Action Against Hunger Pakistan Project funded by ECHO
Sowing potato in Upper Kaghan Valley
Food Security Assessment Report Mahandri Union Council Kaghan Valley
Food Security Program Earthquake affected area Pakistan, NWFP province December 2006 Contents
CONTENTS...... II TABLES...... IV FIGURES ...... V GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS...... V KEY FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STUDY ...... VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... VIII
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND...... 1
SECTION 2: OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSMENT ...... 2
SECTION 3: METHODOLOGY...... 2
3.1 SAMPLING METHODOLOGY...... 2 3.2 FIELD IMPLEMENTATION...... 3
SECTION 4: RESULTS...... 4
4.1 SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE...... 4 4.1.1 CASTE & ETHNICITY ...... 4 4.1.2 LAND TENURE AND SEASONAL MIGRATION PATTERNS...... 4 4.1.3 WEALTH RANKING ...... 5 4.2 LIVELIHOODS ...... 5 4.2.1 HOUSEHOLD IDENTIFICATION AND THE ECONOMIC UNIT...... 5 4.2.2 AGRICULTURE ...... 7 4.2.2.1 Staple crops ...... 7 4.2.2.2 Tree crops ...... 13 4.2.3 LIVESTOCK ...... 14 4.2.3.1 Animal losses...... 15 4.2.3.2 Market prices and economic losses ...... 17 4.2.3.3 Restocking ...... 17 4.2.4 INCOME GENERATING ACTIVITIES ...... 17 4.2.4.1 Cash income losses: changes in remittance and casual labor income ...... 20 4.2.4.2 Livelihoods on hold...... 23 4.2.5 MARKETS, PRICES AND EXPENSES...... 23 4.2.5.1 Markets...... 23 4.2.5.2 Household expenditures ...... 24 4.2.6 DEBT...... 25 4.2.6.1 Growing indebtedness ...... 26 4.2.6.2 Impact by class and remittance profile...... 27 4.3 SHELTER AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 28 4.3.1 SHELTER ...... 28 4.3.2 WATER AND SANITATION...... 30 4.3.3 ROADS, BRIDGES AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 31 4.4 COPING STRATEGIES, SOLIDARITY AND IMPACTS ON HEALTH AND NUTRITION...... 31 4.4.1 PRIMARY COPING STRATEGIES ...... 31 4.4.2 SOLIDARITY ...... 33 4.4.4 IMPACTS ON FOOD AND NUTRITION ...... 34 4.4.4.1 Change in overall food security...... 34 4.4.4.2 Change in consumption of high quality foods...... 36 4.4.5 IMPACTS ON HEALTH AND CARE PRACTICE...... 37
ii 4.5 REMAINING NEEDS AND FUTURE STRATEGY ...... 38 4.5.1 CURRENT URGENT NEEDS ...... 38 4.5.2 FUTURE NEEDS ...... 39 4.5.3 FUTURE STRATEGY OF THE COMMUNITY ...... 40
SECTION 5: CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS...... 41
5.1 CONCLUSIONS...... 41 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS...... 41
6 ANNEXES – FIELD INSTRUMENTS...... 44
6.1 MALE FOCUS GROUP GUIDE ...... 44 6.2 FEMALE FOCUS GROUP GUIDE ...... 49 6.3 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW GUIDES...... 53 6.4 QUESTIONNAIRE HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEW ...... 58 6.5 TABLE OF INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUPS COMPLETED BY CLUSTER ...... 68 REFERENCES...... 69 MAP OF ACF AREA OF INTERVENTION AND SURVEY AREA...... 69
iii Tables
TABLE 1: JARED WEALTH RANKING...... 5 TABLE 2: MANOOR WEALTH RANKING ...... 5 TABLE 3: JOINT FAMILY SYSTEMS...... 6 TABLE 4: HEAD OF EU STATUS...... 6 TABLE 5: DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION OF THE EU BY ACTIVITY ...... 6 TABLE 6: MAIN AGRICULTURAL FEATURES ...... 8 TABLE 7: STAPLE FOODS HARVEST AND NEEDS COVERAGE ...... 8 TABLE 8: MAIN STAPLE CROP PRODUCTION BY EU 2004-2006 ...... 9 TABLE 9: 2004 MAIZE HARVEST IN FOOD-DAYS BY INCOME QUARTILE...... 11 TABLE 10: DISTRIBUTION OF MAIZE CROP LOSSES...... 11 TABLE 11: 2005 HARVEST IN FOOD-DAYS...... 12 TABLE 12: SNAPSHOT OF DESTRUCTION (CROPS)...... 12 TABLE 13: CULTIVATED AND IRRIGATED AREA IN 2005 AND 2006...... 12 TABLE 14: MAIN CONSTRAINTS FACED DURING CULTIVATION ...... 13 TABLE 15: AVERAGE TREES OWNED PRE-EQ PER EU...... 14 TABLE 16: RATE OF OWNERSHIP OF LARGE AND SMALL ANIMALS PER-EQ...... 14 TABLE 17: DISTRIBUTION OF LIVESTOCK LOSSES ...... 15 TABLE 18: AVERAGE OWNERSHIP OF LARGE AND SMALL ANIMALS PRE AND POST-EQ ...... 16 TABLE 19: CHANGE IN LIVESTOCK MARKET RATES...... 17 TABLE 20: SNAPSHOT OF DESTRUCTION (LIVESTOCK)...... 17 TABLE 21: DEFINITION OF INCOME QUARTILES...... 19 TABLE 22: SNAPSHOT OF DESTRUCTION: MONTHLY CASH INCOME ...... 22 TABLE 23: FOOD PRICE INFLATION ...... 24 TABLE 24: DEBT AS A SHARE OF INCOME BY INCOME QUARTILE ...... 27 TABLE 25: REMITTANCE PROFILE OF HOUSEHOLDS INCURRING POST-EQ DEBT ...... 27 TABLE 26: SHELTER TYPES BEFORE THE EQ ...... 28 TABLE 27: DAMAGE TO HOUSES ...... 28 TABLE 28: SHELTER AND NFI DISTRIBUTION IN WINTER 05-06 ...... 28 TABLE 29: SHELTER TYPES IN JULY 2006...... 30 TABLE 30: TO WHAT EXTENT HAVE YOU BEEN DEPENDENT ON CHARITY, HOSHER AND ZAKAT SINCE EQ?...... 34 TABLE 31: CREATING A FOOD SECURITY INDEX ...... 34 TABLE 32: DEFINITION OF FOOD SECURITY RANKS ...... 35 TABLE 33: PRIORITY URGENT NEEDS CITED BY PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS...... 38 TABLE 34: PRIORITY LONGER TERM NEEDS CITED BY PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS ...... 39 TABLE 35: INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUPS COMPLETED BY CLUSTER ...... 68
iv Figures
FIGURE 1: AGRICULTURAL CALENDAR (IN THE MOUNTAINS)...... 7 FIGURE 2: AGRICULTURAL CALENDAR (IN THE PLAIN) ...... 7 FIGURE 3: LIVESTOCK OWNERSHIP PER EU PRE- AND POST-EQ...... 16 FIGURE 4: MAIN SOURCE OF LIVELIHOOD BY HEAD OF EU IN %...... 18 FIGURE 5: AVERAGE MONTHLY INCOME FOR MAIN LIVELIHOOD ACTIVITIES ...... 19 FIGURE 6: INCOME DISTRIBUTION...... 19 FIGURE 8: DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME LOSSES ACROSS INCOME CLASSES ...... 21 FIGURE 9: MAIN LIVELIHOOD SOURCES BY HH MEMBER...... 22 FIGURE 11: AVERAGE INCREASE IN EU EXPENDITURE BY TYPE...... 24 FIGURE 12: AVERAGE EXPENSES PER EU PRE- AND POST-EQ...... 25 FIGURE 14: SHARE OF EUS WITH DEBT PRE- AND POST-EQ...... 26 FIGURE 15: TOTAL DEBT LOAD PER EU PRE- AND POST-EQ ...... 27 FIGURE 16: PRIMARY COPING STRATEGIES AFTER THE EQ ...... 32 FIGURE 17: DESTINATION FOR FAMILIES WHO MIGRATED ...... 32 FIGURE 18: SALE OF VALUABLE ASSETS ...... 33 FIGURE 19: SUPPORT GIVEN PRE- AND POST-EQ...... 33 FIGURE 20: CHANGE IN FOOD SECURITY LEVELS ...... 35 FIGURE 21: CHANGE IN FREQUENCY OF CONSUMPTION OF HIGH QUALITY FOODS ...... 37 FIGURE 22: URGENT NEEDS BY PRIORITY ...... 38 FIGURE 23: LONGER TERM NEEDS BY PRIORITY...... 39 FIGURE 24: FUTURE STRATEGIES...... 40
Glossary and Abbreviations
Charity Sadaqah - voluntary donation of an additional amount of food or cash assistance above zakat Hosher Harvest share to the poorest families (fruit, grains) Jirga A tribal assembly of elders which takes decisions by consensus Kanal A unit of measure equivalent to 1/8 acre Marla A unit of measure equivalent to 1/20 kanal Nazim Chief elected official of a local government in Pakistan Zakat The Islamic concept of alms, paid out as cash to the poorest families each year
EQ Earthquake EU Economic Unit HH Household NWFP North West Frontier Province PKR Pakistani Rupees UC Union Council USD US Dollars
v
Key Findings & Recommendations of the Study
AGRICULTURE o Livelihood strategies are highly diversified, with local casual labor and domestic and international remittance playing prominent roles. Agriculture is the primary activity for just 10% of households. o Baseline agricultural productivity in the area is low, with average maize harvests recorded at 1/3 metric ton per acre covering 70 days of winter food needs o Average household maize harvest after the EQ in 2005 was just 40% of the previous year, covering only 1 month of food needs o Cultivated land area did not change much between 2005 and 2006, while irrigated area dropped to 30% of the previous year o Major constraints to cultivation are now draft power, irrigation and labor. Baseline food security and nutrition in the area could be raised by: raising the productivity of the maize crop, introducing improved wheat into higher altitude areas, and introducing food processing and preservation to improve availability of high quality foods in winter season. Agricultural livelihoods can be further rehabilitated by recovering damaged irrigation infrastructure and providing subsidized tractor or draft animal services during cultivation. Post-harvest monitoring of the 2006 kharif crop will determine if seed inputs are required during 2007.
HORTICULTURE o Existing fruit and nut production systems play an important role in supplementing household nutrition and are a major feature of the subsistence economy o There is little experience with home-based processing or preservation to extend the nutritional benefits past the harvest season o There is little experience with nursery raising and modern propagation technique o The EQ had a relatively moderate impact on local orchards o Market-oriented fruit and nut production remains undeveloped despite an established regional demand The development of small scale fruit and nut micro-enterprise should be investigated as a mechanism to boost income generation, by building capacity, organizing local processing and marketing collectives, and facilitating market linkages.
LIVESTOCK o Two thirds of all households with livestock experienced 100% loss of their draft animals (oxen and bullock) and at least 1 milking animal (cow, goat) in the EQ o Average resulting inflation in livestock prices was 70% Targeted feed provision and assistance in rebuilding livestock shelters would help to rebuild animal husbandry livelihoods. Once assets are recovered and if the population has not spontaneously restocked, a restocking intervention should be considered.
INCOMES & DEBT o Losses in average cash income were mainly due to loss of domestic remittance income in the top 2 income quartiles. Government compensation largely filled this gap in the aftermath of the EQ o An increase in casual labor opportunities after the EQ contributed to a 5% increase in average income in the lowest income quartile o 40% of households took on new debt after the EQ, the majority in the lowest income classes. Total debt load roughly doubled. o Households without pre or post-crisis remittance were twice as likely to acquire new debt o Livelihoods are on hold as people focus on home reconstruction. o The continued provision of humanitarian aid has also depressed the incentive to return to traditional activities Asset recovery should be accelerated as a priority intervention, in particular targeted direct material assistance in home reconstruction and targeted replacement of lost assets, in order to promote the rapid resumption of livelihood activities and mitigate against higher levels of indebtedness. There is a need to develop high value local IGA activities, such as animal breeding, horticulture products and small trades.
vi The humanitarian community should focus on development of these activities rather than continued distribution of relief items. Support to financial infrastructure and strengthening of remittance flows is also recommended.
MARKETS & INFRASTRUCTURE o Basic food commodity prices remain inflated a rough 25% due to the earthquake o Animal rental costs doubled, while transport, shelter and labor costs increased by about one third. o Road rehabilitation is required for full recovery of market prices o The poorest households have disproportionately borne the impact of the increase in market prices and household expenditures. Higher expenditures among this group are being financed by debt. o Water networks were massively damaged. The continued constrained access to drinking water is a special burden on women, who must travel long distances to fetch water. In areas where springs have shifted location, communities anticipate permanent out- migration if the water problem is not quickly solved. Water network rehabilitation is urgently required. Similarly, road rehabilitation should be considered a priority by humanitarian and government actors to enable markets to recover and prices to return to normal. Until markets and household economies fully recover, continued support to most vulnerable households is justified, in the form of subsidized vouchers for basic goods
HOUSING o 90% of people in the UC had failed to secure adequate housing by mid-2006 and shelter remains people’s all consuming priority. A transitional shelter policy is urgently needed, in combination with winter preparedness interventions for winter 06-07. In addition, there needs to be flexibility in the application of eligibility criteria to receive government compensation. Finally, targeted direct material assistance in home reconstruction is recommended, including facilitation of materials procurement and subsidy on transport and materials cost.
MIGRATION o 70% of families in Jared migrated from their village in the winter after the EQ, while 25% migrated from Manoor. 1 in 10 went to IDP camps while the remainder went to private homes down-valley. o 99% of those who migrated returned in the spring.
FOOD o A significant share of the population experienced food shortages and hunger in the wake of the EQ, with an estimated 13% still food insecure o Solidarity networks and food aid did not cover the entire food need o Most vulnerable groups include households with a high ratio of dependents to adult males. This group is not commonly recognized as vulnerable by the community o High market prices continue to constrain access to basic goods and overall food security in the valley o Consumption of high quality foods such as eggs, milk, lassi, ghee, meat and fruit and nuts declined only slightly o The utilization of these foods is seasonally limited, implying a strong nutritional gap in winter season Assessments are needed to determine the size of the winter season food gap and the resulting nutritional impact, and evaluate appropriate responses such as training on kitchen garden and food preservation techniques among women. Winter surveillance is recommended to monitor food access.
VULNERABILITY & SOLIDARITY o Traditional solidarity mechanisms appear to have remained resilient in the wake of the EQ o Vulnerability levels as perceived by the community are in the range of 5-6% of the population o The level of grief, depression and trauma is still high, affecting women’s ability to care for their families, increasing the vulnerability of young children and slowing overall recovery. There is a need for counselling services and psycho-social support especially targeted to women. Basic health care services accessible by women are also needed.
REMAINING NEEDS o Current urgent needs named by the community by priority are shelter (66%) and water supply (23%) o Future needs named by the community by priority are roads, bridges and footpath rehabilitation (35%), electricity (19%), water supply (18%) and medical services (13%)
vii Executive Summary
The household level economy in Mahandri Union Council, Kaghan Valley is strongly cash-based, due to the dual constraints of small size landholdings and low productivity of staple grain crops which permit harvests covering only 2 months of annual food needs. Nevertheless baseline food security in the U/C is reported high, with only a reported 3% of the population facing food shortages in the winter season in a normal year. Diversified livelihoods provide the required cash income, notably remittances and local labor work. Household strategies for securing food are complex and include subsistence agriculture, small-scale horticulture and animal husbandry in combination with market purchases facilitated by credit, remittance and low-wage labor. Family and community-based solidarity networks complement these strategies. The systems in place have proven to be relatively effective in securing the basic needs of the majority of the population.
The 2005 earthquake proved to be a major shock to household economies. Major productive assets were lost, in particular livestock, seed stocks and irrigation channels. Homes and drinking water networks were almost universally damaged or destroyed and roadways affected. Heads of household working in-country largely returned to be near their families after the crisis, forgoing the remittance income previously central to the household economy. At the same time expenditures related to transport, shelter, fuel, medical services and animal rental for draft power increased by an average 30% due to increased demand and inflated market prices in the wake of the earthquake. Middle and low-income families compensated by taking on high rates of new debt – on average doubling their total debt load – as well as relying on relief assistance and solidarity networks. Nevertheless over 50% of the community reports sustaining food shortages over the 2005-2006 winter, and more than 10% of households now report experiencing hunger on a regular basis.
