Garissa County 2020 Short Rains Food and Nutrition Security Assessment Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GARISSA COUNTY 2020 SHORT RAINS FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY ASSESSMENT REPORT A Joint Report by the Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG)1 and Garissa County Steering Group (CSG) February 2021 1Joseph Kamau Swala (Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries) and Hellen Avisa (State Department of Education) I Executive Summary Food and nutrition security assessment is multi sectoral a bi-annual exercise, which aimed at achieving an objective, evidence based, transparent food and nutritional security situational analysis following the performance of short rains season in 2020 and taking into account the cumulative effects of previous seasons, to provide recommendations for possible response options based on the situation analysis. The assessment covered three main livelihood zones in the county drawing below average short rains performance, Desert Locust Invasion, livestock diseases, insecurity/conflicts as well as COVID 19 pandemic safety measures and restrictions as key drivers for food insecurity. The short rains season’s performance was below average with the county receiving 51-75 percent of the normal rains that was 28 percent below the average rainfall of 154.39 mm. It was characterized with even and poor distribution in space and time. The production of maize, green grams, cowpeas and sorghum declined by 21, 16, 31 and 43 percent compared to long term averages respectively. However, production of bananas, mangoes, tomatoes and watermelons under irrigation is expected to increase by 15, 13, 16 and 19 percent compared to the long term averages respectively. Maize stocks held by farmers were 60 percent below the long term averages due to declined production. Stocks held by traders were above the long term averages. Pasture and browse conditions was fair across livelihood zones compared to would be good condition at this time of the year. Milk consumption at household declined by 38 percent in both livelihood zones. In the pastoral livelihood zone, the return distances for livestock has increased by 50 percent from 12 kilometres normally to 18 kilometres. The average maize prices was Ksh.70 per kilogram that was 17 percent above the long term averages of Ksh.60 per kilogram. In January 2021, the average goat prices was Ksh. 3,461 for a medium size goat which 12 percent above compared Ksh.3,092 in the same period in 2020. The terms of trade in January 2021 was 49 kilograms of maize from a sale of goat which were stable compared to the long term average of 52 kilograms. The ToT was 22 percent below compared to same period in 2020. The distance to water for domestic use in pastoral livelihood zones increased from the normal of five kilometre to 10 kilometre while in agro pastoral livelihood zone the distance remained normal at five kilometre. The cost of water in the pastoral livelihood zone increased by 40 percent compared to normal of Ksh. 5 per 20 litres jerrycan while in agro pastoral livelihood zone it remained at Ksh. 5 per 20 litres jerrycan. Water consumption in the agro pastoral livelihood zone was normal at 30 litres per person per day. However, in the pastoral livelihood zones, water consumption reduced by 33 percent from 30 litres per person per day normally to 15-20 litres. In January 2021, the proportion of household in poor, borderline and acceptable food consumption categories were three, 23 and 74 percent respectively compared to one, 11 and 88 in the same period of 2020.The coping strategy index in January 2021 was 12.11 compared with 10.9 recorded in the same period in 2020 indicating a stable trend. The proportion of children 6-59 month with MUAC below 125 was 5.7 percent as compared to 6.7 percent recorded during the month of December 2020. A reducing trend was observed as from July 2020.The crude mortality and mortality are below the normal threshold. Garissa County was classified as ‘Stressed’ (IPC Phase 2). II Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 County Background ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Methodology and Approach ............................................................................................................... 1 2.0 DRIVERS OF FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY IN THE COUNTY ............................................................ 2 2.1 Rainfall Performance ........................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Insecurity/Conflict ............................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 COVID 19 Pandemic ............................................................................................................................ 2 2.4 Desert Locust ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.5 Other Shocks and Hazards .................................................................................................................. 3 3.0 IMPACTS OF DRIVERS ON FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY ................................................................. 4 3.1 Availability ........................................................................................................................................... 4 3.2 Access .................................................................................................................................................. 9 3.3 Utilization .......................................................................................................................................... 16 3.4 Trends of Key Food Security Indicators ............................................................................................ 19 3.5 Education .......................................................................................................................................... 19 4.0 FOOD SECURITY PROGNOSIS ................................................................................................................ 22 4.1 Prognosis Assumptions ..................................................................................................................... 22 4.2 Food Security Outlook....................................................................................................................... 22 5.0 CONCLUSION AND INTERVENTIONS ..................................................................................................... 23 5.1 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 23 5.2 Ongoing Interventions ...................................................................................................................... 25 5.3 Recommended Interventions ........................................................................................................... 27 III 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 County Background Garissa County is located in North Eastern part of the Country. It borders Lamu County to the South, Wajir County to the north, Tana River County to the West, Isiolo County to the North western and Somalia to the East borders. It covers an approximate area of 45,702 square kilometre (Km²) with an estimated population of 841,353 persons (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, 2019 Population Census). Administratively, the County is divided into six sub counties namely: Garissa Township; Fafi; Balambala; Lagdera; Dadaab and Ijaara. The county has three main livelihoods zones namely, pastoral all species; agro-pastoral and formal employment with population proportions of 90, seven and three percent 3% respectively (Figure 1). Livestock 7% production is the main source of income in the pastoral all species contributing 72 percent to cash income. Firewood collection/charcoal burning contributes 15 percent while food crop production contributes five percent to cash income. In 90% the agropastoral livelihood zone, food crop production is the main source of income contributing 50 percent, livestock production and remittance 15 and five Figure 1: Proportion of Population by Livelihood percent respectively. 1.2 Methodology and Approach The main aim of the food and nutrition security assessment was to conduct an objective, evidence- based and transparent food and nutrition security situation analysis following the performance of short rains in 2020, taking into account the cumulative effect of previous seasons and to provide immediate and medium-term recommendations for possible response options. The assessment adopted a multi-sectoral and multi-agency approach consisting of representatives from KFSSG, CSG and various non-state actors. The assessment in the county was conducted from 18th to 22ndJanuary2021. The exercise began with the initial CSG briefing of the objectives of the assessment together with sector presentations and later a review of the sector checklists. Field teams were constituted with the aim of fact-finding mission or confirming the data in selected sample areas across all livelihood zones. The data was triangulated with the information provided in the checklists with the actual situation