE (مجموع زمېن خساره مند شده(جرېب(TOTAL LAND DAMAGED (JERIB Major damag es (mech anical repair neede Minor damages (repairable manually) d) (خسارات جزېې (توسط دست قابل ترمېم ميباشد خسارات عمده (ضرور ت به ترميم ميخانيکې (است How many hours of How many tractor man days work are required to required to Size of Size of repair one repair one land land Jerib land By when do you expect your field to be ready? Jerib land? (Jerib) چه وقت توقع اماده شدن زمين أت را داريد؟ چند نفر اندازه (Jerib) اندازه زمين( چند ساعت کار مردکاربراي (زمين (جريب (جريب يک تراکتور ترميم يک نياز است که جريب زمين يک جريب در کار است زمين ترمېم گردد

TOTAL CROPS DAMAGED مجموع

18 نباتاتخساره مند شده Wheat Wheat *Vegetable **Pulses Potatoes Cotton Melon Water ***Fodder علوفه جات melon خربوزه پخته کچالو نباتات پلېدار سبزيجات (irrigate) (rainfed) تربوز گندم للمي گندم أبي Total Size of land cultivated (Jerib) مجموع ساحه زمېن کشت (شده (جرېب Total size of land remaining after flood (Jerib) مجموع ساحه زمېن با قې مانده بعد از سيلب ((جرېب Expected yield per Jerib (kg) حاصل متوقعه /فې جرېب (کېلو (ګرام Expected value of each kg yield قېمت(AFN) متوقعه از هر کېلو ګرام حاصل (افغا (نې *Main vegetable crops were: حاصل عمده سبزېجات عبارت اند از ** Main pulses were: حاصل عمده پلې دار عبارت اند از *** Man Fodder crops were: حاصل عمده علوفه عبارت اند از مجموع باغات خساره مند شده TOTAL ORCHARD DAMAGED -Fruit and Non* انواع مهم درختان Most important tree species fruit TreeNursery قوريه درختان مثمر و غير مثمر

19 Total Size of orchard(Jerib) (مجموع ساحه باغات (جرېب Total size of orchard remaining after flood (Jerib) مجموع ساحه باغات باقې مانده (بعد از سېل (جرېب Expected yield per Jerib(kg/nr of Sapling( حاصل متوقعه از يک جرېب (کلو ګرام/تعداد نهالې) Expected value of each sapling (AFN) قېمت متوقعه حاصل هر نهالې ((افغانې *What were the main fruit tree species in nursery: انواع عمده درختان ميوه دار در قورېه کدام بودند * What were the mainnone-fruit tree species: انواع عمده درختان غير ميوه دار کدام بودند مجموع جنګلهای خساره مند شده TOTAL FOREST DAMAGED

Area damaged (Jerib) ساحه خسارمند شده (جرېب)ده Forest Avg. # of trees per Jerib Avg. rehabilitation cost per Jerib اوسط قېمت احبا مجدد يک جرېب تعداد درختان در يک جرېب Severally damaged Partially damaged جنګل (>50% trees damaged) (<50% trees damaged) خساره سطحی خساره عميق (کم از 50 فيصد درختان خساره ديده) (بيش از 50 فيصد درختان خساره ديده) Natural forest جنگل طبعی Plantation forest جنگل مصنوعی Agro-forest سردرختيها مجموع علفچرهای خساره مند شده TOTAL PASTURE DAMAGED Remaining size The remaining pasture will Did flood affect The remaining pasture will feed of pasture after secure what % of winter your pasture? Size of pasture before flood (Jerib) livestock for how long flood (Jerib) roughages requirement چه مدتې حېوانات از علفچر باقی مانده تغذيه ساحه علفچر قبل از سېل(جرېب)د أيا علفچر تان را سيل علفچر باقې مانده چند فېصد ضرروت ساحه با قې مانده علفچر خواهند کرد؟ متاثر ساخته خوراکه زمستانې را مرفوع مې سازد بعد از سېل(جرېب)د