Rehabilitation has proceeded at a slow pace and basic infrastructure such as homes, drinking water channels and roadways has still not been recovered at the time of writing. Shelter is the overwhelming priority urgent need of the community at this time, with winter fast approaching. Water supply is the second highest urgent need. Food is a distant third priority. The main longer term need reported is the rehabilitation of roads, bridges and footpaths, heavily damaged in the earthquake and further damaged in the monsoon. Access to basic health, education and communication services is reported as the second greatest longer term need. However, when asked about their strategies to meet these needs, community leaders indicated they expected NGOs and government to solve the problems.
viii SECTION 1: BACKGROUND
Context Pakistan’s northern mountainous areas are historically isolated, and as a result, culturally insular. The bulk of the population is scattered in small loosely connected villages and hamlets across the remote mountainscape, relying on subsistence production of staple crops to meet some portion of their food needs.
The harsh mountainous terrain, short growing season and marginal soils, combined with the historic prevalence of sharecropping arrangements in some areas and small landholdings in others, has led to the need for alternative forms of livelihood. Improvements in road and communications infrastructure have favored economic migration to major cities inside Pakistan and foreign hubs such as Saudi Arabia and UAE. Many households now supplement income from agriculture with local casual labor, small trades and remittances. Even so, the northern areas of Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK) and North West Frontier Province (NWFP) rank among the poorest and most food insecure in the country. Aside from basic road and communications infrastructure, government intervention in sectors such as education, health, financial services and small industry has been minimal.
The earthquake Massive loss of life, infrastructure and livelihood was suffered in the earthquake that hit northern Pakistan in the morning of October 8 2005. The bulk of the damage was sustained in 9 districts spread across the 2 provinces of NWFP and AJK. According to the Government, 73 000 people lost their lives and more than 70 000 were severely injured or disabled. Over 2.8 million people lost their shelter, with several hundred thousand becoming internally displaced in the weeks that followed as they migrated from their place of origin to government and UN-administered temporary camps set up in and around the main affected cities. A large share of livestock, harvests and seed stores, businesses, piped water infrastructure and schools and health facilities were destroyed.
Impact in ACF zone of intervention Mahandri Union Council (U/C) in District Manshera, NWFP is one of the intervention sites of Action Against Hunger’s Food Security Program in the EQ zone. It comprises 2 valleys: Jared Valley and Manoor Valley. Total population is an estimated 6360 families and 38 000 individuals. In the World Food Programme’s Vulnerability and Mapping (VAM) exercise conducted in March 2006, Mahandri U/C was ranked as “very high” food insecure.1 People’s food stores for the upcoming winter were lost in the earthquake and the bulk of the standing maize crop was not harvested, aggravating the food security situation. Seeds and agricultural tools needed for planting the new wheat and maize crops were lost. Animal husbandry activities were halted with the loss of half the bullock, cow, buffalo, oxen and small ruminant population. 80% of houses were destroyed and the remainder damaged.2 806 people lost their lives and 881 were injured in Jared Valley alone,3 with 50% of all families suffering at least one death or major injury. Many suffered more.
In July 2006 Action Against Hunger conducted a month-long food security assessment in Jared and Manoor valleys (Mahandri Union Council) to look at the impact of the October earthquake on basic food security and livelihoods. It also looked at the ability of the community to recover based on new and established coping strategies including solidarity mechanisms. Recommendations for boosting the recovery and rehabilitation process on the basis of these findings are included in the last section. They are intended for all concerned stakeholders including local and district government, non governmental actors active in the region and, the communities themselves.
1 World Food Programme, Pakistan. “Rapid Food Security Assessment, March 2006”. Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (VAM) Unit. Islamabad, Pakistan. 2 Pakistan Army figures. 3 Ibid. 1 SECTION 2: OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSMENT
The assessment had six specific objectives.
9 To compile a baseline on the pre-earthquake food security and livelihood situation in Kaghan Valley 9 To define the household economic unit in the assessed area 9 To design a socio-economic wealth ranking based on productive assets and livehood 9 To assess the impact of the October 2005 earthquake on food security and livelihoods in Jared and Manoor Valley (Mahandri U/C) 9 On this basis to define the remaining immediate and longer term needs of the population 9 To make programmatic recommendations for future activities by ACF and other actors, if any, and guide the future strategy definition of the program
SECTION 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Sampling Methodology
The methodology included 3 main approaches to collecting data for the purpose of triangulation: 1. Household interviews 2. Male and female focus group discussions with village representatives 3. Key informant interviews
In order to identify representative households to interview, a double random sampling method with a fixed random number of households sampled per cluster was used.
Sample size was calculated from the formula n=Z2 x p(p-1)/E2 n being the sample size, Z=1.96, meaning a 95% confidence interval, p=50%, expected population proportion, E=+/-5%, maximum tolerable error. A sample size of 400 households was chosen (from a total estimated population of 6360 households and a margin of error of 15 interviews) 20 clusters were randomly selected from an exhaustive list of 104 villages 20 households were randomly sampled in each cluster by compiling exhaustive household lists in each cluster and sampling at a fixed interval 40 village-level focus groups were conducted, with one male and one female focus group in each cluster
The sample size of 400 households represents 6% of the population according to previous registration figures collected during seeds and tools distribution in April-May 06 (Jared) and from community leaders (Manoor). See Annex 6. 4 for the Household Interview Questionnaire that was used.
Focus groups were held to crosscheck and confirm data collected in the household interviews and to gather additional information. Specific topics were covered such as community organization, seasonal migration patterns, road and water infrastructure, debt, seed saving practices, and wealth rankings among the men. Among the women, livestock, female income generation, health and care practices, solidarity mechanisms and food & hunger issues were discussed.
Key informants were also consulted to gather additional information on specific topics. Local shopkeepers were interviewed to discuss supply constraints, shortages, prices and predictions for recovery of the markets. Drivers and owners of jeep businesses were met to get a sense of running costs and prices charged for transport and the 2 changes since the earthquake. Local teachers and nazim were met to confirm general figures for salaries and wages associated with the prevalent livelihood activities in the area, including national and international remittance and to discuss landownership patterns and wealth rankings. These individuals also discussed the overall response of the community to the earthquake and its priority needs. See Annexes 6.1 to 6.3 for the Focus Group and Key Informant question guides that were used.
3.2 Field Implementation The survey was implemented over 4 weeks, from July 10 to August 3, 2006. The survey team consisted of 12 people including 2 supervisors and 4 team leaders who were trained on the questionnaire and methodology previous to the start of the survey One cluster per day was visited by the entire team, with the goal of completing 20 interviews and 2 focus groups (one male, one female) each day Some families had shifted to second homes in upper pasture areas with their livestock. In the case of Manoor, they were still accessible at upper areas near to Biari village. In the case of Jared, they had shifted to Naran and other locations outside the U/C. Most of the resident population in certain clusters was therefore not available at their permanent village location. In Manoor, those families selected for interview in the cluster but who had shifted to upper pasture areas were visited at their summer location as much as possible. In some cases the pasture areas were too remote, requiring more than 4 hours walk from the base camp. This required splitting the team, covering clusters over more than 1 day and adding additional villages to clusters 1, 3 and 6 where pasture areas were too remote. In total 16% of Manoor household interviews were completed at the summer location In Jared, those families who had shifted outside the U/C could not be included in the sample. This created an unavoidable bias in the sample and required adding additional villages to clusters 14, 15 and 20. Female focus groups were completed in only 13 of the 20 clusters due to lack of trained staff and remote access to some villages. Male focus groups were completed in all clusters, with more than one conducted across 3 clusters where villages had split and some families had shifted to upper pasture areas. This was intended as a cross check on the information provided. In weeks 1 and 2, the team set up a temporary base camp at Kundian in Manoor Valley. In weeks 3 and 4, the team worked out of the ACF base camp at Jared. See Annex 6.5 for table of interviews and focus groups by cluster.
3 SECTION 4: RESULTS
4.1 Socioeconomic Profile
4.1.1 Caste & ethnicity Five main castes are present in Upper Kaghan Valley: Swati Pathans, Gujar, Syed, Moghul and Awan, each including a number of different clans. Caste is correlated with ethnic origin. The Swati people constitute roughly 60-75% of the population. They are the dominant caste in the area, holding most of the land and the traditional leadership positions in the community. This group invaded the valley many centuries ago and established rule over the indigenous people (Gujars and Awans). The Syed people constitute 10-20% of the population. They are popularly believed to be direct descendents of the Prophet Mohammed, and as such hold the religious leadership positions in the community. By origin, they call themselves Arab. A great number of the mullahs and religious leaders in the area are part of this caste. The Gujar people are one of the indigenous people of the area. Traditionally a nomadic pastoral people reliant on animal husbandry as a main source of livelihood, many have settled and adopted small trade occupations. Carpenters, dairy workers, and cobblers are included in this caste. Many members of this group have gone abroad for work, allowing in recent years for the purchase of land from Swati Pathans thus raising their historically poor social status. Roughly 10-15% of the population is Gujar. The Moghul people are a small minority (5%) whose ancestors were Turks. They are generally very poor and not listened to in the society. The Awan people (5%) are indigenous to the area and also among the poorest people. They perform the more menial jobs.
Political loyalties often follow along caste lines. Traditional power structures based on caste and ethnicity are generally more influential, stable and respected than elected leadership positions, which are widely known as subject to political manipulation. Social disputes are addressed by the local Jirga system which privileges elders from the Swati caste and other traditionally recognized leaders. Religious leadership also represents an influential avenue for power in the area and serves as a counterweight to political and traditional leaders hailing from other castes.
4.1.2 Land tenure and seasonal migration patterns Most families in the area are small landholders, with 80% of the population estimated to have access to land. Some 20% work as tenants under sharecropping arrangements where a portion of the harvest is turned over to the landowner in exchange for access to inputs and shelter.
In the summer season, families residing in the upper parts of the valley traditionally send their animals to upper pastures for grazing 3-4 months of the year. In Manoor Valley, virtually all families shift to high pastures in the upper reaches of the Union Council where they keep second homes, cultivate potato and herd animals. Women are primarily responsible for the herding and stay at the pasture lands while their men shift back and forth between the upper and lower villages in order to maintain the maize crop. In Jared Valley, families from more remote wards traditionally move to locations up-valley with their animals. Families from lower plain areas nearer to the Kunhar River tend to keep their animals at the home due to smaller herds and greater availability of grass.
In the winter season, a small minority of families from Jared Valley (5%) normally shift down-valley to stay with relatives or in second homes in Balakot, Gari Habibullah and Manserha. Those families generally have the means to do so and do not have livestock to tend. There is no normal winter migration from Manoor Valley. People rely on stocked food from harvest and market sources, stored feed and fodder for their livestock, and stored wood as a fuel source. Most cash-related livelihood activities that rely on roads and markets slow down or cease during the snow season.
The earthquake was an exceptional event in which an estimated 65% of the Jared population migrated down- valley over the 2005-06 winter following the resulting massive destruction of homes and depletion of assets. Migration from Manoor was minor as a result of the reduced scale of structural damage that was suffered there. 4
4.1.3 Wealth ranking The wealth ranking in the area can be summarized as follows.
Table 1: Jared wealth ranking Share of Land Livestock Solidarity Land tenure Type of IGA population cultivation ownership given/received Small land Tenant, small 0-3 cows, Agriculture, local Receiving zakat, 40% 0-5 kanal cultivator landowner goats labor, female IGA hosher, charity Agriculture, local Occasionally giving Medium labor, in- and out- 1-5 cows, zakat, hosher, land 55% Landowner 6-40 kanal country labor, gov’t goats charity. Help each cultivator servant, small other shopkeeper More than 5 Businessmen, Outside Giving zakat, Large land Landowner, 41-100 cows, country labor, big hosher, charity in cultivator 5% landlord kanal bullocks & shopkeepers, gov’t maize, wheat, potato
goats servants & cash
Table 2: Manoor wealth ranking Share of Land Livestock Solidarity Land tenure Type of IGA population cultivation ownership given/received Small land Tenant and 1-4 cows, Agriculture, Receiving zakat, cultivator 40% small 0-3 kanal goats local labor hosher, charity landowner Agriculture, Occasionally local labor, in- Medium land 5-8 cows, giving zakat, 50% Landowner 4-12 kanal country labor, cultivator goats, sheep hosher, charity. small shopkeeper Help each other or trade Businessmen, in 10-15 cows, Giving zakat, Large land & out- country bullocks, hosher, charity in cultivator 10% Landowner 13-80 kanal labor, big goats & maize, wheat, shopkeeper, sheep potato & cash gov’t servant * These levels have been defined first according to the local perception of wealth and then crosschecked with the local distribution of land and livestock ownership. 20-25 kanal or about 3 acres is the lowest size of field that needs to be planted in order to cover all basic yearly food needs. Most families have access to less land and derive their main livelihood from IGA activities such as local labor, small trade or migratory labor.
4.2 Livelihoods
4.2.1 Household identification and the Economic Unit The concept of an economic cell or unit (EU) is not intuitive. When we talk about shared resources among a small group of people, usually we think in terms of families or households. But household economies are complex: individuals supported by a household and eating from the food stock may not be the same ones as those contributing income. Micro-economies do not necessarily correlate with blood links or physical presence under a same roof: they can expand outwards to include orphaned relatives or other vulnerable members of the extended family or community (supported by the household) and wealthy relatives (supporting the household).
Therefore we define an economic unit as the group of people contributing in cash or in kind to a common economy and / or sharing and consuming those same commonly held assets. The concept will be used throughout the analysis in this report.
Joint family systems are common in the area, with multiple families sharing a household in over a third of all surveyed cases (see table below). On average there are 7 persons per household.
5 Table 3: Joint Family Systems Number of Percent of all families per HH surveyed HHs 1 66% 2 22% 3 7% 4 3% 5 1% 6 0.5% 100%
However, households are not always economic cells.
Married brothers with their respective wife and children live together and share a roof; however they do not usually share cash income and food, and are thus separate economic cells. Polygamous households with more than 1 family do pool resources and constitute a single cell, since the male head of household is responsible for supporting his multiple families until his sons are of age. The exception is if a first wife separates from her husband and moves back to her father’s house. Similarly, widowed or aging parents who lack their own resources are taken on by an adult son as part of his family and economic cell. 1 out of 10 single-family households and 1 out of 12 of all households are reported to be headed by a widow or widower (see table below).
Table 4: Head of EU status Head of HH status Female Male Total Married monogamous 1.7% 87.1% 88.9% Married polygamous - 1.5% 1.5% Widow or widower 7.2% 1.2% 8.4% Divorced - 0.2% 0.2% Never married - 1.0% 1.0% Total 8.9% 91.1% 100.0%
Participation in the household economy We found that the typical economic unit (EU) is comprised of 1-2 families and 8 persons with the following breakdown: 2.3 adult males, 2.2 adult females, 3.5 children under 14 years, and 0.1 vulnerable or disabled adult or child (see table below).
Table 5: Demographic Composition of the EU by Activity Families Persons Adult Adult Children per EU per EU Males Females <14 yrs Number per EU 1.5 8.1 2.3 2.2 3.5 Contributing Income Locally 0.8 0.8 - - Contributing Remittance 0.5 0.5 - - Eating from Food Stock 7.6 1.8 2.2 3.5 Vulnerable 0.1 0.07 0.04 0.01
Local livelihoods are very rarely based purely on subsistence agriculture. More often than not families have diversified cash-based economies that include agriculture, casual labor and economic migration. A minority is also formally employed, generating income through a small trade (carpentry, plumbing), a small business or a low-level government job (teacher, guard).
Remittance plays a major role in household income. One or more adult males commonly lives and works outside the home in large urban centers in Pakistan or abroad in UAE or Saudi Arabia and sends back cash remittance, thus contributing income but not eating from the household food stock. This is true in 38% of cases.
6 Other males (including male children, although not reflected in the figures) work locally and contribute other cash income while also receiving support from the household. All together, 83% of EUs have at least 1 wage earner and 39% have at least 2.
Women are not responsible for cash contributions but perform all the work related to the home and the tending of the livestock in exchange for economic support from the household. Solidarity from the community may be received in the form of support during cultivation, zakat and hosher. Orphaned children and other vulnerable members of the extended family may be taken in and supported by the household, in addition to disabled family members who cannot work (true in 10% of cases). Together these individuals and activities comprise the economic unit.
