DOCSLIB.ORG

Link NCA Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Link NCA Final Report Link NCA Final Report February – June 2016 Borena-Guji Cattle Pastoral Livelihood zone of Miyo and Moyale woredas, Borena zone, Oromia region, Ethiopia Christine PLAZA, Link NCA Expert Link NCA Report - Borena zone, Oromia region, Ethiopia – June 2016 1 / 135 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Nutritional Causal Analysis (NCA) was undertaken with funding from ECHO and OFDA. The NCA was managed by ACF NCA Expert, Christine Plaza with support from ACF Ethiopia Deputy Country Director (Aurelie Carmeille), ACF Technical Advisors in Ethiopia (Jogie Abucejo Agbogan, Sofia Gimenez, Firehiwot Mezgebu, Dawit Bekele, Yibeltal Jemberu) and in France (Celine Sinitzsky, Fabienne Rousseau, Maud Gimenez and Alex Letzelter) who provided key information and support throughout the project. In addition, ACF NCA Unit, Marie Sardier and Blanche Mattern, provided technical guidance and support on implementing the NCA methodology. The NCA would not have been possible without the support of ACF Mega base staff including Field Coordinator, as well as HR, Finance, Logistics and Programme Departments. We would like to thanks each member of the field team for their hard work in gathering data for this survey. This study was supported by the Oromia Regional Health Bureau as well as Zonal and Woreda authorities. In addition, we would like to thanks technical experts from Zonal and Woreda Pastoral Development office, Zonal and Woreda Disaster Preparedness and Prevention offices, Zonal and Woreda Women and Children Affairs offices, Zonal and Woreda Water , Mineral and Energy offices, Zonal and Woreda Health offices, Bule Hora University, and Mercy Corps, who provided key inputs through the NCA preliminary and final workshops. Most importantly, ACF would like to thank each of the respondents who gave up their time to participate in this survey and for sharing valuable information with our team. Link NCA Report - Borena zone, Oromia region, Ethiopia – June 2016 2 / 135 TABLE OF CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 2 TABLE OF CONTENT......................................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................... 6 LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................. 7 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................. 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 9 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 13 SECTION I – METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................... 14 1. WHY CONDUCT A LINK NCA ? ..................................................................................................................................... 14 1.1. Context information ........................................................................................................................................ 14 1.2. Main study objective ........................................................................................................................................ 16 1.3. Specific study objective................................................................................................................................... 16 2. THE LINK NCA METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 16 2.1. Overview of the Link NCA approach ......................................................................................................... 16 2.2. Study design ........................................................................................................................................................ 17 2.2.1. Initial Stakeholder Technical Workshop ........................................................................................................... 17 2.2.2. Field data collection ..................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.2.3. Final Stakeholder Technical Workshop ............................................................................................................. 17 3. SAMPLING PROCEDURES ................................................................................................................................................ 17 3.1. Selected method and sample size calculation ....................................................................................... 17 3.2. Sampling procedure for the quantitative survey ................................................................................. 19 3.3. Sample for the qualitative study ................................................................................................................ 20 4. DATA COLLECTION METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 20 4.1. Quantitative survey ......................................................................................................................................... 21 4.1.1. Data collection methods ............................................................................................................................................ 21 4.1.2. Field team composition, recruitment and training....................................................................................... 21 4.1.3. Data collection ................................................................................................................................................................ 21 4.2. Qualitative inquiry ........................................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.1. Research instruments and methods .................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.2. Data collection ................................................................................................................................................................ 22 4.2.3. Field team composition, recruitment and training....................................................................................... 