( )/بلي Yes ) (نه خير/ No

تعداد تعداد مجموعيمواشی در فريه /جتماع قبل از حادثه TOTAL NUMBER LIVESTOCK IN THE COMMUNITY BEFORE DISASTER Ca و Sheep Goat Cow Calf Oxen/bull Horse Donkey/Mul Chicken me Other غيره l مرغ مرکب/قاطر e اسپ قلبه گاو گوساله گاو بز گو سفند اشتر # of livestock تعداد موا شی Avg. unit cost اوسط قيمت فی واحد موا شی تعداد مجموعی مواشی تلف شده در جريان حادثه TOTAL NUMBER OF LIVESTOCK THAT DIED IN THE DISASTER و Sheep Goat Cow Calf Oxen/bull Horse Donkey/Mul Chicken Ca Other غيره me مرغ مرکب/قاطر e اسپ قلبه گاو گوساله گاو بز گو سفند l

20 اشتر # of livestock تعداد موا شی تعدادمجموعی مواشی فروخته شده بعد از حادثه TOTAL NUMBER OF LIVESTOCK SOLD AFTER DISASTER Ca و Sheep Goat Cow Calf Oxen/bull Horse Donkey/Mul Chicken me Other غيره l مرغ مرکب/قاطر e اسپ قلبه گاو گوساله گاو بز گو سفند اشتر # of livestock تعداد موا شی Avg. unit اوسط قيمت cost فی واحد موا شی How many Will you sell more What are the main reasons livestock normally What is the current condition animals before Why did you sell the livestock after for current condition of do you keep of existing livestock? winter? disaster? existing livestock? during the winter? قبل از فرا رسيدن زمستان و ضيعت فعلی به طور نورمال به چه دليل عمده و ضيعت فعلی مواشی فعلی چرا مواشی تان را بعد از حادثه فروختيد؟ موا شی بيشتر را خواهيد تعداد مواشی را در جريان چه بوده است؟ مواشی موجود چگونه است؟ فروخت؟ زمستان نگهداری ميکنيد ؟ Partiall Fully هر سال Every year .1 y مکمل ٌ Pasture/fodder ( ) عدم مو Not enough pasture .2 قسما خوب Good ( ) condition جوديت چراګاه کافی علفچر/ حالت علوفه جات عدم موجوديت Lack of shelter .3 ( )/بلي Yes اوسط Average ( ) پناهګاه ) (نه خير/ No امراض Diseases ( ) بی جاه شدگی Displacement .4 ضعيف Poor ( ) برای خريد غذا To buy food .5 وغيره______Other( ) 6. Other______و غيره __ TOTAL IRRIGATION INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGED N Category I, II, or o (*I –MostUrgent, Areas Remarks/De Name of Location River basin Structure **II-Urgent, and scription of and Source and GPS readings ***III-Ordinary) Crops Damage موقعيت scheme ملحظات / Served ساختملن و نقطه جی پی اس دريا ابگير و منبع اسم منبع ابياري تشريحخسارات درجه يک، دو يا سه وارده اندازه (*درجه يک فو ق العاده ساحات و عاجل نبانات را که درجه دو عاجل ** ابياري ميکند (درجه سه معمولی ***

Type, No Eo Cut/Fill نوعيت قطع / مملو

*Structures Category I* (Most urgent - Fast track – Immediate action within one month time): Those structures that after rehabilitation connect broken part of a canal and secure water supply from water source to irrigated land. درجه يک :( فوق العاده عاجل- پيگيری سريع- عملکرد فوری در جريان يک ماه ): انعده ساختمان های که بعد از بازسازی بخش های شکسته شده کا نال و متابع تامين کننده اب را با زمين های* .ابی ارتباط ميدهد

**Structures Category II* (Urgent - Fast track – Action required within three months time): Those structures that after rehabilitation increase water supply up to 50% (decrease huge leakages in the conveyance system).