4.2.2 Agriculture
4.2.2.1 Staple crops The main staple crops cultivated in the area are maize-potato-bean-squash. Wheat is a minor crop. There are no developed cash crops except for surplus liquidation of walnut and potato on local markets at harvest time, practiced by a minority of farmers. There are two agricultural seasons: the short rabi or winter season which is reserved for wheat cultivation in the lower plain areas, and the longer kharif summer season which is dedicated to maize, potato, common red bean, sweet pea and vegetable (squash, okra, tomato, chilli) cultivation. The rainy season falls in July and August and lasts for two months.
Figure 1: Agricultural calendar (in the mountains)
March (end) May July Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
Land preparation Maize sowing Rainy season Maize Harvest & Processing + preparation and sowing of potato Potatoes harvest
Figure 2: Agricultural calendar (in the plain)
April June October November
Land preparation Maize sowing Rainy season Maize Harvest
Wheat harvest Preparation wheat
In Kaghan Valley, households usually intercrop maize and bean, with squash sowed on the field periphery. In the flatter plain areas near to the river, potato is also often planted together with maize and beans. In the higher altitudes, where the climate is cooler and more suited to potato, households commonly plant potato as a monocrop. Kitchen gardens are kept, most often by women. Tomato, chili, okra and other vegetables are traditionally raised to supplement household diet.
Seed saving for maize, bean and potato is commonly practiced and seed is purchased only in rare cases i.e. crop failure. Wheat and vegetable seed is saved by about one third of households and otherwise sourced from the market. Large outdoor wooden or woven ventilated structures are used to store the maize seed, while potato is stored underground and other types of seed in bags or boxes inside the home. People commonly store their seed together, especially within joint families, extended family and occasionally members of the community. Families typically stock over one tenth of their maize harvest for use as seed the following year. This high proportion is linked to the use of exceptionally high seeding rates4, a likely response to poor storage conditions leading to reported deteriorations in seed quality.
4 Twice the maize seeding rate recommended by PAK Dept of Agriculture. 7 In addition to annual crops farmers also tend small orchards for home consumption, especially the walnut, apple, pear, plum and persimmon. Small scale animal husbandry is widely practiced.
Table 6: Main agricultural features Average per Economic Cell Kanals
Total landholding 9.1 Number fragments 2.4 2005 Cultivated area 5.3 2005 Irrigated area 2.7
Landholdings are terraced and small for villages located on the mountainside, while those at the bottom of the valley and near the top of the ridge have access to larger and more fertile terrain. Overall the average size landholding is 9 kanals or just over 1 acre, split into multiple parcels. About half the landholding is usually cultivated, with the remainder used for the house, orchard, pasture or otherwise not cultivable (see table above).
Due to the small, inaccessible, and often steeply sloped landholdings, animal draft power in the form of bullocks and ox are the cornerstone of the production system, together with family and village-based solidarity systems that share labor at cultivation and harvest times. A minority of households with larger landholdings also hire labor and tractors at these times. Two thirds of the population had access to irrigation water pre-earthquake.
Baseline period Standard yield data from PAK Dept of Agriculture suggests that baseline productivity in the area is low. While wheat yields locally averaged 72 kg per kanal or 0.58 ton per acre, DOA suggested a standard of 1.0 ton/acre for improved wheat. Similarly local maize yields averaged just 41 kg per kanal or 0.33 ton per acre, while DOA suggested a standard of up to 1.2 ton/acre for improved varieties.5 These low levels of productivity can be attributed to the use of local unimproved seed varieties on marginal soils, combined with soil management practices that fail to adequately build and replace fertility from year to year. See table below for detailed data on staple food crops.
Reported harvest volumes in 2004 were low, the result of a dry year combined with small size of landholdings. According to the average reported yields for maize, red bean and wheat, harvests would only last about 2 months or on average 69 days, as reflected in the table below.6
Table 7: Staple Foods Harvest and Needs Coverage Maize Red Bean Wheat Average 2004 harvest used for consumption 217 14 238 In kg
Daily consumption rate per person in kg 0.45 0.05 0.45
Average consumption 3.10 0.30 3.10 Per EU per day in kg Days needs covered 69 41 76 2004 harvest
5 According to DOA, yields per acre for unimproved maize are reported at 0.4 tons, close to the figure recorded in this survey. 6 Households practice traditional seed-saving and consistently set aside some portion of the harvest for the following year. This amount was deducted from total harvest to yield that portion of the harvest which is consumed. 8
Staple Food Crops
Table 8: Main staple crop production by EU 2004-2006 Total Percent Average Seeding Seed Origin Total Total Harvest Use Seed Yield MAIZE Population Kanals Rate harvest destroyed Used (kg/kanal) Seed Cultivating Planted (kg/kanal) Stock Market Share NGO (kg) (kg) Consume Fodder Sale Trade Share (kg) Stock 2004 97% 6.2 4.9 30 29 1 - - 253 - 41 217 3 2 - 30 2
2005 97% 5.3 5.9 31 29 2 - - 94 142 18 84 - - - 10 -
2006 93% 5.0 5.6 28 8 6 1 13
Total Percent Average Seeding Seed Origin Total Total Harvest Use Seed Yield BEAN population Kanals Rate harvest destroyed Used (kg/kanal) Seed cultivating Planted (kg/kanal) Stock Market Share NGO (kg) (kg) Consume Fodder Sale Trade Share (kg) Stock 2004 95% 5.2 0.9 5 4.5 0.4 - - 18 - 3.5 14 0.1 - - 4 -
2005 95% 5.2 0.9 5 4.1 0.7 - - 7 10 1.3 6 - - - 1 -
2006 91% 4.9 1.1 5 1.0 0.6 0.1 3.5
Total Percent Seeding Seed Origin Total Total Harvest Use Kanals Seed Yield POTATO population Rate harvest destroyed Planted Used (kg/kanal) Seed cultivating (kg/kanal) Stock Market Share NGO (kg) (kg) Consume Fodder Sale Trade Share (kg) Stock 2004 47% 5.1 8.3 43 41 2 - - 179 - 35 121 1 16 - 40 43
2005 45% 5.2 8.3 43 41 2 - - 105 58 20 84 2 5 - 14 -
2006 46% 4.7 9.8 46 14 8 - 23
9 Total Percent Average Seeding Seed Origin Total Harvest Use Seed Yield WHEAT Population Kanals Rate harvest Used (kg/kanal) Cultivating Planted (kg/kanal) (kg) Seed (kg) Stock Market Share NGO Consume Sale Trade Share Stock
2004-05 11% 3.4 7.7 26 8 18 1 - 249 72 238 - - 5 5
2005-06 0.2% 4.0 6.3 25 - 25 - - 300 75 300 - - - -
10 The October maize harvest is particularly important because it represents the primary food staple over the winter, at a time when market prices usually rise, on average 15% or more. With winter lasting 4 long months in the mountains, a 70-day stock is insufficient to bring a family all the way through the winter season, even accounting for stores from the potato harvest which extends the maize stock somewhat. Resource-poor families are especially vulnerable and report facing food shortages each year at this time. They describe compensating by reducing consumption and relying on a standard diet of daal and chapatti.
Table 9: 2004 maize harvest in food-days by income quartile Income Income range in Days Quartile monthly PKR* covered** Fourth 0 - 4,500 71 Third 4,501 - 6,000 72 Second 6,001 - 10,000 66 First 10,001 -50,000 68 * Pre-earthquake **2004 maize harvest
Correlation with income quartiles shows that access to land is quite uniform and harvest size does not differ substantially across groups. However, those in the upper quartile can readily call on alternative resources to fill the food gap. Those in the lower quartiles have fewer cash resources, are more subsistence-based and thus harvest dependant.
Thus a sort of “lean period” exists in this area in the gap between the end of the maize harvest stock (roughly midway through the winter) and the time of the wheat harvest (April). In normal years, the wheat harvest also coincides with market prices returning to pre-winter levels, thus increasing affordability for poor families and marking the end of the lean period.
As of late 2006, market prices had not yet stabilized from earthquake-related inflation due to the poor condition of the main access road into the valley, damaged in the earthquake. They remain at levels 10-50% higher than normal.
The data suggest a need to improve baseline food security in the area. Possible avenues of intervention include: o Raising the productivity of the maize crop o Introducing improved wheat into higher altitude areas not traditionally cultivating wheat o Introducing food preservation and food processing to improve availability of high quality foods in winter season o Diversifying livelihoods to improve purchasing power
Post-earthquake period Crop losses were dramatic. The 8 October earthquake hit at the start of the annual maize harvest, which normally provides a buffer against winter food insecurity. 86% of the population was affected, with a third of the population losing their entire harvest and nearly two thirds losing half or more. 11% were not affected and were able to harvest their crop (see table below).
Table 10: Distribution of maize crop losses percent of Degree of crop loss population total loss 34% 75% or more 41% 50% or more 63% 25% or more 80% 1% or more 86% no loss 11% no maize cultivation 3%
As a result, the average maize harvest in 2005 destined for food consumption was just 84 kg or 39% of the previous year, covering only 1 month of food needs (see table below). Thus, an already precarious food security situation in the winter months became much worse following the earthquake.
11 Table 11: 2005 harvest in food-days Maize Red Bean Average 2005 harvest used for consumption 84 6 In kg Daily consumption rate per person in kg 0.45 0.05 Average consumption 3.10 0.30 Per EU per day in kg Days needs covered 27 16 2004 harvest
Table 12: Snapshot of Destruction (crops) value value Estimated volume per kg total value total value per kg total value lost across UC (kg) PKR PKR USD KCAL KCAL Wheat 212,600 10 2,126,000 35,433 3300 701,580,000 Maize 1,030,700 9 9,276,300 154,605 3500 3,607,450,000 Potato 197,500 20 3,950,000 65,833 770 152,075,000 Bean 73,100 50 3,655,000 60,917 3500 255,850,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE LOST 316,788 4,716,955,000 PER EU ESTIMATED VALUE LOST USD 42 KCAL 628,927
Economic losses across the UC amounted to 317,000 USD and 42 USD per EU. This relatively insignificant amount reflects the fact that the crops are grown for their nutritional rather than economic value. Total kilocalories lost in the earthquake amount to 4.7 billion, equivalent to 630,000 kcals lost per EU. This translates to 37 feeding days, confirming the figures presented above.
The earthquake also impacted longer term food security, by preventing the sowing of the traditional winter wheat crop, and preventing adequate seed stocks from being set aside for spring sowing of maize. Only 1 person interviewed or 0.2% of the sample reported being able to sow the winter wheat crop. The vast majority of families normally cultivating wheat could not attend to the planting because they had lost their wheat seed and other assets and were occupied with tending to the dead and injured and securing their basic needs.
Families were able to save on average just one third the amount of maize seed compared to other years, jeopardizing their ability to sow the staple kharif season crop in the new year. Thus the earthquake had 3 major direct consequences: loss of winter food stock; loss of seed stocks; and loss of winter wheat cropping season. Without external assistance, the result was serious and cumulative long term impacts on household food security.
In fact, a relatively well coordinated relief effort in much of the earthquake zone prevented a significant deterioration in household security in the aftermath of the crisis. In the survey area, blanket food distributions through the 05-06 winter and targeted food distributions in the post-emergency period combined with distribution of agricultural inputs during cultivation time addressed the major loss of assets.
As a result, total cultivated land area per household did not change much between 2005 and 2006 (see table below). Most households in the survey area sourced a major part of their seed inputs for maize, potato, red bean and vegetables from NGOs in 2006 rather than own stocks (see staple crop production table above).
Table 13: Cultivated and irrigated area in 2005 and 2006 Average per Economic Cell Kanals
2005 Cultivated area 5.3 2005 Irrigated area 2.7 2006 Cultivated area 5.0 2006 Irrigated area 0.8
12
Despite the accessibility of material inputs, the death of hundreds of draft animals across the zone constrained land preparation and cultivation activities, as did the increased costs of hired labor and occasionally the reduced availability of family labor due to injury and sometimes death. Two thirds of all households with livestock experienced 100% loss of their draft animals (oxen and bullock) in the earthquake, and thus a major reduction in energy input into the production system.
Loss of milking cows, goats and laying hens also impacted food security with the loss of animal products vital to household nutrition.
Water inputs were also reduced due to damage to water channels. Irrigated area dropped to 30% of the previous year, from an average of 2.7 irrigated kanals or half of the cultivated area to just 0.8 irrigated kanals or 15% of the cultivated area. Post harvest monitoring will allow an estimate of the extent to which lack of water in fact depressed yields in 2006, in combination with other constraints.7
Main constraints faced These findings were crosschecked with and confirmed by the population. Major constraints to agriculture reported in order of priority are listed in the following table. Draft power – the energy input needed to plough fields – emerged as the overwhelming constraint to production in 2006.
Table 14: Main constraints faced during cultivation Priority Constraint % cited* 1 Animal power 82 2 Irrigation 46 2 Labor 45 3 Seed and other inputs 95 * excluding already cited constraints for priorities 2 and 3
The data suggest a need for further rehabilitation of agricultural livelihoods. Possible avenues of intervention include: o Rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure o Restocking in draft animals when assets are recovered and the community has not spontaneously restocked o The provision of subsidized tractor or draft animal services during 2007 cultivation o Post-harvest monitoring and winter surveillance
4.2.2.2 Tree crops
Baseline period 80% of all families had at least 1 fruit or nut tree: 75% report owning 1 or more walnut tree 50% report owning 1 or more apple tree 30% report owning 1 or more plum tree 10% report owning 1 or more peach, pear or apricot tree
Among those families with trees, the average size of the orchard is 5 trees mixed between walnut and different types of fruit. Typical orchard composition is 2-3 walnut trees, 1-2 apple trees, and 1 plum or pear tree (see table below).
7 Previous yield figures do not tell a clear story about rainfed and irrigated agriculture. In 2004, the time of the last normal maize harvest, maize productivity on rainfed plots was slightly higher than on irrigated plots (49 kg/kan vs. 36 kg/kan, respectively). The reason for this difference is not clear but could be due to: - higher productivity linked to smaller landholdings, typical of rainfed agriculture - adequate rainfall in 2004 13 Table 15: Average Trees Owned pre-EQ per EU Total Walnut Apple Plum Pear, apricot or peach 5.0 2.6 1.5 0.7 0.2
Only a very small share of households (2%) has medium size orchards of 20 or more trees. Hardly any have single type orchards oriented towards the market. This reflects the lack of space in the average landholding and the focus on production for home use rather than resale. 95% of households with orchards report home- based use and community sharing as the primary harvest uses. Only 5% reports selling their surplus harvest in 2005. This group tends to be endowed with larger landholdings and more trees.
Resale is done via traders and directly to small shopkeepers in local markets. The prices given locally are below market value: walnut sells for 50 PKR/kg and is resold with a 10 PKR profit by local shopkeepers. Wholesalers from Gari Habibullah pay the same price although purchasing in larger volumes, for resale at 200 PKR/kg or more. In the valley there is no organized marketing collective or producer-controlled distribution channel. There is no experience with market-oriented production.
Post-earthquake period 8% of families with orchards lost trees or suffered major damage to their trees in the earthquake. Overall: Every 8th family lost a walnut tree Every 16th family lost an apple tree Every 24th family lost a plum tree
Of these, just 12% planned to replace the lost trees at the time of the survey. This in part reflects the absence of local nurseries and lack of access to plant material and technical knowledge regarding propagation. People report having to travel down-valley to major urban markets in order to retrieve plant material. Home-based propagation is traditionally done via seed rather than graft.
The data suggest: o Existing fruit and nut production systems play an important role in supplementing household nutrition and are a major feature of the subsistence economy o There is little experience with home-based processing or preservation to extend the nutritional benefits past the harvest season o There is little experience with nursery raising and modern propagation technique o The EQ had a relatively moderate impact on local orchards o Market-oriented fruit and nut production remains undeveloped despite an established regional demand
4.2.3 Livestock Baseline period Households traditionally complement their staple crop production with small and large animal husbandry. 9 out of 10 households own on average 3 large animals (cow, ox, donkey), while half of households also own small animals (goat, sheep). Ownership of poultry is also extremely common.
Table 16: Rate of ownership of large and small animals per-EQ Large animal Small animal oxen buffalo bullock cow donkey goat sheep assets Assets Ownership 90% 50% 13% 3% 83% 24% 52% 49% 6% Across pop
Oxen and bullock are particularly important as sources of draft power and farmyard manure for the fields and therefore serve as a cornerstone to the production system. Cows, buffalo and goats are a source of milk and play a critical role in household nutrition, supplementing the diet with high quality ghee, lassi, and occasionally meat. Donkeys are beasts of burden and indispensable to moving basic goods from the local markets up to the villages across steep mountain footpaths.