22 4.2.4. Main challenges.............................................................................................................................................................. 22 4.3. Team structure .................................................................................................................................................. 23 5. DATA MANAGEMENT AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................... 23 5.1. Initial technical expert workshop .............................................................................................................. 23 5.2. Quantitative data management and analysis ....................................................................................... 23 5.3. Qualitative data management and analysis .......................................................................................... 23 5.4. Rating hypotheses ............................................................................................................................................ 23 5.5 Final technical expert workshop ................................................................................................................. 24 6. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS TAKEN DURING THE SURVEY ........................................................................................ 24 6.1. Research ethics .................................................................................................................................................. 24 6.2. Ethical approval and inform consent ....................................................................................................... 25 6.3. SAM and severe illnesses protocol.............................................................................................................. 25 7. LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................................................................... 25 7.1. Link NCA methodology limitations ............................................................................................................ 25 7.2. Limitations encountered related to the study presented .................................................................. 25 SECTION II – LINK NCA FINDINGS ............................................................................................................. 26 1. PRELIMINARY WORKSHOP ...................................................................................................................................... 26 11. Initial causal hypotheses ...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Districts of Ethiopia
    Region District or Woredas Zone Remarks Afar Region Argobba Special Woreda -- Independent district/woredas Afar Region Afambo Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Asayita Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Chifra Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Dubti Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Elidar Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Kori Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Mille Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) Afar Region Abala Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Afdera Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Berhale Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Dallol Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Erebti Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Koneba Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Megale Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Afar Region Amibara Zone 3 (Gabi Rasu) Afar Region Awash Fentale Zone 3 (Gabi Rasu) Afar Region Bure Mudaytu Zone 3 (Gabi Rasu) Afar Region Dulecha Zone 3 (Gabi Rasu) Afar Region Gewane Zone 3 (Gabi Rasu) Afar Region Aura Zone 4 (Fantena Rasu) Afar Region Ewa Zone 4 (Fantena Rasu) Afar Region Gulina Zone 4 (Fantena Rasu) Afar Region Teru Zone 4 (Fantena Rasu) Afar Region Yalo Zone 4 (Fantena Rasu) Afar Region Dalifage (formerly known as Artuma) Zone 5 (Hari Rasu) Afar Region Dewe Zone 5 (Hari Rasu) Afar Region Hadele Ele (formerly known as Fursi) Zone 5 (Hari Rasu) Afar Region Simurobi Gele'alo Zone 5 (Hari Rasu) Afar Region Telalak Zone 5 (Hari Rasu) Amhara Region Achefer -- Defunct district/woredas Amhara Region Angolalla Terana Asagirt -- Defunct district/woredas Amhara Region Artuma Fursina Jile -- Defunct district/woredas Amhara Region Banja -- Defunct district/woredas Amhara Region Belessa --
    [Show full text]
  • Hum Ethio Manitar Opia Rian Re Espons E Fund D
    Hum anitarian Response Fund Ethiopia OCHA, 2011 OCHA, 2011 Annual Report 2011 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Humanitarian Response Fund – Ethiopia Annual Report 2011 Table of Contents Note from the Humanitarian Coordinator ................................................................................................ 2 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 3 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 2011 Humanitarian Context ........................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Map - 2011 HRF Supported Projects ............................................................................................. 6 2. Information on Contributors ................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Donor Contributions to HRF .......................................................................................................... 7 3. Fund Overview .................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Summary of HRF Allocations in 2011 ............................................................................................ 8 3.1.1 HRF Allocation by Sector .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ETHIOPIA Humanitarian Access Situation Report June – July 2019