21 درجه دو:( علجل - پيگيری سريع- عملکرد درجريان سه ماه ) :انعده ساختمان های که بعد ا ز بازسازی منابع تا ميين کننده اب را 50فيصد ازدياد ميبخشد ( کاهش زياد در ضياع آب از سيستم در** (طول مسير

***Structures Category III* (Ordinary rehabilitation – Action required within 2014): Those structures that by rehabilitation water use efficiency will increase up to 10%. :بازسازی قسمی يا معمولی- عملکرد درجريان سال 2014): انعده ساختمان های که توسط بازسازی ميزان موثريت استفاده اب را الی 10فيصد ازدياد ميبخشد.***درجه سه )

Note: Please take picture of damage .ياد داشت: لطفا" از خسارات عکس برداری نماييد Did the flood disconnect the community access What type of transportation is available to the For how long the community has not access to to the market? market? the market? ايا سيلب راه ارتبا طې عام و دسترسی به مارکيت را قطع چقدر وخت ميشود که با مار مارکيت دسترسی نداريد؟ کدام نوع وسا يل انتقال به مارکيت دردرسترس قرار داريد؟ نموده است؟

ايا مواد زراعتی با کيفيت برای کشت فصل بعدی در دسترس قرار داريد ؟?Are quality agriculture inputs available for next first planting season

سير seer/)___ ) افغانی AFN ( )نه خير No ,(بلی ( Seed : Yes

بوری ۵۰ کيلويی kg bag افغانی ( ___/AFN 50 ( )نه خير No ,(بلی ( DAP : Yes

بوری ۵۰ کيلويی kg bag افغانی ( ___/AFN 50 ( )نه خير No ,(بلی ( Urea: Yes

ساعت hour /_____ ) افغانی AFN ( )نه خير No ,(بلی ( Ploughing: Yes

ساعت hour/_____ ) افغانی AFN( )نه خير No ,(بلی ( Water: Yes

علت سيل CAUSE OF FLOOD What solutions do you think are appropriate to reduce the risk of floods? چرا قريه شما توسط سيلب متاثر شد؟ ?Why was your village affected by the flood به فکر شما کدام راها حل مناسب خطر سيل ب را کاهش ميدهد؟

معلومات اضافی ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

22 Annex 3 – HH Questionnaire:

معلوماتعمومي A. GENERAL INFORMATION 9. Nr of 1. D children ate of 5. District under 5 years ولسوالي intervie تعداداطفالسيرس w ن 5 سال تاريخمصاحبه 10. Nr of 2. N 6. children 5 ame of Village/Co to 16 Facilita mmunity تعداداطفالز 5 قريه /انجمن :tors الی 16 سال اسمتسهيلکننده 3. C ell 7. Name 11. Nr of phone of HH adults nr of head: تعدادبزرگسال اسمسربراهفامي facilitat ن ل or نمبرتيلفونتسهيل کننده 8. Nr of 12. familymem Phone nr. 4. P bers If applicable تعداداعضايفامي rovince شمارهموبايلگ ل وليت رباشد (مجموعزمېنخسارهمندشده(جرېب(B. TOTAL LAND DAMAGED (JERIB Major damag es (mech anical repair neede Minor damages (repairable manually) (خساراتجزېې (توسطدستقابلترمېمميباشد (d خساراتعم ده (ضرورتب هترميممي خانيکېاس (ت 1. Size 2. How 3. What 4. Size 5. How 6. What 7. By when do you expect your field to be ready? چهوقتتوقعامادهشدنزمينأتراداريد؟ of many is the of many is land hours cost land man labor (Jerib of tracto (Jerib days cost ) tracto r ) requir per ed to day اندازهز r work اندازهز

23 work are requir ed to repair per repair one hour one Jerib (AFN) (AFN) اجورهم Jerib land . زدورفي چندنفرم مين(جر ?land مين قيمتکارت روزچند ردکاربر (يب چندساعت ((جريب رکتورفي افغانياس ايترميمي کاريکت ساعتچند ت کجريبز راکتورن افغانياس ميندرکا يازاستک ت راست هيکجريب زمينترم ېمگرد د

مجموعنباتاتخسارهمندشده C. TOTAL CROPS DAMAGED a. Wheat b. Wheat c. d. **Pulses e. f. Cotton g. Melon h. Water i. ***Fodder علوفهجات melon خربوزه پخته Potatoes نباتاتپلېدار irrigate) (rainfed) Vegetable) تربوز کچالو سبزيجات گندمللمي گندمأبي 1. Total Size of land cultiv ated (Jerib ) مجموعساحهزم ېنکشتشده ((جرېب 2. Total size of land remai ning after flood (Jerib ) مجموعساحهزم ېنباقېماندهبعد ازسيل ب ((جرېب 3. Expe cted yield per Jerib (kg) حاصلمتوقعه /فېجرېب ((کېلوګرام 4. Expe cted value of each kg yield (AFN) قېمتمتو قعهازه رکېلوګ