Livestock also serves as a store of wealth in the absence of formal banking systems, for sale in times of distress such as the death or serious illness of a family member, to fund travel abroad for work or to Mecca, or in other exceptional circumstances.
14
Women are responsible for all the day-to-day animal care, which includes daily feeding, milking and bringing out to pasture when near to the home (fall, winter and spring), herding in summer in upper pasture areas, calving and animal health care. Most high altitude villages (primarily in Manoor Valley) practice a seasonal migration with their animals, shifting to upper pastures in summertime or sending their animals with other families due to insufficient pasture near to the home. In Jared, families with fewer livestock assets who are residing in the lower valley keep their animals near to the home all year, while those living in the more remote areas who are more reliant on animal husbandry will send their animals to areas higher into the valley for summer pasture.
In winter season, hay is the primary feed, supplemented by cake fodder, wheat straw and maize stalk, molasses block among those households with resources. The poorer families give just hay or hay and locally collected wild tubers. Feed materials are purchased from the market and also come from own harvest (wheat straw, hay).
Post-earthquake period
4.2.3.1 Animal losses The earthquake’s impact on livestock assets was catastrophic. Overall 50% of large animal assets were lost in the earthquake, with the majority killed and the remainder consumed or sold in its immediate aftermath.8 Two thirds of households were affected. 33% of small animal assets were similarly lost, affecting one quarter of households. See table below for the distribution of losses across households by category of animal.
The data shows that 1 in 5 households in the valley lost all their animals important to household nutrition, and 1 in 3 lost all their draft animals. Two thirds lost at least one animal important to HH nutrition, while over one third lost at least one draft animal. The magnitude of destruction becomes even clearer when we focus just on households that owned livestock prior to the earthquake. Among this portion of the population: 72% lost at least one draft animal and 65% lost all their draft animals 70% lost at least one milking animal and 22% lost all milking animals
Table 17: Distribution of livestock losses Percent of population Animals Large Small Draft important in HH Degree of loss animals animals animals nutrition (cow, overall overall (ox & bull) buffalo, goat) total loss 23% 13% 32% 20% 50% or more 50% 23% 35% 45% 1% or more 69% 29% 36% 65% no loss 21% 22% 14% 28% no livestock 10% 49% 51% 7%
See figure below for rate of loss by animal per EU. Nearly the entire buffalo stock was lost, as a result of buffalo traditionally being kept in shelters beneath the floor of the main house 24 hours a day. When roofs collapsed, buffalo and other animals kept inside were killed instantly. Oxen also were disproportionately lost for the same reason.
8 Those families who moved down valley over the winter tended to sell any surviving animals, while those who stayed in some cases slaughtered their animals for food or due to an inability to maintain the animals over the winter. Others chose to stay in the village over the winter because of surviving livestock and attempted to maintain them despite loss of stored feed and shelter. A small minority of animals died due to the cold. 15 Figure 3: Livestock ownership per EU pre- and post-EQ
18.0 99% 100% 16.0 14.0 80%
12.0 66% d s s e 60% o n l
10.0 w f o o r 46% 45% e 8.0 44% t
Nb 40% 6.0 Ra
4.0 19% 18%20% 2.0
0.0 0% oxen buffalo bullock cow donkey goat sheep
Nbr owned pre-EQ 1.2 1.4 1.1 2.4 1.2 3.1 16.5 Nbr owned post-EQ 0.4 0.02 0.6 1.3 1.0 1.8 13.5 Rate of loss 66% 99% 46% 45% 19% 44% 18%
Nbr owned pre-EQ Nbr owned post-EQ Rate of loss
Jared Valley was disproportionately affected, with overall 14% more livestock deaths than Manoor Valley.
Overall households were left with, on average, 1.7 large animals after sustaining a 50% loss and 3.3 small animals after sustaining a 33% loss.
Table 18: Average ownership of large and small animals pre and post-EQ Average large Average small
animal assets animal assets Number owned pre-EQ 3.4 4.9 Number owned post-EQ 1.7 3.3 Rate of loss 50% 33% killed in EQ (70%), consumed after Primary reason for loss EQ (25%) , sold after EQ (10%)
Impacts Main reported impacts of the loss of animals on the EU include: Delayed planting of main crop Higher expenses at cultivation time9 Impact on HH nutrition: reduced milk, eggs and meat consumption Impact on family income: cannot sell milk, eggs or meat Loss of source of savings Incentive for migration among families who lost livestock
77% of EUs reported that finding enough power to plough their fields this year was a problem, compared with 20% the previous year. A problem of oxen and labor was cited in most cases. EUs coped by using a combination of strategies: replacing animal power with human power (own labor and/or hired labor), and sharing or renting animals available in the village.
Livestock health Calving rates in most villages are reported to be lower in 2006 than 2005. However, availability of feed proved to be less of a problem for remaining livestock last winter. Families with surviving cattle bought feed from families who lost cattle, leading to a redistribution of feed. As a result the vast majority of those interviewed reported the health of their animals to be “good” or “normal”. However, 54% of people report that livestock shelters remain a problem, especially during the upcoming winter, as few managed to rebuild.
9 Households with resources hired bullocks for ploughing at a price Rs1000/- to 1300/- per 2 bullocks for one day. Previous to EQ the price was 300/- per 2 bullocks per day. 16 12% anticipate feed will be a problem in the winter. All plan to feed hay while half plan to purchase complementary feed.
4.2.3.2 Market prices and economic losses Livestock market prices experiences tremendous inflation following the earthquake – on average 70%. The loss of half the livestock population at one time led to scarcity on animal markets and a consequent price rise. 10 months later, prices still had not come down to pre-earthquake levels.
Table 19: Change in Livestock Market Rates Type of Price before EQ Price after EQ Average Livestock (PKR) (PKR) inflation Oxen 12,000 to 15,000 20,000 to 25,000 67% Cow 10,000 to 12,000 15,000 to 18,000 50% Goat 2,000 to 3,000 4,000 to 6,000 100% Sheep 2,000 to 3,000 3,000 to 5,000 60%
Total estimated economic losses resulting from the deaths of livestock amount to 2.4 million USD in Mahandri Union Council. Per economic unit, losses are calculated at roughly 320 USD, or 225% of reported mean annual income. The equivalent of more than 2 years worth of cash income was lost during the earthquake – just in animal assets.
Table 20: Snapshot of Destruction (Livestock) Estimated nbr. value per total value total value lost across UC animal PKR USD Oxen 2800 15000 42,000,000 700,000 Cow 6800 12000 81,600,000 1,360,000 Sheep 1400 3000 4,200,000 70,000 Goat 4900 3000 14,700,000 245,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE LOST 2,375,000 PER EU ESTIMATED VALUE LOST 320
4.2.3.3 Restocking Partly as a result of high market prices, very few households had restocked by August 2006, 10 months after the earthquake. 6% of households suffering losses had restocked in cows, in the majority of cases using money from savings. Just 3% restocked in oxen. This finding reflects the scale of asset depletion that was sustained, with animals as the main savings bank.
With the loss of animals, very few households were willing or able to leverage alternate resources in order to restock, preferring to focus on home reconstruction. At this stage, restocking may be too early and could prove to be a liability as assets are not yet recovered and people have other priorities.
In the longer term, this continued loss of livestock also signals a protracted vulnerability. In the majority of cases, households now lack a buffer or safety net in the event of a new crisis.
The data suggest: o Two thirds of all households with livestock experienced 100% loss of their draft animals (oxen and bullock) and at least 1 milking animal (cow, goat) o Average resulting inflation in livestock prices was 70% There is a need for: o Targeted feed provision and assistance in rebuilding livestock shelters o Restocking interventions, once assets are recovered and if the population has not spontaneously begun to restock
4.2.4 Income generating activities Baseline period
17 As discussed, subsistence level agriculture in the area is complemented by a broad range of income generating activities. The figure below illustrates the main sources of livelihood by head of EU.
Figure 4: Main source of livelihood by head of EU in %
JARED VALLEY MANOOR VALLEY subsistence agriculture other business 1% 5% subsistence 3% agriculture other small trades business 10% 1% 10% 4% local casual small trades government labor 5% servant 46% government local casual 12% servant labor 49% wo rk in urban 0% areas Pakistan 6% wo rk in urban areas Pakistan work abroad 13% 17% work abroad 18%
Note that due to its remote location, insular character and reduced access to education and trade, the economy in Manoor Valley tends to be more subsistence-based relative to Jared. Few heads of EU claim business, small trade or government job as a main livelihood source in that area (9% Manoor vs. 25% Jared) due to the relative lack of opportunity and low literacy rate. Consequently in-country labor migration rates are higher in Manoor than Jared.
The figure below illustrates the most common types of income-generating activities and estimated monthly earnings, in Pakistan rupees.10 Activities are split into 5 groups: production sales, local skilled and unskilled labor and small trades, government employment, and national and international remittance. Income from home-based production can be significant but marketable surpluses are rare. Few households have access to the formal job market. Remittances form the backbone of many HH economies.
10 1USD=61PKR / 1€ = 78PKR at time of survey 18 Figure 5: Average monthly income for main livelihood activities
Maize sales 4500 Walnut sales 6500 Eggs & milk sales 3500 Home based tailoring 2500
Local casual labor 4000 Driver (salaried) 3000 Driver (owner) 13500 Shopkeeper large 22500 Shopkeeper small 6000 Plumber 8000 Carpenter 6000
Class IV forest guard 6000 Class IV office boy 3500 Class IV guard 4000 Class IV teacher 8000
Natl remittance driver 4500 Natl remittance carpenter 6500 Natl remittance unskilled laborer 5000
Intl remittance driver 5500 Intl remittance carpenter 10000 Intl remittance unskilled laborer 7000
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Source: key informant interviews. Note: Remittance income shown is total estimated amount returned to the EU.
The number of reported livelihood activities per EU averages 1.44 (median=1). Because accurate income data is notoriously difficult to come by, we can consider this figure to be underreported, with a minimum of 2 activities likely across all but the poorest households.
Figure 6: Income distribution
50 45 40 35 30 t n
u 25 Co 20 15 10 5 0 - 4,500 8,500 13,000 21,500 30,000 Total monthly income in PKR
Average monthly reported income per EU is PKR 8536 or USD 142 (median = Rs 6000). Income distribution is unequal, with the bulk of the population making a reported PKR 10,000 or less per month and the top quartile earning up to PKR 50,000 per month (see above).
Table 21: Definition of income quartiles Income Income range in Quartile monthly PKR* Fourth 0 - 4,500 Third 4,501 – 6,000 19 Second 6,001 - 10,000 First 10,001 -50,000
Primary livelihood sources differ substantially by income quartile. In the lowest earning quartile, local casual labor is the major income source for 75% of all EUs, while its importance steadily decreases across quartiles. Female IGA and timber income are also relatively important income sources for this group. Skilled labor only constitutes a tiny share of primary livelihood sources (4%), suggesting that education level is strongly correlated with earning potential.
Meanwhile, higher value livelihoods are disproportionately practiced by the higher income classes, such as business, small trade, livestock sale, local formal employment, and remittance. International remittance is most significantly associated with income class, representing the major occupation for 17% of EUs in the top earning class versus just 4% in the lowest class. This finding is also indicative of the high initial investment required for travel abroad (see figure below).
Figure 7: Distribution of livelihood sources by income quartile
45% Local casual labor 54% 74%
0% 50% 100% 3% Business 2% 1%
5% Small trade 6% 3%
2% Sale of livestock 2% 0
3% Sale of agriculture surplus 3% 0 8% Local employment 7% 0 1% Timber & wood income 1% 3% 17 % Intl remittance 6% 4%
9% Natl remittance 10 % 6%
2% Female IGA 2% 6%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Quartile 4 Quartile 2 & 3 Quartile 1
Post-earthquake period
4.2.4.1 Cash income losses: changes in remittance and casual labor income Average reported monthly cash income only decreased 5% after the earthquake, from PKR 8536/USD141 to PKR 8154/USD134 per EU.
The distribution of losses across income classes is uneven, with the losses clustered in the top 2 quartiles (6- 7% average loss). Meanwhile the lowest quartile of the population actually gained in mean income after the earthquake, on average 5%. Government compensation checks distributed after the earthquake are not included in the income calculations. If government checks are included as income, mean reported income across the population actually does not significantly change from pre-earthquake levels. See figure below for the graphic representation.
20 Figure 8: Distribution of income losses across income classes
20,000 8.0% e R m
K 4.6%
15,000 o P c
n e i m n o 10,000 0.0% i n i a inc -1.8% g t hly 5,000 en nt o rc
-6.1% e M -6.8% - -8.0% P 1234
Mean income pre-EQ 17,918 8,237 5,502 3,178 Mean income post-EQ 16,827 7,680 5,404 3,323 % gain -6.1% -6.8% -1.8% 4.6% Income quartile
Change in domestic remittance levels pre- and post-earthquake is most responsible for the overall decline in cash income in the EU. Of those household members who had migrated to cities in Pakistan for work, a full 25% returned home after the earthquake, depriving the household of this income. Heads of household who were working in-country overwhelmingly came back to be near their families and rebuild the house.11
The other major change in livelihood source was in casual labor rates. Share of EUs reporting casual labor as a primary income source after the earthquake increased across all but the top income class, most significantly in the second lowest class which saw an 8% increase across EUs involved in casual labor. This is due to the increase in demand for removal of rubble, home rebuilding and other casual work after the earthquake. Cash-for-work programs run by NGOs also contributed to the increased demand for unskilled labor on local markets. This labor was partly supplied by males returning to the area after the earthquake but many people were also involved in working on their own homes and therefore not available on local job markets. As a result of these combination of factors, market rates for casual labor experienced significant inflation after the earthquake.
Material aid provided by NGOs also emerges significantly as a source of livelihood for the poorest EUs. Rates are likely to be underreported, and difficult to track as income is in-kind.
Interestingly, the share of EUs reporting international remittance as a primary livelihood source does not substantially change as a result of the earthquake. This suggests family members who were already abroad tended to stay there instead of returning home, in contrast to those people working in-country. This is likely to have contributed to lower vulnerability and faster recovery after the earthquake.
11 This is confirmed in a November 2006 study by ODI entitled “Remittances in crises: a case study from Pakistan” by Abid Qaiyum Suleri and Kevin Savage. An HPG Background Paper.
21 Figure 9: Main livelihood sources by HH member
Head of HH livelihood sources
Local casual labor
Natl remittance PRE
Intl remittance POST
Local employment
Small trade
Agriculture (Sell surplus)
Female IGA
Business
Agriculture (HH food needs)
Sale of livestock
Government Check
Domestic Labor
Zakat
Timber & wood income
Pension
Material aid
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Other HH member livelihood sources
Natl remittance
Local casual labor
Intl remittance PRE
Small trade POST
Local employment
Business
Domestic Labor
Agriculture (Sell surplus)
Agriculture (HH food needs)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
In summary total monthly lost cash income across Mahandri U/C following the earthquake is estimated to be roughly PKR 2.86 million or USD 48,000.12 This loss very roughly amounts to the difference between total lost remittances and total gained labor income across the population. Estimated casual labor income gains amount to PKR 0.82 million or USD 14,000 per month, while estimated losses due to foregone remittances are PKR 3.16 million or USD 53,000 per month.
Table 22: Snapshot of Destruction: Monthly cash income Total income loss PKR (2.86 million) Remittance income loss PKR (3.16 million)
12 Based on mean loss figures per EU 22 Casual labor income gain PKR 0.82 million
If these total losses are extended over the course of a year, they amount to over half a million US dollars.
4.2.4.2 Livelihoods on hold At the time the survey was undertaken only a few short months had passed since families had returned from IDP camps in the lower part of the valley, and private reconstruction was in full swing. Normal IGA activities were put on hold as people returned from their places of work outside the local area and focused on rebuilding houses, businesses and community infrastructure. Some sectors experienced strong growth, such as carpentry, masonry and the unskilled labor market, while the formal job market remained depressed as most schools and heath clinics destroyed in the earthquake were still closed in mid-2006.
The continued provision of humanitarian aid also depressed the incentive to return to traditional activities, as NGOs and GOP continued to provide food, NFIs, compensation checks and employment long after the end of the official emergency period. Finally productive assets were lost at such a massive scale that it was impossible for most people to recover their previous level of livelihood in the months following the earthquake. This combination of factors makes it difficult to predict the sustainability of the above described changes in income sources. It is likely however that a certain level of cash income loss will be sustained at least through 2007, as key informants observed asset recovery was proceeding at a very gradual pace and earners of domestic remittance prefer to stay near their families for the time being.