    ETHIOPIA Humanitarian Access Situation Report June – July 2019 This report is produced by OCHA Ethiopia in collaboration with humanitarian partners. It covers the period June - July 2019. The next report will be issued around September - October 2019. OVERVIEW IUS • In June - July, Ethiopia experienced an at- TIGRAY 276 Access incidents reported tempted government overthrow in Amhara, Western socio-political unrest in Sidama (SNNPR), North Gondar Wag Hamra Central Gondar and a rise in security incidents in Southwest- Zone 4 (Fantana Rasu) AFAR ern Oromia and Gambella. The quality of ac- Zone 1 (Awsi Rasu) cess declined, limiting assistance to people AMHARA No. o incidents by one South Wello Metekel in need, against a backdrop of massive gov- Oromia East Gojam BENISHANGUL Zone 5 (Hari Rasu) 4 13 35 49 AsosaGUMUZ Siti ernment-led returns of IDP to areas of origin. Zone 3 (Gabi Rasu) North Shewa(O) North Shewa(A) Kemashi Dire Dawa urban West Wellega East Wellega DIRE DAWA West Shewa Fafan • Hostilities between Ethiopian Defense Forc- ADDIS ABABA Kelem Wellega East Hararge Finfine Special West Hararge es (EDF) and Unidentified Armed Groups Buno Bedele East Shewa Etang Special Ilu Aba Bora Jarar OROMIA Erer (UAGs) as well as inter-ethnic, remained the GAMBELA Jimma Agnewak main access obstacle, with 197 incidents Doolo Nogob West Arsi SOMALI (out of 276), mostly in Southwestern Oromia SNNP Sidama Bale Korahe (110). The Wellegas, West Guji (Oromia), and Gedeo Shabelle Gambella, were the most insecure areas for Segen Area P. West Guji Guji aid workers. Liban Borena • In June, conflict in the Wellegas scaled up, Daawa with explosive devices attacks causing ci- Source: Access Incidents database vilian casualties in urban centres.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethiopia Socio-Economic Assessment of the Impact of COVID-19
    ONE UN ASSESSMENT ETHIOPIA ADDIS ABABA MAY 2020 SOCIO - ECONOMIC IMPACT of COVID­‑19 in ETHIOPIA ABOUT This document is a joint product of the members of the United Nations Country Team in Ethiopia. The report assesses the devastating social and economic dimensions of the COVID-19 crisis and sets out the framework for the United Nations’ urgent socio- economic support to Ethiopia in the face of a global pandemic. FOREWORD BY THE UN RESIDENT / HUMANITARIAN COORDINATOR This socio-economic impact assessment has been This assessment aligns fully with the ‘UN framework drafted by the United Nations (UN) in Ethiopia in for the immediate socio-economic response to the spirit of ‘One UN’. It reflects our best collective COVID-19’ launched by the Secretary-General in assessment, based on the available evidence and April 2020, even though its design and preparation our knowledge and expertise, of the scale, nature preceded the publication of this vital reference and depth of socio-economic impacts in the country. document. This assessment addresses all aspects of We offer this as a contribution to the expanding the framework, in terms of the people we must reach; knowledge base on this critical issue, acknowledging the five pillars of the proposed UN response – health and drawing upon the work of the Government of first, protecting people, economic response and Ethiopia (GoE), academic experts, development recovery, macroeconomic response and multilateral partners and consulting firms, among others. collaboration, community cohesion and community resilience; and the collective spirt deployed to deliver Given the high level of uncertainty and volatility in the product and our upcoming socio-economic conditions, whether in Ethiopia or outside - not least response.
    [Show full text]
  • Sero-Prevalence of Brucellosis in Goats and Community Awareness in Liban District of Guji Zone, Oromia Regional State, Southern Ethiopia
    Research Article JOJ Pub Health Volume 2 Issue 3 -August 2017 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Wubishet Zewdie DOI: 10.19080/JOJPH.2017.02.555587 Sero-Prevalence Of Brucellosis In Goats And Community Awareness In Liban District Of Guji Zone, Oromia Regional State, Southern Ethiopia Wubishet Z1, Golo D1, Chala F2, Shubisa A1, Huqa L Godana H3 and Ararsa D4 1Oromia Pastoral Area Development Commission Yabello Regional Veterinary Laboratory, Ethiopia 2Alage Federal Agricultural Technical Vocational Education and Training College, Ethiopia 3Oromia Pastoralist Area Development Commission, Dida Tuyura Borena Breed genetic improvement and breeding center, Ethiopia 4Haramaya University School of Veterinary Medicine, Africa, Ethiopia Submission: August 18, 2017; Published: August 30, 2017 *Corresponding author: Wubishet Zewdie, Oromia Pastoral Area Development Commission Yabello Regional Veterinary Laboratory, Ethiopia, Email: Abstract A cross-sectional study was conducted to determine sero prevalence of brucellosis, community awareness about zoonotic importance of the disease and its transmission to goat owners in Liban district of Guji zone Oromia regional state, southern Ethiopia. Study was conducted on 413 goats that are managed under pastoral production system. Sera samples were serially tested using Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT). Positive sera samples were retested by complement fixation test (CFT). Questionnaire survey was administered to 153 goat owners to assess community awareness. Collected data was analyzed using SPSS version 15 software. The study showed that goat brucellosis is a moderately childrendistributed to bewith the overall risky group sero-prevalence with higher of probability 6.2% in Liban of being district. infected All with153 (100%)brucellosis respondents from goats in relative the area to menrecognized as result abortion of close but contact 136 they(88.9%) have of with the goatsrespondents during parturition,have no awareness handling about of cases zoonotic like aborted importance foetus of and brucellosis.