24 رامحا صل ((افغانې 5. *Main veget able crops were: حاصلعمدهسبزې جاتعبارتانداز 6. ** Main pulse s were: حاصلعمدهپلېد ارعبارتانداز 7. *** Man Fodd er crops were: حاصلعمدهعلوف هعبارتانداز مجموعباغاتخسارهمندشده D. TOTAL ORCHARD DAMAGED Most important tree species انواع مهم درختان a. b. c. d. e. f. g.

h. *Fruit and Non-fruit TreeNursery قوريه درختان مثمر و غير مثمر

1. Total Size of orcha rd(Jer ib) مجموعساحهبا (غات (جرېب 2. Total size of orcha rd remai ning after flood (Jerib ) مجموعساحهبا غاتباقېماندهبع دازسېل ((جرېب 3. Expe cted yield per Jerib

25 (kg/nr of Sapli ng( حاصلمتوقعهازي کجرېب کلوګرام/تعدا) (دنهالې 4. Expe cted value of each saplin g (AFN) قېمتمتوقعهحا صلهرنهالې ((افغانې 5. *Wha t were the main fruit tree speci es in nurse ry: انواع عمده درختان ميوه دار در قورېه کدام بودند 6. * What were the main none- fruit tree speci es: انواع عمده درختان غير ميوه دار کدام بودند مجموعجنګلهایخسارهمندشده E. TOTAL FOREST DAMAGED (نوعدرخت (مثمر/غيرمثمر/هردو .Forest Area c. Avg. # d. type of e. Avg. f. type of trees damaged of trees trees. rehabilitati جنګل on cost per نوعدرخت Jerib) per Jerib) Jerib (مثمر/غيرمثمر تعداددرختاندري ساحهخسارمند اوسطقېمتاحبام (/هردو کجرېب شده (جرېب)ده جدديکجرېب

26 a. b. Partially Severally damaged damaged (<50% (>50% trees trees damaged) خسارهسطحی (damaged کماز 50) خسارهعميق فيصددرختانخس بيشاز 50) (ارهديده فيصددرختانخس (ارهديده 1. Natur al forest جنگلطبعی 2. Plant ation forest جنگلمصنوعی 3. Agro- forest سردرختيها مجموععلفچرهایخسارهمندشده F. TOTAL PASTURE DAMAGED d. The c. Rema b. Size remai ining ning of size pastu a. Did pastu of re will flood re pastu feed affect befor re livest your e e. The remaining pasture will secure what % of winter roughages requirement after ock علفچرباقېماندهچندفېصدضرروتخوراکهزمستانېرامرفوعمېسازد pastu flood flood for re? (Jerib (Jerib how ( أياعلفچرتانراسي ) long ساحهعلفچرقبل لمتاثرساخته چهمدتېحېوانا ساحهباقېمانده زسېل(جرېب) تازعلفچرباقيمان علفچربعدازسې د دهتغذيهخواهند ل(جرېب)د کرد؟

( )/بلي Yes (نهخير/ No (

تعدادتعدادمجموعیمواشيدرفريه /جتماعقبلزحادثه G. TOTAL NUMBER LIVESTOCK IN THE COMMUNITY BEFORE DISASTER e.Oxen/bul g.Donkey/ a.Sheep b.Goat c.Cow d.Calf h.Chicken i.Camel j.Other مرکب/ق Mule اسپ l f.Horse وغيره اشتر مرغ گوساله گاو بز گوسفند اطر قلبهگاو 1. # of livest ock تعدادموا شی 2. Avg. unit cost اوسطقيم تفيواحدم واشی تعدادمجموعيمواشيتلفشدهدرجريانحادثه H. TOTAL NUMBER OF LIVESTOCK THAT DIED IN THE DISASTER e.Oxen/bul g.Donkey/ a.Sheep b.Goat c.Cow d.Calf h.Chicken i.Camel j.Other مرکب/ق Mule اسپ l f.Horse وغيره اشتر مرغ گوساله گاو بز گوسفند اطر قلبهگاو 1. # of livestock تعدادمواشی تعدادمجموعيمواشيفروختهشدهبعدازحادثه I. TOTAL NUMBER OF LIVESTOCK SOLD AFTER DISASTER