The data suggest: o There is a need for development of high value local IGA activities, such as animal breeding, horticulture products and small trades o The humanitarian community in the area should focus on development of these activities rather than continued distribution of relief items o Asset recovery should be accelerated, in particular of shelter and productive assets, to promote the rapid resumption of livelihood activities
4.2.5 Markets, prices and expenses
4.2.5.1 Markets Figure 10: Prices of basic food items pre- and post-EQ 4,000
Income and non-cash livelihood sources were lentil 50kg reduced after the earthquake. At the same time, due to damage to roads, market prices for basic items 3,000 such as fuel and food went up. Transportation costs consequently increased. red bean
R 50kg 2,000 In normal years, food and fuel prices increase each PK winter season due to reduced road access in to the sugar 50kg valley, but bounce back with the opening of the rice 50kg roads in the spring. This expected seasonal inflation 1,000 is calculated at roughly 15% based on food and fuel wheat 40kg price figures provided by key informants (see figure veg oil 5L alongside).13 Prices in the main bazaar in Manoor milk powd Valley are generally set above the rates in Mahandri - 400g pre-EQ post-EQ winter post-EQ summer bazaar (located on the main access road) because of additional jeep rental costs. Source: key informant interviews
However, in 2006 prices across all markets remained high past the melting of the snows, for a combination of reasons:
13 Another factor is that prices of basic commodities are controlled by the GOP. An increase is normally announced each year in February. Higher transport costs (by jeep rather than truck) also contribute to increased winter prices. 23 Damaged road conditions have led to continuing supply problems for local shopkeepers, both in high transport costs and restricted physical access14 Inflated rates from major suppliers, possibly as a result of large-scale procurement by humanitarian agencies, have forced a hike in local prices Inflated warehouse rental costs in down-valley areas where local shopkeepers keep stocks also contributed to high prices Rice, lentils and sugar experienced significant price increases. The rough inflation in the local area that we can attribute to the earthquake is estimated at 25% across basic food commodities, comparing the difference in prevailing prices in summer 2005 and summer 2006 (see figure above and table below).
Table 23: food price inflation winter –related EQ-related FOOD inflation inflation wheat 40kg 14% 9% rice 50kg 24% 29% veg oil 5L 8% 12% red bean 50kg 13% 13% lentil 50kg 30% 50% sugar 50kg 14% 54% milk powder 400g 9% 18% Mean 16% 26%
4.2.5.2 Household expenditures Despite the increase in food prices, expenditures on food were not reported to significantly increase, undoubtedly facilitated by the large quantities of food aid delivered after the crisis. Labor and animal rental costs (represented in figure below as draft power – the energy input needed to plough fields) dramatically increased due to the surge in demand for these services following the earthquake. Expenses related to medical care increased as families dealt with earthquake-related injuries. Expenditures on cement and other shelter construction materials also rose significantly, as prices were higher and people rebuilt homes. On the other hand, with schools destroyed and children at home, expenses related to schooling dropped. See figure below for mean reported increased in HH expenditures in the aftermath of the earthquake.
Figure 11: Average increase in EU expenditure by type draft power 100% transport 38% shelter 36% labor 32% fuel 23% medical 18% clothes 12% food 4% schooling -9%
-10% 100%
The impact of the increased prices was felt disproportionately by income class. The top earners spent on average 18% more per month compared to the year before the earthquake, mostly on rent in down areas over the winter and reconstruction of their houses. Middle income earners were not able to undertake these expenses and increased their expenditures by only 7-9%. The poorest households experienced the greatest
14 The monsoon season in July-August 2006 was particularly harsh and led to regular land sliding on the main Balakot- Kaghan access road, as a result of EQ-destabilized soils and hillsides. This prevented the regular supply of items to market. Shopkeepers and those employed in public transport state clearly that the road needs to be rehabilitated to pre- EQ condition before markets can completely recover. 24 shock due to their smaller overall income base: the increase in market prices for basic goods forced a 15% increase in expenditure among this group. See figure below.
Figure 12: Average expenses per EU pre- and post-EQ 10,000 20% 18%
15% e s n
7,500 9% 10% e 7% p x e R n
5,000 0% i e PK s ea
2,500 -10% cr n
- -20% % i 1234
pre-EQ 5,826 5,932 5,004 4,345 post-EQ 6,868 6,372 5,472 4,996 % increase 18% 7% 9% 15% Income quartile
Expenses as a share of income Figure 13: Expenses as a share of income All but the poorest quartile reported being able to meet the increased HH expenses, a relatively positive finding (see 150% 137% figure to the left).
Among the fourth income quartile however, expenses as a 100% 101% share of monthly income rose from a pre-earthquake level 91% 83% of 137% to 150%. This rise in expenditures was 72% overwhelmingly financed by increased debt (see following section). 41% 33% pre-EQ post-EQ 0% 1234
Income quartiles
The data suggest: o Basic food commodity prices remain inflated a rough 25% due to the earthquake o Animal rental costs doubled, while transport, shelter and labor costs increased by about one third. o Road rehabilitation is required for full recovery of market prices o The poorest households have disproportionately borne the impact of the increase in market prices and household expenditures. Higher expenditures among this group are being financed by debt. There is a need for: o Road rehabilitation is required for full recovery of market prices and should be considered a priority by humanitarian and government actors o Until markets and household economies fully recover, continued support to most vulnerable households could be justified, in the form of subsidized vouchers for basic goods
4.2.6 Debt Baseline period In these areas it is normal practice for a large share of the population to rely on seasonal loans with local shopkeepers to sustain a cash flow. People buy basic goods on credit every month and repay the credit at the time of maize, potato and walnut harvest. Storekeepers represent a primary source of loan for a reported 38% of the population. Shopkeepers report that about half of their regular customers have credit on the books, on average PKR 20,000-25,000 or USD 350-400.
Families also rely on relatives and wealthy individuals for emergency loans. Family is a major loan source of credit for a reported 57% of the people. 25
Prior to the earthquake, 30% of EUs report an average level of PKR 27,000 (451 USD) debt load, equivalent to one quarter of the mean annual cash income.
Post-earthquake period
4.2.6.1 Growing indebtedness 40% of households took on debt after the earthquake. Of these, a reported two thirds were new debtors: they had not taken out loans the previous year. The major sources were: o Family (72%) o Shopkeeper (38%) o Local money lender (4%) o Bank (1%)
Note the important role of family in providing a financial safety net, underscoring the strong solidarity systems in place at the time of the earthquake. Such type of informal credit systems based on social relationships and trust, are especially important in the absence of formal social security programs or access to financial markets.
The figure below illustrates the distribution of new debt across the population by income quartile.
Figure 14: Share of EUs with debt pre- and post-EQ 0.60 60% 57% 46% s
0.50 40% r bt o t b de e
h 0.40 20% t d i 10 %
6% n w i
s 0.30 0% e s U ea E 0.20 -20% e cr r n
0.10 -40% i Sha % - -60% 1234
share of EU with new debt 0.19 0.37 0.42 0.54 share of EU wit h debt in '05 0.18 0.25 0.38 0.34 % increase new debt ors 6% 46% 10% 57% Income Quartiles
We can make 2 important observations: The share of households with pre-earthquake debt in each income class increases as income decreases. In the lower income quartile, 34% of the population carries some debt compare to half as many in the top quartile. This reflects the preexisting high level of financial insecurity among this group. Many more households in the lowest quartile acquired new debt after the earthquake compared to the top quartile. New debtors increased by nearly 60% among those earning the least, compared to just 6% among better-off households. This reflects the scale of asset depletion that took place during the earthquake and the poorest households’ lack of capacity to absorb the shock.
Debt load roughly doubled across all income classes (see figure below). Total debt among EUs with outstanding loans now ranges from 40,000-75,000 PKR
26 Figure 15: Total debt load per EU pre- and post-EQ
80,000 116 % 120% )
s 111% 110 % d R (
100% a
o U 60,000 85% l E t
80% b r e d pe
40,000 60% n i bt e s de
f 40% ea cr l o 20,000 e n i
v 20% e L % - 0% 1234
avg level current debt 74,340 61,950 54,150 43,640 avg level pre-EQ debt 34,340 33,440 25,690 20,790 % increase in debt load 116% 85% 111% 110% Income Quartile
4.2.6.2 Impact by class and remittance profile The relative impact on poorer families is dramatic due to much lower earning capacity. Total debt load in the 4th income quartile, including newly accumulated debt, now amounts to 14 times the reported monthly income (see table below), or slightly more than the total annual income. This level is likely to be unsustainable, since credit is extended on a short term basis and usually expected to be repaid within 6 months to 1 year.
Table 24: Debt as a share of income by income quartile Income quartile 1 2 3 4 avg debt 74,340 61,950 54,150 43,640 avg monthly income 18,000 8,237 5,502 3,178 Debt as a share of income 413% 752% 984% 1373%
This finding helps to explain why households spent the compensation checks received in the months following the earthquake on food and repaying debt rather than rebuilding shelters, as intended and expected by the Pakistan government.
The high level of new debt among the poorest households also reflects the high prevalence of un- or underemployment in the area and the inadequate opportunities for cash IGAs available to this group. It also highlights the protective role of remittance with regard to indebtedness. We found that households without sources of remittance – either pre or post-crisis – were twice as likely to go into debt after the earthquake (see table below).
Table 25: Remittance profile of households incurring post-EQ debt Share of households borrowing money after the EQ without remittance 64% with remittance 36%
The data suggest: o 40% of households took on new debt after the crisis, the majority in the lowest income classes. o Total debt load roughly doubled. o Households without pre or post-crisis remittance were twice as likely to acquire new debt There is a need for: o Targeted direct material assistance in home reconstruction and targeted replacement of lost assets to mitigate against higher levels of indebtedness o Expanded income generating activities among the poorest households o Support to financial infrastructure and strengthening of remittance flows
27
4.3 Shelter and Community Infrastructure
4.3.1 Shelter Baseline period Relative to Manoor Valley, Jared Valley’s proximity to the main Balakot-Naran road gives its population greater access to imported construction materials, in particular cement and steel. Modern cement homes used to be common especially near to the main road axis, with some structures still standing although severely damaged in the earthquake, or rebuilt.
20% of the Jared population reports owning a cement structure prior to the earthquake, and these families are overwhelmingly from villages near to the road (Jared/Gran and Sahri, Chelai/Chelai and Thanger, Ochiri/Totan and Ochiri Lower). The remaining 80% reports owning a traditional mud house (“kacha” house) prior to the earthquake; these households are almost universally located in the upper remote areas, where means and access are less.
By contrast, Manoor Valley’s distance from the main road and remote location predisposes the large majority of its inhabitants to the use of local building materials for their homes. In Manoor, 90% of those surveyed reported owning and living in kacha houses prior to October 2005 (see table below).
Table 26: Shelter Types before the EQ Overall in the U/C Manoor Jared Kacha house 84% 90% 78% Cement house 16% 8% 22%
Earthquake period The earthquake destroyed or severely damaged the great majority of homes and other types of structures in the Union Council, with Jared Valley particularly hard hit. According to Pak Army, 78% of houses were completely destroyed and 22% partially destroyed (see table below).
Table 27: Damage to Houses Condition of Houses Ward Total Houses C. Damaged P. Damaged Jared 568 420 148 Shalai 651 446 205 Ochari 818 774 44 Nakian 463 423 40 Dhanoo 534 310 222
Total 3034 2373 659 Source: Pak Army
Seven organizations including two INGOs plus the Army distributed shelter kits in Jared UC in the winter months following the earthquake. (see table below)
Table 28: Shelter and NFI Distribution in winter 05-06 Shelter CGI Sheets Shelter Kits Tents Tarps Blankets Mattresses Constr Army 5,640 467 350 2,496 1,690 24,490 757 ACF 11,672 170 1,700 1,000 30,000 450 Al-Khidmat 160 IOM 5,000 3,000 Jamat-Ud-Dawa 100 200
28 SRSP 125 SUNGI 4,000 120
Total 26,312 972 3,520 4,396 2,690 54,490 1,207 Source: Pak Army and NGOs
Over 26,000 CGI total were distributed in the valley, covering the needs of 2600-3000 households or more or less the resident winter population in Jared Valley. While the number suggests broad coverage, in fact the CGI was unequally distributed, with some families stockpiling sheets due to duplication across agencies, and other hard-to-reach households receiving nothing.
Families who migrated down valley after the earthquake and spent the winter in tent villages did not get any shelter assistance. This population is estimated at 1,500 people. Families returning from the tent villages in March and April did so, in most cases, to destroyed homes. Some are landless. These families have not received any external assistance from NGOs in rebuilding their shelters. The compensation package provided by the government was supposed to cover their needs. However, there are problems with the ERRA policy and manner in which it is being implemented. As a result, at the time of writing most of these returned families have not rebuilt permanent shelter and remain most vulnerable.
GOP compensation package on the ground To address the massive damage that was suffered to private infrastructure and the resulting shelter crisis, the GOP developed a reconstruction package that would insure every home would be rebuilt to a seismic resistant standard (cement and steel). The distribution of the compensation package was contingent on GOP validation of home constructions. Checks were to be distributed in installments based on established criteria for progress achieved on reconstruction. Field surveys were to be carried out by PAK army to determine eligibility.
Unfortunately, as the data below shows, the vast majority of households have not been able to or chosen not to implement the Earthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Authority (ERRA) approved home reconstruction plan. This is due to: Logistical complications transporting materials Cost of materials Poor access to ERRA checks (delays, corruption) Poor information on reconstruction guidelines ERRA shelter designs not culturally accepted Installment system not meeting needs
Those who rebuilt a traditional mud house did so out of necessity and in many cases without knowing they risked losing their compensation checks. Many continue to fear using the one-foot soil kacha (mud) roofing because of the deaths it caused in 2005. Most families stated they could not afford to implement the ERRA design due to the high cost of cement and steel and the lack of availability of these materials on local markets. The loss of remittances, livestock and other sources of livelihoods severely depleted the asset base and prevented the rebuilding of even the cheaper mud houses among the majority of the population. As a result most have not rebuilt any type of permanent shelter. Overall people report that the shelter crisis is persistent, unresolved and has not been adequately addressed by the government response.
Focus group discussions revealed that, sadly, the inhabitants of the valley consider their shelter situation in mid-2006 to be as grave as the previous year’s. Fewer camps are planned to be established by GOP and NGOs in winter 2006-07 because the emergency has been declared over. Households lack the resources to finance a winter stay in a rented house down-valley. 95% people therefore plan to stay in their villages and face the winter as best they can instead of migrating out.
Post-earthquake period As of August 2006, overall in the Union Council 62%of surveyed households was still living under temporary shelter. One third of these households or 20% of the total population are living under tents only or tents and makeshift shelters made of salvaged wood and plastic sheeting. The other two thirds of families in temporary shelter or 40% of the population are living under tents and CGI shelter. A small portion also has a pre-fabricated single room SRSP shelter.
29 Over a quarter of the population is using kacha houses in combination with tents and other temporary shelter. In most cases, these houses are damaged and structurally unsound. People use them as living and cooking spaces during the day but sleep under tents.
Table 29: Shelter Types in July 2006 Overall in the U/C Manoor Jared CGI shelter or CGI / tent 39% 15% 60% Tent 21% 18% 24% Kacha house / tent / CGI 28% 45% 13% Kacha house 9% 20% - Cement house 2% 3% - SRSP shelter 2% - 3%
TOTAL 100% 100% 99%
In summary, 90% of people in the UC had failed to secure adequate housing by mid-2006 (see table above, grey highlight). Only 2 percent of the population overall is currently living in cement houses, despite this being the main thrust of the ERRA housing policy and the goal of its compensation package. This finding reflects the total failure of the policy on the ground level to date.
The data suggest a need for: o A transitional shelter policy o Winter preparedness interventions for winter 06-07 o Flexibility in the application of eligibility criteria to receive government compensation for housing o Targeted direct material assistance in home reconstruction: facilitation of materials procurement, subsidy on transport and materials cost
4.3.2 Water and sanitation Prior to the earthquake, the water distribution networks were based on gravity flow designs, which utilized spring catchments and protection of water points on both sides of the valley. The systems that existed were highly developed; separation of irrigation and drinking water systems was common. Irrigation systems consisted of open channels with water supplied from the river, and drinking water systems were comprised of spring catchment boxes, ferrocement tanks for storage and GI pipeline network distribution. Sanitation facilities existed in only a minority of villages.