    [Show full text]
  • Oromia Region Administrative Map(As of 27 March 2013)
    ETHIOPIA: Oromia Region Administrative Map (as of 27 March 2013) Amhara Gundo Meskel ! Amuru Dera Kelo ! Agemsa BENISHANGUL ! Jangir Ibantu ! ! Filikilik Hidabu GUMUZ Kiremu ! ! Wara AMHARA Haro ! Obera Jarte Gosha Dire ! ! Abote ! Tsiyon Jars!o ! Ejere Limu Ayana ! Kiremu Alibo ! Jardega Hose Tulu Miki Haro ! ! Kokofe Ababo Mana Mendi ! Gebre ! Gida ! Guracha ! ! Degem AFAR ! Gelila SomHbo oro Abay ! ! Sibu Kiltu Kewo Kere ! Biriti Degem DIRE DAWA Ayana ! ! Fiche Benguwa Chomen Dobi Abuna Ali ! K! ara ! Kuyu Debre Tsige ! Toba Guduru Dedu ! Doro ! ! Achane G/Be!ret Minare Debre ! Mendida Shambu Daleti ! Libanos Weberi Abe Chulute! Jemo ! Abichuna Kombolcha West Limu Hor!o ! Meta Yaya Gota Dongoro Kombolcha Ginde Kachisi Lefo ! Muke Turi Melka Chinaksen ! Gne'a ! N!ejo Fincha!-a Kembolcha R!obi ! Adda Gulele Rafu Jarso ! ! ! Wuchale ! Nopa ! Beret Mekoda Muger ! ! Wellega Nejo ! Goro Kulubi ! ! Funyan Debeka Boji Shikute Berga Jida ! Kombolcha Kober Guto Guduru ! !Duber Water Kersa Haro Jarso ! ! Debra ! ! Bira Gudetu ! Bila Seyo Chobi Kembibit Gutu Che!lenko ! ! Welenkombi Gorfo ! ! Begi Jarso Dirmeji Gida Bila Jimma ! Ketket Mulo ! Kersa Maya Bila Gola ! ! ! Sheno ! Kobo Alem Kondole ! ! Bicho ! Deder Gursum Muklemi Hena Sibu ! Chancho Wenoda ! Mieso Doba Kurfa Maya Beg!i Deboko ! Rare Mida ! Goja Shino Inchini Sululta Aleltu Babile Jimma Mulo ! Meta Guliso Golo Sire Hunde! Deder Chele ! Tobi Lalo ! Mekenejo Bitile ! Kegn Aleltu ! Tulo ! Harawacha ! ! ! ! Rob G! obu Genete ! Ifata Jeldu Lafto Girawa ! Gawo Inango ! Sendafa Mieso Hirna
    [Show full text]
  • Damage and Loss Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ©UNHCR/Adelina Gomez
    ©UNHCR/Anna Helge Damage and Loss Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ©UNHCR/Adelina Gomez TABLE OF CONTENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 DAMAGE AND LOSS IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION SECTORS 4 DAMAGE ON LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEM 5 DAMAGE AND LOSS ASSESMENT ON SOCIAL AND INFRAESTRUCTURAL 6 SECTORS • Private houses 6 • Public Infrastructure 7 • Recommendations 8 LEGAL ASSISTANCE NEEDS 10 • Access to justice 10 • Access to Land holding certificate 11 • Customary/Traditional justice system 12 • Recommendations 12 CONFLICT, PEACE BUILDING AND SOCIAL COHESION 13 POSSIBLE APPROACHES FOR CONFLICT TRANSFORMATION AND PEACE- 14 BUILDING IN THE CONTEXT OF GUJI AND GEDEO ETHNIC GROUPS • Building Trust 14 • Developing social cohesion 15 • Supporting local buy-in 15 • Recommendations 16 APPENDIX 1 18 - 2 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Damage and Loss Assessment in West Guji Bule Hora University initiated a Damage and Loss Assessment (DaLA) in West Guji zone in collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the West Guji Zonal Disaster Risk Management Office to assess loss and damages incurred during the intercommunal conflict between the Gedeo and Guji people in 2018, which displaced hundreds of thousands. The assessment also analyzed legal assistance needs, as well as the potential for peace-building and social cohesion. A total of 78,257HHs (508,671 individuals) with an average family size of 6.5/HH were severely exposed to multiple socio-economic crises due to the conflict. Following the Government’s initiated return process based on the alleged improved safety and security situation (assessed by the Government) in May 2019, according to the Government, the majority of the IDPs were returned to their places of habitual residence 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethiopia: Administrative Map (August 2017)