27 e.Oxen/bul g.Donkey/ a.Sheep b.Goat c.Cow d.Calf h.Chicken i.Camel j.Other مرکب/ق Mule اسپ l f.Horse وغيره اشتر مرغ گوساله گاو بز گوسفند اطر قلبهگاو 1. # of livest ock تعدادموا شی 2. Avg. unit cost اوسطقيم تفيواحدم واشی 5. If poor, what are 6. Will 3. Why 4. What the you did is the main sell you curre reaso more sell nt ns for anim the condit curre als livest ion of nt befor 7. How many livestock normally do you keep during the winter? ock existi condit بهطورنورمالبهچهتعدادمواشيرادرجريانزمستاننگهداريميکنيد؟ e after ng ion of winter disast livest existi ? er? ock? ng قبلزفرارسيدنز livest وضيعتفعلی چرامواشيتانراب مستانمواشيبيشت ?ock مواشيموجودچ عدازحادثهفروخ رراخواهيدفرو دليلعمدهوضيعت گونهاست؟ تيد؟ خت؟ فعلی (ضعيفبودن)مو اشيچهبودهاست ؟ a.Partially b.Fully )/بلي E a.( ) a.( ) a.Yes .7 مکمل قسماٌ ( Pasture/fo خو ب Good very year (نهخير/dder b.No هرسال condition ( b. Not علفچر/ ( ).b enough حالتعلوفهجات Average pasture اوسط عدمموجوديتچر b.( ) اګاهکافی Diseases امراض ( ).L c .8 ضعيف ack of Poor shelter ( ).c عدمموجوديتپن Other اهګاه 9. D ______وغيره_ isplacem ent بيجاهشدگی 10. T o buy food برايخريدغذا 11. O ther______وغيره__

28 J. TOTAL IRRIGATION INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGED No 5. Category I, 6. Areas 7. Remarks/Description of Damage (jerib) (ملحظات / تشريحخساراتوارده (جريب Name 2. 3. River 4. II, or and Crops .1 Location basin and Structure Served of (*I – Source and GPS موقعيت sche MostUrgen اندازهساحاتونبا readings درياابگيرومنبع me t, ناتراکهابياريمي ساختملنونقطهج ,II-Urgent** اسممنبعابياري کند -III*** يپياس Ordinary)

درجهيک،دويا سه (*درجهيکفوقال عادهعاجل ** درجهدوعاجل *** درجهسهمعمول (ی

Type, No Eo Cut/Fill نوعيت قطع / مملو a b c d *Structures Category I* (Most urgent - Fast track – Immediate action within one month time): Those structures that after rehabilitation connect broken part of a canal and secure water supply from water source to irrigated land. .درجهيک :( فوقالعادهعاجل-پيگيريسريع- عملکردفوريدرجريانيکماه ): انعدهساختمانهايکهبعدازبازسازيبخشهايشکستهشدهکانالومتابعتامينکنندهابرابازمينهايابيارتباطميدهد*

**Structures Category II* (Urgent - Fast track – Action required within three months time): Those structures that after rehabilitation increase water supply up to 50% (decrease huge leakages in the conveyance system). (درجهدو:( علجل -پيگيريسريع- عملکرددرجريانسهماه ) :انعدهساختمانهايکهبعدازبازسازيمنابعتاميينکنندهابرا 50فيصدازديادميبخشد ( کاهشزياددرضياعآبازسيستمدرطولمسير**

***Structures Category III* (Ordinary rehabilitation – Action required within 2014): Those structures that by rehabilitation water use efficiency will increase up to 10%. :بازسازيقسمييامعمولی- عملکرددرجريانسال 2014): انعدهساختمانهايکهتوسطبازسازيميزانموثريتاستفادهابراالی 10فيصدازديادميبخشد.***درجهسه )