Communities managed the maintenance of the lines and the distribution of the irrigation water in a cooperative manner. Hamlets or groups of houses take responsibility for individual schemes where there is a single scheme per hamlet. In other villages where schemes are shared between hamlets, the entire community contributes money towards the maintenance and repair of the lines. In terms of irrigation water share, communities allocate hours by household.
In addition to shelters, the earthquake partially or completely destroyed most of the water supply network across the areas, with villages in upper sloped areas facing the greatest impact. Many springs also shifted or dried up. An estimated 60% of all pre-existing water schemes in Mahandri UC were severely affected by the earthquake and require complete rehabilitation, as a result of damage from landslides following the earthquake as well as the quake itself. Sanitation facilities were also severely affected. Technical surveys are required to precisely assess the level of sustained damage.
To date minimal work has been done to rehabilitate the drinking water networks on which households rely to meet their basic needs – the preexisting gravity flow systems remain in large part nonfunctional. In areas where springs have dried up, women report spending hours each day traveling back and forth to distant unprotected spring sources to provide the minimum requirement for their families. In some cases, they resort to going to the rivers and streams for drinking water due to the absence of alternative sources. In all cases the water used is untreated and unsafe, leading to a high rate of water-borne disease especially among the young, the sick and the elderly.15
15 As reported by local BHU staff, army doctors and medical NGOs operating in the area 30
4.3.3 Roads, bridges and other infrastructure Previous to the earthquake road access into the whole of Manoor Valley was extremely limited. Only a mud road passable by 4WD jeeps existed, and only for 8 months of the year. All basic goods, materials and members of 3500 households must pass on this road to access the valley. Further into the valley donkeys are the primary means of cargo as the link road deteriorates in quality after the first main village and bazaar. Footpaths provide the only access into the villages. Some require 2-3 hours walk from the road.
In Jared valley, the main Balakot-Kaghan axis road was in good condition and permitted the free flow of materials up and down valley for most months of the year. Village access is limited to footpaths.
The main road, secondary roads and mountain footpaths linking villages were massively damaged in the quake. Further damage was sustained during the winter snows and summer monsoons due to soil erosion and frequent land sliding. The poor road conditions and frequent blockages have had a major impact on market supply and market prices, as described earlier.
The government has been clearing the main road during landslides, ensuring this vital artery remains open. However significant rehabilitation work is still required to improve the condition and security of the road and in order to permit a full recovery of the markets and tourism industry. In focus groups the communities report organizing themselves to repair the link roads and footpaths both after the quake and again after the snows and the rains. Some NGOs are also organizing Food for Work and Cash for Work projects to stimulate a fast repair of the infrastructure.
Finally other types of community infrastructure such as schools and health clinics were severely affected. The precise scale of the damage was not assessed during this survey but is likely to reflect the damage rates sustained to private infrastructure, detailed above. In mid-2006 the majority of schools in the valley had not been reconstructed or reopened. A small minority were operating under tents but lacked materials or adequate number of teachers. The Jared Basic Health Unit (BHU) reopened in the spring with a skeleton staff and is now being supported by medical INGOs. General access to health facilities in the valley remains poor.
The data suggest a need for the urgent rehabilitation of water supply networks, link roads and bridges and other community infrastructure.
4.4 Coping strategies, solidarity and impacts on health and nutrition
The immediate impact of the crisis was the loss of life and injury, loss or damage to homes, loss of animals, trauma and shock. There were food shortages immediately following the earthquake and families faced hunger for one or more days in its aftermath. People shared what little they had.
4.4.1 Primary coping strategies Short term coping strategies involved distress sales or slaughter of remaining livestock, reduced food consumption, loans and other help from relatives outside the area, new credit from local shopkeepers, reliance on relief assistance to meet basic needs throughout the winter, and outmigration. Men refer mostly to these material and human losses and coping mechanisms related to the household economy when asked about the impact of and responses to the earthquake.
The main coping strategies of the people following the earthquake as reported in the survey are represented below.
31 Figure 16: Primary coping strategies after the EQ
Rely on aid from government or NGO 96% Spend savings 90% Take out loan or extend previous loan 70% Stay on Iand to retain claim to land 53% Household migration 48% Slaughter / consume livestock 29% Rely on kinship & zakat 18% Sell valuable assets 11% Consume seed stock 10% Reduce / change amt or type food eaten 3%
0% 100%
Migration vs. staying on the land Roughly half the population reported staying on the land and half migrating down-valley after the earthquake with the entire household, reflecting the scale of damage that was sustained in the area. Migration as a coping strategy was concentrated in Jared Valley, where a reported 70% of all EUs left their village as a result of the destruction to their homes and the lack of food.16 In Manoor where comparatively less structural damage was suffered and where there is less of a winter migration tradition, less than 25% left their homes.
Official figures suggest migration rates were lower, around 40% for Jared Valley. However these figures only estimated the number of families living in camps and could not forecast those moving to private homes. At the time of the emergency the army also attempted to count those people who were leaving the valley but those figures are not available as a cross-check.
Of the reported share of households who migrated, only a small proportion (12%) went to spontaneous camps (“tent villages”) or to the camps that had been set up by army, UN and other agencies after the emergency. The majority went to private homes, either staying with family in Manshera, Gari Habibullah, Abbotabad and elsewhere or renting a house (see graphic below). This finding suggests that migration rates from the valleys were in fact much higher than being reported at the time of the emergency.
It also suggests that there were 3 primary determinants for migration after the emergency: Household resources sufficient to cover rent, or Extended family offering help Extreme vulnerability and need
Figure 17: Destination for families who migrated Rented house 57%
Family house 30%
NGO/ UN tent village 8%
army tent village 4%
Other location 1%
0% 60%
Only those families with means or access to credit could afford to rent a house. Two thirds of those who rented a house belong to the top 2 income quartiles, and one third to the bottom 2 quartiles. This also reflects the strong role of culture, where heads of household chose private settings for the winter (either village or town-based) rather than the public camp setting where their women risked exposure. In other cases, people also chose to stay in order to care for surviving livestock or to protect their claim to land in the absence of formal land title.
16 This figure was cross-checked and confirmed with the population during the course of later monitoring activities. A migration rate of 64% during the 05-06 winter was overall reported for Jared Valley. 32 In contrast to other affected areas where the landless in many cases did not return to the villages after the eathquake, the vast majority (99%) of people that migrated out of Mahandri UC have since returned. This can be attributed to the relatively equal land distribution pattern.
In general migration can be considered a positive coping strategy in the sense that it protected lives and allowed access to resources such as shelter, food, health care and other services not immediately available in the affected areas. Staying on the land was also positive in the sense that it protected valuable assets (livestock, land) vital to livelihood recovery, but at the risk of health and survival. Fortunately, the winter was milder than expected and aid agencies and community solidarity networks supported those people who stayed at their villages.
Solidarity, credit, savings and aid Other positive strategies reported here include solidarity (18%), credit (70%), savings (90%) and aid (96%). Some households took in new orphans after the eathquake as a form of solidarity. Female IGA also became an important source of income among an increased share of the poorest families, as reported under the livelihoods section.
Sale of productive assets and other negative strategies Meanwhile a significant minority of the population was forced to engage in a range of negative coping strategies such as the sale of productive assets i.e. livestock and land (10%), the consumption of seed stocks (10%), the slaughter and consumption of livestock (30%) and a reduction in quality of the diet (3%). See figure below for the detailed share of assets sold.
Figure 18: Sale of valuable assets
Cattle 93%
Jewelry 4%
Land 2%
0% 100%
4.4.2 Solidarity Traditional forms of solidarity include zakat, paid out as cash to the poorest families each year; hosher, which is a harvest share to the poorest families (fruit, grains); slaughter and meat share at big Eid; regular charity in the form of food or cash assistance to poor families; cultivation support and emergency support.
The most common type of food-based support given between households are basic items such as sugar, rice, flour, pulse and oil, in most cases limited to exchanges within the extended family. Hunger is considered a private family matter and not the responsibility of the wider community. If a family lacks a food stock, the head of house will go directly to his relative. It is 36% not considered acceptable socially to request or take cultivation, cultivation, from outside the family. 33% 35% Note in the graphic below that solidarity systems remained in place in the aftermath of the quake, despite the widespread loss of assets that took place. The exception is hosher due to the loss of the maize hosher, 23% harvest in 2005. hosher, 19% Figure 19: Support given pre- and post-EQ This suggests that in fact solidarity systems remained quite resilient. Communities may be in a position to take care of their most vulnerable emergency, members as far as food and other basic needs much emergency, 9% sooner after a major crisis than previously thought. 6% other food, However, this applies only to those members 8% other food, recognized as vulnerable by the community. This is 4% shelter, 4% shelter, 1% 33 0% Before After explored further in the food and nutrition section below.
A rough 6% of the population reports being very reliant on these traditional forms of solidarity to meet their basic needs (food, shelter, clothing) in the wake of the earthquake, which gives an indication of the level of vulnerability as perceived by the community (see table below). However, this finding may be biased in the emergency context: acute needs heightened vulnerability, but humanitarian assistance then relieved some portion of the increased needs and also filled some of the gap normally filled by the community itself for its most vulnerable members.
The graph above gives an indication that meal and food share is normally given to 4% of the population, which roughly correlates with the 6% vulnerability reported in the table below. Further detailed studies are required to accurately assess the true levels of vulnerability across the community and the role played by solidarity in the absence of crisis and aid.
Table 30: To what extent have you been dependent on charity, hosher and zakat since EQ? not occasionally Very reliant reliant reliant to feed family 78% 14% 8% to supplement diet 80% 14% 6% to cultivate 40% 54% 6% to care for children and orphans 85% 11% 4% for shelter and clothing 80% 15% 5%
Meanwhile, support at cultivation time and harvest share are widespread practices that consequently cannot be correlated with vulnerability or poverty.
The data suggest that: o Traditional solidarity mechanisms appear to have remained resilient in the wake of the EQ o Actual levels of vulnerability as perceived by the community are in the range of 5-6% of the population. Further studies are needed to assess dynamics around vulnerability and solidarity
4.4.4 Impacts on food and nutrition Two components of food security are analyzed in this section: general food security in the wake of the earthquake, and access to high quality foods.
4.4.4.1 Change in overall food security A food security index was created based on 5 questions asked in the household interview. Some of the questions include perceptions about the security of the household’s access to food in addition to concrete indicators such as physical food shortages, quality of the diet and frequency of actual hunger in order to produce a more nuanced scale.
Methodology Questions 1 to 5 were asked in reference to the months following the quake while questions 1 to 3 were asked in reference to the previous period. Points were awarded on the basis of the answer given in order to reflect the relative level of food insecurity implied by the response (see table below).
Table 31: Creating a Food Security Index Question Response Points* Were you ever worried you could not provide enough food once a month or few times a year 0.5 1 for your household? weekly or daily 1 2 Have you faced shortages of certain foods? Yes 1 a few times a year 1 Are members of your household sometimes faced with 3 once a month 2 hunger? weekly or daily 3 4 Have members of your HH reduced the amt of food eaten? Yes 1 5 Have members of your HH substituted for less quality foods? Yes 1 * Negative answers were awarded zero points
34 The points for each respondent were then summed across the questions, giving each respondent 2 food insecurity scores: one for the pre-crisis period and one for the post-crisis period. The pre-crisis scores covered a spectrum ranging from 0 (food secure) to 5 (food insecure). The post-crisis scores ranged from 0 (food secure) to 7 (food insecure). In order to compare the prevalence of food insecurity between the two time periods, 4 ranks or levels of food security were then extracted from this index based on criteria. This allowed us to identify the change in the overall level of food security that was experienced in the area. See table below for the definition of food security ranks and criteria.
Table 32: Definition of food security ranks Rank Pre-EQ score Post-EQ score Criteria No food shortage 0 to 0.5 0 to 0.5 No shortage or hunger reported, occasional worry Winter food winter shortages (wheat flour, sugar ghee, etc.), occasional shortage 1.0 to 2.0 1.0 to 3.0 worries, some reduction in quality and quantity but no hunger regular shortages, regular worry, reduction in quality and quantity, Hunger 2.5 to 3.5 3.5 to 5.5 hunger every month regular shortages, regular worry, reduction in quality and quantity, Significant hunger 4.0 to 5.0 6.0 to 7.0 hunger every week
Results We found surprising results. In the pre-quake period, the large majority (96%) of the population was generally food secure, considering both external indicators and their own perception. This is testimony to the efficient strategies people employ to meet food needs throughout the year, including stocking over the winter months and supplementation of harvest with market purchases. A small minority (3%) report experiencing food shortages during the winter months.
In the year after the quake, more than half the population reported experiencing food shortages during the winter months. Hunger emerged for the first time, with 12% reporting facing occasional but regular hunger including outside of the winter season. A small share (1%) emerged with “significant” hunger or hunger on a weekly basis or more. The prevalence of shortages and hunger is relatively evenly spread between Jared and Manoor.
Figure 20: Change in food security levels Analysis 100% 1%0% 1% Large-scale general food distributions were conducted in the 3% 12% area by two INGOs, ACF and Acted, immediately following the earthquake and continuing for several months. They were 80% presumed to have reached the large majority of the winter resident population and to have filled the major gap in food 60% 54% access. These findings highlight a broad-based persistence in 96% needs despite these interventions and the lack of capacity of 40% traditional solidarity mechanisms to absorb the additional need (see figure alongside).
20% 32% The results suggest that food distributions in the area failed to reach the most vulnerable but are likely to have prevented large- 0% scale suffering related to food insufficiency. Before After no food shortage w inter food shortage Duplication of households on distribution lists at the time of the emergency is to be expected and is known to have occurred at a hunger significant hunger high rate (30% or more) as a result of later list monitoring. The above findings in combination with the findings on winter migration rates (70%) and numbers of beneficiary households served in Jared over the winter (2,500) together suggest that only 1,500 to 1,800 actual households in Jared benefited from food distributions and a significant portion of the population was left out.
The data further suggest a higher level of intrinsic vulnerability than is or could be covered by solidarity networks. While just 6% of the population reported being very reliant on community-based solidarity in the wake of the earthquake, twice that number are found to be significantly food insecure.
35 Previous studies of vulnerability and solidarity networks in the area conducted by ACF have shown that widows, the elderly, the disabled and the orphaned are widely considered vulnerable by the community and taken care of as a result. This was especially true in the wake of the earthquake where many men died and new widows were quickly remarried or taken in by family. Meanwhile, households headed by able-bodied males are more likely to be considered self-sufficient and not requiring of community support. Our data showed that among this group, a significant minority was in fact most in need and most vulnerable across the community as a whole. This was due to this group’s reliance on extremely limited income sources such as local casual labor to support the household and furthermore its high ratio of dependents to adult males. But households with this profile did not tend to be recognized as vulnerable or in need of support in the society, due to the strong cultural traditions around male roles and the family.
Therefore it is likely that the relatively high level of intrinsic vulnerability highlighted above that is not recognized or shouldered by the community pertains to large families with few assets and limited livelihood sources. The demographic data confirms this. Excluding households without adult males, which is 13% or significantly higher than the general population, the remaining food insecure households have a higher than average ratio of dependents to adult males (5.3 versus 4.6 in the general population).
High food and fuel prices have constrained economic access to basic goods for this group.
The data suggest that: o A significant share of the population experienced food shortages and hunger in the wake of the EQ, with an estimated 13% still food insecure o Solidarity networks and food aid did not cover the entire food need o Most vulnerable groups include households with a high ratio of dependents to adult males. This group is not commonly recognized as vulnerable by the community. o High market prices continue to constrain access to basic goods and overall food security in the valley
4.4.4.2 Change in consumption of high quality foods The household consumption of high quality nutritious foods such as lassi, milk, ghee, meat and eggs is common across the population. Most families keep poultry, at least one goat and in many cases a cow to supplement staple grains production with a high quality protein source. Fruit and nut trees and kitchen gardens also provide additional needed vitamins and minerals in the diet. Prior to the quake, nearly 100% of EUs had access to these foods and to meat at least on a monthly basis. 92% had access to eggs, milk products and vegetables on a weekly basis (excluding the off-season).
As quantities are limited, women report normally saving milk and eggs for children and for family members who are sick. Occasionally the head of EU or working members of the family also get preference. When asked about the role of these foods in the diet, women recognized them as important to a balanced diet and overall health. They are informed and knowledgeable about basic nutrition. However pregnant and lactating women are routinely excluded from accessing these nutritious foods, largely as a result of cultural norms.
Due to the high death toll of livestock (50%) the household consumption of animal products was expected to have dramatically declined, as reported informally by the people. However, in mid-2006 the survey findings show that the consumption of these products had declined by a slight 8% across the population as a whole, with the exception of meat consumption which declined faster (see figure below). Vegetable consumption somewhat increased.