    Ethiopia: Administrative map (August 2017) ERITREA National capital P Erob Tahtay Adiyabo Regional capital Gulomekeda Laelay Adiyabo Mereb Leke Ahferom Red Sea Humera Adigrat ! ! Dalul ! Adwa Ganta Afeshum Aksum Saesie Tsaedaemba Shire Indasilase ! Zonal Capital ! North West TigrayTahtay KoraroTahtay Maychew Eastern Tigray Kafta Humera Laelay Maychew Werei Leke TIGRAY Asgede Tsimbila Central Tigray Hawzen Medebay Zana Koneba Naeder Adet Berahile Region boundary Atsbi Wenberta Western Tigray Kelete Awelallo Welkait Kola Temben Tselemti Degua Temben Mekele Zone boundary Tanqua Abergele P Zone 2 (Kilbet Rasu) Tsegede Tselemt Mekele Town Special Enderta Afdera Addi Arekay South East Ab Ala Tsegede Mirab Armacho Beyeda Woreda boundary Debark Erebti SUDAN Hintalo Wejirat Saharti Samre Tach Armacho Abergele Sanja ! Dabat Janamora Megale Bidu Alaje Sahla Addis Ababa Ziquala Maychew ! Wegera Metema Lay Armacho Wag Himra Endamehoni Raya Azebo North Gondar Gonder ! Sekota Teru Afar Chilga Southern Tigray Gonder City Adm. Yalo East Belesa Ofla West Belesa Kurri Dehana Dembia Gonder Zuria Alamata Gaz Gibla Zone 4 (Fantana Rasu ) Elidar Amhara Gelegu Quara ! Takusa Ebenat Gulina Bugna Awra Libo Kemkem Kobo Gidan Lasta Benishangul Gumuz North Wello AFAR Alfa Zone 1(Awsi Rasu) Debre Tabor Ewa ! Fogera Farta Lay Gayint Semera Meket Guba Lafto DPubti DJIBOUTI Jawi South Gondar Dire Dawa Semen Achefer East Esite Chifra Bahir Dar Wadla Delanta Habru Asayita P Tach Gayint ! Bahir Dar City Adm. Aysaita Guba AMHARA Dera Ambasel Debub Achefer Bahirdar Zuria Dawunt Worebabu Gambela Dangura West Esite Gulf of Aden Mecha Adaa'r Mile Pawe Special Simada Thehulederie Kutaber Dangila Yilmana Densa Afambo Mekdela Tenta Awi Dessie Bati Hulet Ej Enese ! Hareri Sayint Dessie City Adm.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutritional Causal Analysis East Hararghe Zone, Fedis and Kersa Woredas, Ethiopia, August, 2014
    East Hararghe Zone, Fedis and Kersa Woredas, Ethiopia Action Contre La Faim_ Ethiopia mission Nutritional Causal Analysis East Hararghe Zone, Fedis and Kersa Woredas, Ethiopia, August, 2014 Carine Magen, Health Anthropologist, and ACF team, Ethiopia mission 11/1/2014 ACF East Hararghe Nutrition Causal Analysis Report Page 1 LIST OF ACRONYMS ARI Acute Respiratory Infection BCG Bacillus Calmette Guerin CBN Community Based Nutrition CGC Charcher, Gololicha zone (Coffee, Khat, Maize) CVG Khat, Vegetable CI Confidence Interval CMAM Community-based Management of Acute Malnutrition CDR Crude Death Rate CHD Community Health Day CLTS Community Led Total Sanitation CSB Corn Soya Blended food DE Design Effect DPPO Disaster Preparedness and Prevention Office DRMFSS Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector ENA Emergency Nutrition Assessment ENCU Emergency Nutrition Coordination Unit EPI Extended Programme of Immunization ETB Ethiopian Birr FGD Focus Group Discussion GAM Global Acute Malnutrition GBG Gursum and Babile zone (sorghum, maize, haricot bean) HH Households HRF Humanitarian Response Fund IGA Income generating activities IMC International Medical Corps IYCF Infant and Young Child Feeding MAM Moderate Acute Malnutrition MNC Mother with Malnourished Child MUAC Mid-Upper Arm Circumference NCA Nutrition Causal Analysis NNP National Nutrition program NCHS National Centre for Health Statistics ODPPC Oromiya Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Commission OTP Out-Patient Therapeutic Program PPS Probability Proportional to Population Size
    [Show full text]
  • The Quest for Resolution of Guji-Gedeo Conflicts in Southern Ethiopia: a Review of Mechanisms Employed, Actors and Their Effectiveness
    The Quest for Resolution of Guji-Gedeo Conflicts in Southern Ethiopia: A Review of Mechanisms Employed, Actors and Their Effectiveness Girum Kinfemichael1 Abstract This article assesses the quest for resolution of Guji-Gedeo conflicts, the federal device as a means of managing conflict employed and their effectiveness. Methodologically, the study is mainly based on qualitative approach with an opinion and descriptive surveys to reveal the existing problems. It emerges from the study that the different structures, processes and mechanisms, which are employed at various levels of administrative hierarchies of governments for managing the conflicts, remain ad-hoc, not well-coordinated and, above all, their actions are mainly reactive. The study draws an argumentative conclusion that the Federal Government and authorities of the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Region (SNNPR) and Oromiya Regional State need to boost their close cooperation, engagement in early warning and conflict management endeavors in addressing the conflict as the two communities are still at loggerheads over the issue of defining the contested boundary claims. It is also useful to extend the scope of such cooperation and engagement to the level of local governments in both Regional States. Along with these efforts, it would be better if authorities at various levels revitalize and empower traditional conflict resolution institutions to run parallel with ‘modern’ government structures to respond to the conflicts promptly. It is thus prudent to use the advantage of federalism as flexible and innovative system of governance to manage the conflict constructively. Keywords: Boundary conflicts, ethnicity, ethnic federation, federal restructuring, Guji-Gedeo conflicts, indigenous institutions. 1 Lecturer, Department of Federalism and Local Government Studies, Institute of Federalism and Legal Studies, Ethiopian Civil Service University.