Note: Please take picture of damage .يادداشت: لطفا" ازخساراتعکسبردارينماييد K. TRANSPORTATION 1. What 2. Did 3. For how long the community has not access to the market? چقدروختميشودکهبهمارمارکيتدسترسينداريد؟ type the of flood trans disco portat nnect ion is the availa com ble to munit the y mark acces et? s to the کدامنوعوسايلن mark تقالبهمارکيتدرد

29 et? اياسيلبراهارتبا رسترسقراردار طېعامودسترس يد؟ يبهمارکيتراقطع نمودهاست؟

اياموادزراعتيباکيفيتبرايکشتفصلبعديدردسترسقرارداريد؟?Are quality agriculture inputs available for next first planting season .4

سير seer/) ___ ) افغانی a. AFNنهخير( )No 2 ,(بلی ( 1a. Seed : Yes

بوری ۵۰کيلويی kg bag افغانی ( ___ / b. AFN 50نهخير( )No 2 ,(بلی ( 1b. DAP : Yes

بوری ۵۰کيلويی kg bag افغانی ( ___ / c. AFN 50نهخير( )No 2 ,(بلی ( 1c. Urea: Yes

ساعت hour / _____ ) افغانی d. AFNنهخير( )No 2 ,(بلی ( 1d. Ploughing: Yes

ساعت hour/ _____ ) افغانی e. AFNنهخير( )No 2 ,(بلی ( 1e. Water: Yes

علتسيل L. CAUSE OF FLOOD 1. W 2. What solutions do you think are appropriate to reduce the risk of floods? h بهفکرشماکدامراهاحلمناسبخطرسيلبراکاهشميدهد؟ y

y o u r v i l l a g e

a f f e c t e d

f l o o d ? چ ر ا ق ر

30 ي ه ش م ا ت و س ط س ي ل ل ب م ت ا ث ر ش د ؟

معلوماتاضافی M. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Annex 4- Key information Questionnaire:

معلومات عمومی GENERAL INFORMATION Date of interview Province Name of interviewee: اسم مصاحبه شوينده وليت تاريخ مصاحبه Name of facilitators: District Title of interviewee: سمت/ و ظيفه مصاحبه شوينده ناحيه اسم تسهيل کننده Cell phone nr of Interviewee Cell phone nr of the facilitator organization interviewee نمبر تليفون مصاحبه شوينده ارگان مصاحبه شويند نمبر تليفون تسهيل کننده TOTAL AGRICULTURE LAND IN THE

31 1. What is the extent of damages to agriculture sector? وسعت تخريب سکتور زراعت تا چه اندازه است؟ .1

2. What coping mechanisms exist? چه توانمنديها در مقابل همچو حوادث وجود دارند؟ 2-

3. What are the main challenges?

چالش های اصلی کدام ها اند؟ 3-

32 4. What do you recommend to overcome challenges?

چه را بخاطر غلبه با لی چا لشها سفا رش ميکنيد؟ 4-

Annex 5 – Families composition in the 15 assessed districts

Province District Average # Average # Average # Average # in a family of children of children of adults under 5 between 5

33 and 16 Baghlan Gozargahi Noor 12.1 4.0 6.0 2.0 Pul-e-Khumri 10.5 3.5 4.8 2.2 Balkh Khulam 10.1 3.4 4.5 2.1 Shulgara 13.6 4.6 5.7 2.5 Faryab Dawlat Abad 16.3 5.8 6.9 3.7 PashtoonKot 8.9 3.3 3.2 2.4 SherinTagab 10.3 4.0 3.7 2.6 Jawzjan Faizabad 17.6 6.0 6.7 4.7 Khwaja Dow Koh 15.2 5.2 6.1 3.8 Qushtepa 11.2 4.4 3.9 2.9 Samangan KhuramWaSarbagh 11.9 2.7 4.6 4.5 Sar-e-Pul Balkhab 10.9 4.2 3.7 3.0 Sayad 9.2 3.0 3.7 2.5 Sar-e_pul 10.4 4.3 3.5 2.6 Takhar Taloqan 10.7 2.9 3.6 4.2