36 Figure 21: Change in frequency of consumption of high quality foods 100%
75% never yearly 50% monthly w eekly 25% daily
0% Egg Egg Milk Milk Meat Meat Fruit Fruit Vegtb Vegtb pre- post- prod prod pre- post- nuts nuts l pre- l post- EQ EQ pre- post- EQ EQ pre- post- EQ EQ
never 1% 3% 1% 3% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% yearly 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 2% 0% 0% monthly 7% 11% 1% 0% 23% 39% 48% 61% 4% 6% w eekly 56% 60% 8% 10% 76% 60% 45% 32% 27% 22% daily 36% 24% 91% 87% 1% 1% 4% 4% 68% 72%
The data suggest that: o Consumption of high quality foods such as eggs, milk, lassi, ghee, meat and fruit and nuts declined only slightly o However the utilization of these foods is seasonally limited, implying a strong nutritional gap in winter season o Assessments are needed to determine the size of this gap and the resulting nutritional impact, and evaluate appropriate responses such as training on kitchen garden and food preservation techniques among women
4.4.5 Impacts on health and care practice In focus group discussion, women report long standing impacts of the earthquake, mainly in the area of mental health and its relationship to care practices in the home: Trauma and grief at the loss of loved ones and home and widespread fear of new shocks has led to a tangible stress and depression syndrome among many women. New mothers report having insufficient milk as a result of trauma, depression, improper diet and illness; as a result, reducing the number of breastfeeding times per day to 4-5. Where mothers had no milk, goat’s milk was used instead. Mothers are introducing solid foods earlier than normal to their infant children due to the lack of milk, at 4-6 months of age. Weaning foods include banana, egg, sagodana, porridge, dried wheat milk (nishasta), custard, cow milk, goat milk (more rare), boiled rice, thick roti, boiled potato and biscuit. Sources of nutritious foods such as eggs, cow milk and meat for the older children were more limited after the crisis. Some families experienced food shortages in the winter following the earthquake. Across several villages women note the impact on children, described as “weakness” and “less blood in the body”, as well as on themselves. Other common ailments were also reported, especially diarrhoea and skin infections among the children due to the absence of clean water sources There is a single trained traditional birth attendant (TBA) or dayi in the whole of Mahandri UC. She charges for her services. Women report in many cases not being able to afford her services or access her in time, instead relying on experienced women in the village to assist in the births.
As a whole, women report that their inability over many months to properly sustain their traditional role as caretaker and protector of home and children – in the prolonged absence of adequate shelter, basic infrastructure such as water, and regular access to food – has compounded their depression and slowed their recovery.
37 The level of grief, depression and trauma is still high, affecting women’s ability to care for their families, increasing the vulnerability of young children and slowing overall recovery. The data suggests a need for counselling services and psycho-social support especially targeted to women. Basic health care services accessible by women are also needed.
4.5 Remaining Needs and Future Strategy
People ranked their remaining needs by priority, both in terms of urgent needs and needs for the longer term (“next year and beyond”). In order to reflect the overall priorities of the communities, a score was assigned to each need according to its priority level and summed across the different categories.
4.5.1 Current Urgent Needs
Figure 22: Urgent needs by priority
shelter 100
w ater supply 83
food 43
latrines 38
roads, bridges and footpath 23
hospital or BHU 14
agric inputs 9
electricity 5
livestock feed 5
job opportunities 4
livestock 2
livestock shelter 1
0 50 100
The top cited needs relate to the still-unmet basic needs of the people for survival. Shelter and water17 were cited as the overwhelming priority urgent needs in the area, as a result of the massive damage to infrastructure that was sustained and the lack of progress in the months following to fill these basic needs. Women in particular highlighted water as a major need, citing the long distances they would travel each day to fetch water. 9 out of 10 households cited shelter and 8 out of 10 cited water in their top 3 urgent needs. Food and sanitation facilities were cited as a distant third and fourth overall priority (see figure above).
Needs related to assets and livelihoods were also cited though with less frequency (agricultural inputs, livestock, jobs). Needs related to services (medical services, electricity) and community level infrastructure (roads, bridges, footpaths) also appeared as urgent.
Table 33: Priority urgent needs cited by percent of households Current Urgent Needs Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Shelter 66% 20% 7% Water 23% 41% 19% Food 7% 14% 21% Other needs 5% 24% 53%
17 Both drinking water supply and irrigation, but primarily drinking water 38 4.5.2 Future Needs In many cases people had a clear idea about their basic rehabilitation and development needs when asked to list their priorities for the next year and beyond. Roads, bridges and footpaths emerged as the major structural need by far – cited by 7 out of 10 households in their top 3 needs – reflecting the urgent access issues still being faced by the communities and its continuing impact on livelihoods, markets and prices (see figure below).
Figure 23: Longer term needs by priority
roads, bridges and footpaths 100
hospital or bhu 62
electricity 58
w ater supply 51
schools 45
telephone 38
job opportunities 11
utility store 4
training center 4
shelter 3
livestock 1
sanitation 1
0 50 100
Medical, electrical, educational and communication services came second in a group, reflecting more the historical underdevelopment of the area rather than strict rehabilitation needs. Women specifically highlighted the lack of medical services for the female population as a major problem. Water infrastructure18 emerges in fourth place and can be directly linked to the earthquake.
Finally, needs around female vocational training were cited with notable frequency. Women lack income- generating opportunities and in focus group discussions frequently mentioned a need for training in embroidery and other vocational skills.
Restocking in livestock is clearly not yet a priority for most households, as people focus on building homes for their families and in some cases struggle to provide shelter and fodder for surviving stock. Just 1% of households cited livestock among their priority future needs.
Very few people cited food as a long term need, which indicates some measure of hope across the population regarding their capacity to recover basic livelihoods.
Table 34: Priority longer term needs cited by percent of households Longer Term Needs Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 roads, bridges and footpath 35% 18% 15% Electricity 19% 12% 13% Water 18% 9% 7% hospital/bhu 13% 21% 16% Schools 9% 15% 13% Telephone 3% 15% 21% Other needs 3% 9% 16%
18 Both drinking water supply and irrigation, but primarily irrigation 39 These basic findings reflect well the overall results of this survey, as laid out in the previous sections.
4.5.3 Future strategy of the community At the time the survey was undertaken a large portion of basic needs were still unmet across the population, in particular related to shelter and water. People found it difficult envisioning a future strategy beyond the recovery of their lost assets. Relief assistance had sustained the population throughout the winter but independent or community-managed recovery of livelihoods was a concept that had not really been introduced. When asked about the future and the community’s strategy in focus group discussions, community leaders again and again suggested that NGOs and the government solve their problems, as they lacked the resources to fulfil their own needs. The strategies that emerged from these conversations and the HH interviews are represented below. The dominant strategy was home reconstruction. A very small minority cited their plan to migrate out of the area.
Figure 24: Future strategies
construct house 100
stay 91
migrate 2
w ork locally 2
w ork in other city 0
- 50 100
40 SECTION 5: CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
The household level economy in Mahandri Union Council, Kaghan Valley is strongly cash-based, due to the dual constraints of small size landholdings and low productivity of staple grain crops which permit harvests covering only 2 months of annual food needs. Nevertheless baseline food security in the U/C is reported high, with only a reported 3% of the population facing food shortages in the winter season in a normal year. Diversified livelihoods provide the required cash income, notably remittances and local labor work. Household strategies for securing food are complex and include subsistence agriculture, small-scale horticulture and animal husbandry in combination with market purchases facilitated by credit, remittance and low-wage labor. Family and community-based solidarity networks complement these strategies. The systems in place have proven to be relatively effective in securing the basic needs of the majority of the population.
The 2005 earthquake proved to be a major shock to household economies. Major productive assets were lost, in particular livestock, seed stocks and irrigation channels. Homes and drinking water networks were almost universally damaged or destroyed and roadways affected. Heads of household working in-country largely returned to be near their families after the crisis, forgoing the remittance income previously central to the household economy. At the same time expenditures related to transport, shelter, fuel, medical services and animal rental for draft power increased by an average 30% due to increased demand and inflated market prices in the wake of the earthquake. Middle and low-income families compensated by taking on high rates of new debt – on average doubling their total debt load – as well as relying on relief assistance and solidarity networks. Nevertheless over 50% of the community reports sustaining food shortages over the 2005-2006 winter, and more than 10% of households now report experiencing hunger on a regular basis.
Rehabilitation has proceeded at a slow pace and basic infrastructure such as homes, drinking water channels and roadways has still not been recovered at the time of writing. Shelter is the overwhelming priority urgent need of the community at this time, with winter fast approaching. Water supply is the second highest urgent need. Food is a distant third priority. The main longer term need reported is the rehabilitation of roads, bridges and footpaths, heavily damaged in the earthquake and further damaged in the monsoon. Access to basic health, education and communication services is reported as the second greatest longer term need. However, when asked about their strategies to meet these needs, community leaders indicated they expected NGOs and government to solve the problems.
5.2 Recommendations
Clear needs remain around the rehabilitation of agricultural livelihoods, community assets and homes. Recommended priority areas for intervention include direct targeted material assistance in home reconstruction, rehabilitation of drinking water schemes and irrigation channels, and road repair. The rebuilding of shelter and access to water continue to be the overwhelming concerns and priorities of the people. In addition, psycho-social support services are needed to address the widespread trauma, grief and depression still experienced by those who lost loved ones in the earthquake.
Communities need to be involved in the identification of long term strategies for recovering and strengthening local livelihoods. The area has a strong local knowledge base and is rich in natural resources such as the native walnut and apple. Local resources and capacities could be (re)mobilized to meet large unmet needs for income generation and diversification, in the form of organized fruit and nut production, processing and marketing; animal breeding and sales; off-season vegetables; and specialized trades such as wood working and carving. Such an initiative would require a strong focus on building of local capacities in collaboration with local government. Financial infrastructure can be strengthened to promote remittance flows, central to the livelihood strategies of over a quarter of the population.
Meanwhile agricultural and soil management practices can be strengthened in order to raise baseline productivity and to yield marketable surpluses. Such initiatives are recommended to incorporate a nutrition component which would address the nutrition gap experienced during the winter season. Women-focused projects organized around the development of kitchen garden practices and food preservation and processing
41 would simultaneously improve household nutrition and provide much needed opportunities for female income generation.
A surveillance program is recommended to be put in place over the 06-07 winter season given the unexpectedly high rates of food shortage and hunger that were experienced the preceding winter. Recommended indicators include market prices, road access and household food stocks. If interventions are needed, the targeting process should be carefully focused on asset-poor households who lack access to community-based forms of solidarity, in order to avoid the scale of exclusion in humanitarian assistance that the data suggests took place in the winter following the earthquake.
Finally large unmet needs remain around the delivery of government services such as schools, medical facilities, communications and electricity that predate the 2005 earthquake. The provision of these services is required to raise the basic standard of living in the valley and to support its development to its true potential.
AGRICULTURE o Livelihood strategies are highly diversified, with local casual labor and domestic and international remittance playing prominent roles. Agriculture is the primary activity for just 10% of households. o Baseline agricultural productivity in the area is low, with average maize harvests recorded at 1/3 metric ton per acre covering 70 days of winter food needs o Average household maize harvest after the EQ in 2005 was just 40% of the previous year, covering only 1 month of food needs o Cultivated land area did not change much between 2005 and 2006, while irrigated area dropped to 30% of the previous year o Major constraints to cultivation are now draft power, irrigation and labor. Baseline food security and nutrition in the area could be raised by: raising the productivity of the maize crop, introducing improved wheat into higher altitude areas, and introducing food processing and preservation to improve availability of high quality foods in winter season. Agricultural livelihoods can be further rehabilitated by recovering damaged irrigation infrastructure and providing subsidized tractor or draft animal services during cultivation. Post-harvest monitoring of the 2006 kharif crop will determine if seed inputs are required during 2007.
HORTICULTURE o Existing fruit and nut production systems play an important role in supplementing household nutrition and are a major feature of the subsistence economy o There is little experience with home-based processing or preservation to extend the nutritional benefits past the harvest season o There is little experience with nursery raising and modern propagation technique o The EQ had a relatively moderate impact on local orchards o Market-oriented fruit and nut production remains undeveloped despite an established regional demand The development of small scale fruit and nut micro-enterprise should be investigated as a mechanism to boost income generation, by building capacity, organizing local processing and marketing collectives, and facilitating market linkages.
LIVESTOCK o Two thirds of all households with livestock experienced 100% loss of their draft animals (oxen and bullock) and at least 1 milking animal (cow, goat) in the EQ o Average resulting inflation in livestock prices was 70% Targeted feed provision and assistance in rebuilding livestock shelters would help to rebuild animal husbandry livelihoods. Once assets are recovered and if the population has not spontaneously restocked, a restocking intervention should be considered.
INCOMES & DEBT o Losses in average cash income were mainly due to loss of domestic remittance income in the top 2 income quartiles. Government compensation largely filled this gap in the aftermath of the EQ o An increase in casual labor opportunities after the EQ contributed to a 5% increase in average income in the lowest income quartile o 40% of households took on new debt after the EQ, the majority in the lowest income classes. Total debt load roughly doubled. o Households without pre or post-crisis remittance were twice as likely to acquire new debt 42 o Livelihoods are on hold as people focus on home reconstruction. o The continued provision of humanitarian aid has also depressed the incentive to return to traditional activities Asset recovery should be accelerated as a priority intervention, in particular targeted direct material assistance in home reconstruction and targeted replacement of lost assets, in order to promote the rapid resumption of livelihood activities and mitigate against higher levels of indebtedness. There is a need for development of high value local IGA activities, such as animal breeding, horticulture products and small trades. The humanitarian community should focus on development of these activities rather than continued distribution of relief items. Support to financial infrastructure and strengthening of remittance flows is also recommended.
MARKETS & INFRASTRUCTURE o Basic food commodity prices remain inflated a rough 25% due to the earthquake o Animal rental costs doubled, while transport, shelter and labor costs increased by about one third. o Road rehabilitation is required for full recovery of market prices o The poorest households have disproportionately borne the impact of the increase in market prices and household expenditures. Higher expenditures among this group are being financed by debt. o Water networks were massively damaged. The continued constrained access to drinking water is a special burden on women, who must travel long distances to fetch water. In areas where springs have shifted or dried up, communities anticipate permanent out- migration if the water problem is not solved soon. Water network rehabilitation is urgently required. Similarly, road rehabilitation should be considered a priority by humanitarian and government actors to enable markets to recover and prices to return to normal. Until markets and household economies fully recover, continued support to most vulnerable households is justified, in the form of subsidized vouchers for basic goods
HOUSING o 90% of people in the UC had failed to secure adequate housing by mid-2006 and shelter remains people’s all consuming priority. A transitional shelter policy is urgently needed, in combination with winter preparedness interventions for winter 06-07. In addition, there needs to be flexibility in the application of eligibility criteria to receive government compensation. Finally, targeted direct material assistance in home reconstruction is recommended, including facilitation of materials procurement and subsidy on transport and materials cost.
MIGRATION o 70% of families in Jared migrated from their village in the winter after the EQ, while 25% migrated from Manoor. 1 in 10 went to IDP camps while the remainder went to private homes down-valley. o 99% of those who migrated returned in the spring.
FOOD o A significant share of the population experienced food shortages and hunger in the wake of the EQ, with an estimated 13% still food insecure o Solidarity networks and food aid did not cover the entire food need o Most vulnerable groups include households with a high ratio of dependents to adult males. This group is not commonly recognized as vulnerable by the community o High market prices continue to constrain access to basic goods and overall food security in the valley o Consumption of high quality foods such as eggs, milk, lassi, ghee, meat and fruit and nuts declined only slightly o The utilization of these foods is seasonally limited, implying a strong nutritional gap in winter season Assessments are needed to determine the size of the winter season food gap and the resulting nutritional impact, and evaluate appropriate responses such as training on kitchen garden and food preservation techniques among women. Winter surveillance is recommended to monitor food access and need.
VULNERABILITY & SOLIDARITY o Traditional solidarity mechanisms appear to have remained resilient in the wake of the EQ o Vulnerability levels as perceived by the community are in the range of 5-6% of the population o The level of grief, depression and trauma is still high, affecting women’s ability to care for their families, increasing the vulnerability of young children and slowing overall recovery. There is a need for counselling services and psycho-social support especially targeted to women. Basic health care services accessible by women are also needed.