    [Show full text]
  • COUNTRY Food Security Update
    ETHIOPIA Food Security Outlook Update November 2014 Mid-October floods continue to limit access to grazing lands Projected food security outcomes, November to KEY MESSAGES December 2014 In mid-October, unusually late rains caused flooding along the Shebelle River in Somali Region, on the shores of Lake Turkana in South Omo Zone in Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region (SNNPR), and along the Awash River in southern Afar. The floods both destroyed and limited access to grazing areas, which has led to deterioration in livestock body conditions and productivity. This reduced households’ access to food and income. In the lowlands of Borena Zone in southern Oromia, the March to May rains were below average and followed by a warmer than usual June to September dry season. This led to a faster deterioration of pasture and a faster decrease in water availability. These rangeland resources have yet to recover as the October to December Hageya rains have been below Projected food security outcomes, January to March average so far. Unseasonal livestock migration has continued, 2015 and planting has been delayed in agropastoral areas. Poor households are Stressed (IPC Phase 2!) but only with the presence of humanitarian assistance through December by when the remaining rains will likely lead to improved rangeland conditions. CURRENT SITUATION Harvesting and threshing of Meher crops are underway in eastern Amhara, eastern Tigray, and central and eastern Oromia Region. The June to September Kiremt rains extended into mid-October, supporting additional growth of late- planted, short-cycle crops. For example, some pulses and other late planted crops are at the seed-setting or maturity stages.
    [Show full text]
  • Periodic Monitoring Report Working 2016 Humanitarian Requirements Document – Ethiopia Group
    DRMTechnical Periodic Monitoring Report Working 2016 Humanitarian Requirements Document – Ethiopia Group Covering 1 Jan to 31 Dec 2016 Prepared by Clusters and NDRMC Introduction The El Niño global climactic event significantly affected the 2015 meher/summer rains on the heels of failed belg/ spring rains in 2015, driving food insecurity, malnutrition and serious water shortages in many parts of the country. The Government and humanitarian partners issued a joint 2016 Humanitarian Requirements Document (HRD) in December 2015 requesting US$1.4 billion to assist 10.2 million people with food, health and nutrition, water, agriculture, shelter and non-food items, protection and emergency education responses. Following the delay and erratic performance of the belg/spring rains in 2016, a Prioritization Statement was issued in May 2016 with updated humanitarian requirements in nutrition (MAM), agriculture, shelter and non-food items and education.The Mid-Year Review of the HRD identified 9.7 million beneficiaries and updated the funding requirements to $1.2 billion. The 2016 HRD is 69 per cent funded, with contributions of $1.08 billion from international donors and the Government of Ethiopia (including carry-over resources from 2015). Under the leadership of the Government of Ethiopia delivery of life-saving and life- sustaining humanitarian assistance continues across the sectors. However, effective humanitarian response was challenged by shortage of resources, limited logistical capacities and associated delays, and weak real-time information management. This Periodic Monitoring Report (PMR) provides a summary of the cluster financial inputs against outputs and achievements against cluster objectives using secured funding since the launch of the 2016 HRD.
    [Show full text]