43 6 ANNEXES – FIELD INSTRUMENTS
6.1 Male Focus Group Guide
ACF NEEDS ASSESSMENT JARED U/C VILLAGE: MALE FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS CLUSTER: DATE: How many people present? Who?
COMMUNITY STRUCTURE Formal community structures or organizations in this village (pre-EQ and post-EQ) and activities to date
OTHER ACTORS NGO/government activities in this village
MAIN LIVELIHOODS OF THE PEOPLE Main livelihood activities (economic migration, animal husbandry…)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Seasonal migration patterns of the people (winter migration, summer migration).
WEALTH RANKING Describe what is a poor-normal-rich family in term of: Tenant or Size Number and Type of Level of debt Solidarity landowner cultivated type of Income given/received or landlord and crop livestock generation Poor
Normal
Rich
44 GENERAL IMPACT & RESPONSE Main impacts of the EQ (list & use as guide for more detailed conversation) 1.
2.
3.
4.
Specific responses of this community (migration, reduce consumption, solidarity, aid…) 1.
2. 3.
4.
ROADS Describe damage to access roads, secondary roads, footpaths
WATER Describe previous drinking water and irrigation canal infrastructure (cement/piping) & number schemes
Type of management system for maintenance & sharing: how is it organized?
Current condition of water network
In absence of irrigation, is rain usually sufficient to ensure a good harvest?
Sanitation facilities (now/before)
AGRICULTURE & LIVESTOCK Main crops (potato or maize or wheat?)
Landownership pattern: tenants or small landowners or landlords?
Crop rotation and fallow land system (are all lands cultivated each year or some left unplanted?)
Fertilizer and pesticide products commonly used Types
On which crops
Quantity used per kanal
45 Spreading method Top of soil /ploughed into soil? Mixed with seeds/spread before sowing? Before/after irrigation? How many times spread per season?
How many kanals are needed to feed one family for a year (specify family size): ______
How many kanals can one man cultivate alone? ______
Do all farms hire workers or just the largest? ______
What is daily wage for casual labor? Now: ______Before EQ: ______
Cash worth of animals now and before EQ: Oxen: Cow: Sheep: Goat:
Wheat Is wheat commonly planted as a winter crop (rabi season) in this village?
IF YES: Planted on same land as kharif crops? YES NO
Approximate number kanals planted in wheat per family: ______
Wheat harvest from 5 kanals will meet family food needs for how long? ______
Variety/type used (describe): ______
Seeding rates (kg/kanal): ______
Planting time: ______
Fertilizer use on the wheat crop (when, how much):
Main problems faced with cultivation this year 1.
2.
3.
4.
SEED SAVING
1. What was the impact of the EQ on the community’s seed saving practice this year? () Damaged or destroyed maize seed storage container () Not able to save seed from standing maize crop () Could have saved seed, but saving seed was not a priority after the EQ () Destroyed stocked seed (wheat, potato, maize…) () Could not plant rabi crop
46 2. Do households typically store their saved seed in common with others? YES NO If so, which type seed?
If so, with who? () Brothers of the male head of household () Other members of the extended family () Other people in village (if yes, explain under what circumstances)
What types of losses are experienced here during storage in a normal year? (check those that apply) Fungus, mold & humidity Rodents (field mice) Insects Maize Potato Wheat Bean Vegetables
In a normal year, do people sow extra seed to compensate for seed stock that is damaged? () If stock is visibly damaged () Always () Never
In order to avoid these losses, what are your ideas for improving storage conditions?
OTHER LIVELIHOODS Change in activity patterns since the EQ (people returned from abroad, people injured & not able to work..)?
LOAN/DEBT What is the usual type of loan held by households? () seasonal and repaid at each harvest () Cumulative and held over long term
Who loans the money? (shopkeepers, family, wealthy individuals in village, bank…)
What is the interest system?
Did people take on unusual loans this year following the EQ?
SOLIDARITY Which is the most common type of food-based support? Describe.
Were people able to help each other in the usual ways this year?
In what ways will the community help?
47 CURRENT URGENT NEEDS: FOR THE NEXT YEAR: 1. 1.
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.
Community strategy for addressing these needs
48 6.2 Female Focus Group Guide
ACF NEEDS ASSESSMENT JARED U/C VILLAGE: FEMALE FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS CLUSTER: DATE: How many people present? Who?
COMMUNITY STRUCTURE Any women’s organizations in this village (pre-EQ and post-EQ) and activities to date
GENERAL IMPACT & RESPONSE Main impacts of the EQ (consider food availability & consumption, health of family, caring for children) 1. 3.
2. 4.
Specific responses to the EQ (in or out-migration, reduce/change consumption, ask for/receive zakat, food or other assistance from inside/outside family) 1. 3.
2. 4.
LIVESTOCK (Pre-EQ)
1. Which duties are women responsible for in day-to-day animal care?
○ Herding in summer ○ Helping with calving ○ Daily feeding/milking when near to home ○ Health care of animals ○ Bringing out to pasture ○ Other: ______
2. Describe seasonal migration for the animals in this village Shift to upper pastures with family Send animals with other families Keep near to home all year
3. Pasture lands are communally owned or private?
4. What do you normally feed the livestock in summer? In winter?
5. Where do you collect hay for winter feeding?
6. If animals are sick/need medical attention, who provides health care? Owner of livestock Skilled person in village or nearby area Veterinarian
7. If animals are sick, is medication given? Describe type of care provided.
8. How do families normally use the milk, eggs and meat in this village? Milk & eggs for children 49 Milk & eggs for whole family Meat for the whole family Share in village the meat Sale 9. What is the importance of this source of food in the diet?
10. When the amount of eggs/milk is limited, who gets preference in the family?
(Post-EQ) 11. Did most/some/very few families lose animals in the EQ in this village?
12. What happened to remaining animals (charity, sold, died from cold/hunger…)
13. What is current health of animals?
14. Have your remaining animals been calving normally this year?
15. Main problems faced with remaining livestock: Fodder for this coming winter Sheltering Other ______
16. What are the strategies for winter feeding this year? 1. 3.
2. 4.
INCOME GENERATION
1. In this village, what kind of income generating activities are females involved in? Home based tailoring Sale of eggs, milk, yoghurt Other:
2. Do women or men control the income from these activities?
3. Is there a need/desire among females for more income generating activities?
If Yes, what kind?
What are the constraints to developing these activities?
50
FOOD
1. In the past (before EQ), are there some families used to suffering hunger in this village?
Of these, how many face hunger only in winter season? Of these, how many face hunger year-round (chronic hunger)?
2. Has there been increased hunger in this village since the EQ?
3. Due to what reason? Loss of livestock Loss of income due to death of main wage earners Loss of income due to injury/disability Loss of income due to return from abroad of main wage earner Higher expenses Higher prices Road access problems Other ______
4. If yes, what foods have families cut back on/increased?
5. If yes, have families had to reduce number of meals?
6. If yes, have women or girls sacrificed food so others can continue to eat the same?
7. Are families suffering food shortages since the EQ? Which foods?
HEALTH & CARE PRACTICE
1. Is there a traditional birth attendant in this or nearby village?
2. Main health problems faced (women & children)
3. What is the general energy level of the children and the women (weak/strong) ?
4. What was the impact of the EQ on mental health (trauma, depression & ability to care for families) among the women?
5. What was the impact of the EQ on mothers’ ability to breastfeed after birth or to maintain breastfeeding: () No milk or not enough milk Explain:
() Decreased time spent breastfeeding / fewer times in one day Explain:
() Earlier than usual introduction of semi-solid or solid foods Explain:
() Other:
51
SOLIDARITY
1. Which is the most common type of food-based support given between households? Describe.
2. Were people able to help each other in the usual ways this year?
3. For families faced with hunger, is this considered private family matter, or the responsibility of the village?
4. In what ways will the community or women in the community help these families, if any? [food-sharing, meal-sharing, zakat]
5. If a person or family lacks a food stock:
Can they request help or should it first be offered?
Who can they ask for food or go to eat?
NEEDS and FUTURE STRATEGY
What are the needs, in order of importance?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Strategy for addressing these needs
52 6.3 Key Informant Interview Guides
ACF NEEDS ASSESSMENT JARED U/C DATE: KEY INFORMANT 1 QUESTIONS INTERVIEW WITH:
LOCAL SHOPKEEPERS, JARED & MAHANDRI BAZAAR
1. Food Prices How do they change in a normal year over the winter season?
How did they change this year following the EQ?
When do you expect prices to go back down to normal?
Did NGO food distributions affect your business or affect prices (Acted, ACF)? If so how?
FOOD PRICES Unit Type or Price before Price in Price now Grade EQ winter season after EQ Atta 40 kg bag Rice Cooking oil Ghee Red beans Mash Sugar Tea leaf Milk powder Khal
2. Food shortages Did you face special problems bringing food to market this winter? If so which items? Are you still facing supply problems, if so for what reason? 53 How long do you expect them to last? When do you expect markets will recover and go back to normal? This year Next year In several years
What will be the required conditions before markets can recover completely? Road rehabilitated to pre-EQ condition Transport costs down Other:
3. Shortages of other items Fuel Gas
4. Credit
What kind of credit do you offer to your customers? (describe)
What time of year do you give the most credit (winter, summer…)?
How do you decide to who you offer credit? Based on need Based on proven ability to repay Based on personal relation
How many of your regular customers have credit with you (quarter, half, three-quarters…)
What is the common amount of debt they will have with you?
Did you give more or less credit after the EQ to your customers? How much more (double, triple…)?
54 ACF NEEDS ASSESSMENT JARED U/C DATE: KEY INFORMANT 2 QUESTIONS INTERVIEW WITH:
JEEP OWNERS & THOSE EMPLOYED IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
1. Get a sense of the running costs for running a jeep or van transport business locally and to/from Balakot (fuel, vehicle maintenance, rent).
2. Get a sense of the change in these costs since the EQ, now and during the winter
3. What is the price charged NOW for local transport and for transport down-valley In winter: In summer:
4. What used to be the price before the EQ In winter: In summer:
5. How much can a jeep owner earn in a month (give range & time of year)
6. How much can a driver earn in a month (give range & time of year)
Other Comments:
55 ACF NEEDS ASSESSMENT JARED U/C DATE: KEY INFORMANT 3 QUESTIONS INTERVIEW WITH:
LOCAL TEACHER OR NAZIM
1. Estimate size of MONTHLY remittances to a family with one person working away from the home: International remittance (Saudi Arabia…): Type of job______Salary______Amt sent back______Type of job______Salary______Amt sent back______Type of job______Salary______Amt sent back______
National remittance (Karachi, Lahore, Pindi…): Type of job______Salary______Amt sent back______Type of job______Salary______Amt sent back______Type of job______Salary______Amt sent back______
2. Estimate rough monthly salaries for locally available jobs (class IV): Teacher Season? Guard Season? Other______Salary______Season? Other______Salary______Season?
Estimate rough monthly income for local business or trade: Carpenter Plumber Shopkeeper Other______Wage______
Are they seasonal?
3. Estimate rough monthly income for: Home-based tailoring Sale of eggs & milk in the village Income from walnut Income from maize Income from zakat
56 4. Describe the landownership pattern (history and current) in Jared U/C. Every family owns their home, but lands are still owned by a few large landlords, who also live & cultivate the best lands near to the river? Or do we truly have 95% small landowners as everyone claims?
Describe how ethnicity is related to these ownership patterns?
5. What are the main livelihood activities in Jared U/C?
6. Wealth ranking Tenant or Size Number and Type of Level of debt Solidarity landowner or cultivated type of Income given/received landlord and crop livestock generation Poor
Normal
Rich
GENERAL IMPACT & RESPONSE Main impacts of the EQ
1.
2.
3.
4
Specific responses of this community (migration, reduce consumption, solidarity, aid…)
1.
2.
3.
4
Other Comments:
57 6.4 Questionnaire Household Interview ACF NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY Jared-Mahandri Union Council July-August 2006
Introduction of ACF activities in the U/C. Objective of the survey activity. Date: Name of monitor: Cluster Nbr.: Ward/Village: Summer Location (if applicable): 1 – HOUSEHOLD IDENTIFICATION The head of this household is: () Married monogamous () Married polygamous () Widow or widower () Divorced () Never married
How many families live in the household? ______Family shifted to upper area for summer season? YES NO
COMPOSITION OF THE ECONOMIC UNIT Nbr. Nbr. Nbr. Nbr. eating Main Occupation Relation to the head Num Male/ vulnerab contribut working from (if any) of different of EU ber Female le ing outside food persons (specify) income local area stock 1. Head of EU
2. Other adult male
3. Other adult female 4. Children under 14 years old
2 – AGRICULTURE & LAND USE Size of landholding: ______kanals Number of parcels: ______
TREE CROPS THIS YEAR LAST YEAR If you lost any trees, what is the 2006 harvest 2005 harvest reason? Trees owned Harvest Use Trees owned Harvest Use () Damaged or lost in EQ Walnut () Water problem
() Other: Apple Are you planning to replace Plum these trees? () Yes () No If Yes, from where? If No, why?
SEASONAL CROPS How many kanals did you cultivate in 2004, in 2005, and 2006? 2004 (before EQ) 2005 (EQ) 2006 (Expected) Total Tena Total Irriga Tenan Total Irrigat Rainfe Irrigat Tenant kanals Rainfed nt or kanals ted t or kanals Rainfed ed d ed or cultiv kanals Own cultiv kanal Owne cultiv kanals kanals kanals kanals Owner ated er ated s r ated
58 Describe your harvests. THE RABI SEASON YEAR REFERS TO THE HARVEST YEAR. 2004 (before EQ) 2005 (EQ) 2006 (Expected)
Total Kanals Total Kanals Kanals Origin of Seed Use of harvest Origin of Seed Use of harvest Origin of Seed Harves Plante Harves Plante Planted * in kg in kg in kg in kg in kg t d * t d *
STOCK: STOCK: STOCK: CONSUME: CONSUME: SELL: SELL: Wheat MARKET: MARKET: MARKET: RABI Kg TRADE: Kg TRADE: SHARE: SHARE: SHARE: SEED STOCK: SEED STOCK: NGO: OTHER: NGO: OTHER: NGO:
STOCK: CONSUME: STOCK: DESTROYED: STOCK: CATTLE FEED: MARKET: MARKET: CONSUME: MARKET: Maize SELL:
SHARE: TRADE: SHARE: SEED STOCK: SHARE: SEED STOCK: NGO: NGO: OTHER: NGO: OTHER: STOCK: STOCK: DESTROYED: STOCK: CONSUME: SELL: CONSUME: Bean MARKET: MARKET: MARKET: TRADE: SHARE: SHARE: SEED STOCK: SHARE: SEED STOCK: NGO: OTHER: NGO: OTHER: NGO: KHARIF STOCK: CONSUME: STOCK: DESTROYED: STOCK: CATTLE FEED: MARKET: MARKET: CONSUME: MARKET: Potato SELL:
SHARE: TRADE: SHARE: SEED STOCK: SHARE: SEED STOCK: NGO: NGO: OTHER: NGO: OTHER: STOCK: STOCK: DESTROYED: STOCK: CONSUME: Veget MARKET: SELL: MARKET: CONSUME: MARKET:
ables TRADE: SHARE: SHARE: SEED STOCK: SHARE: SEED STOCK: Marlas marlas marlas NGO: OTHER: NGO: OTHER: NGO: * Indicate if mixed crop
59 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 What are the main problems you face this year with cultivation? Number by priority DUE TO EQ: NOT RELATED TO THE EQ: ( ) Animal power (bullocks, oxen) 1. ( ) Labor 2. ( ) Irrigation 3. ( ) Seed & other inputs ( ) Other: ______
3 – LIVESTOCK
Nbr Nbr REASON OF LOSS METHOD OF GAIN own owned Specify: KILLED IN EQ, Specify: DEBT, DONATED, now 1 year SACRIFICE/CONSUMED, SOLD AFTER PAID FROM INCOME, FROM ago EQ, DEATH FROM COLD/DISEASE, SAVING OR FROM NATURAL DEATH… GOVERNMENT CHECK Oxen
Bullock
Cow
Donkey/Horse/Mule
Sheep
Goat
Chicken
LAST YEAR BEFORE THE EARTHQUAKE:
1. Was finding enough power to plough your fields last year a problem? () YES () NO If yes, why?
2. What kind of power did you use last year? Check all that apply () Use own labor (bail) () Use own animals () Share bullocks/oxen available in village () Rent animals () Rent tractor () Rent labor () DID NOT PLANT
3. Before earthquake, did you give any supplementary animal feeding (beside hay)? YES NO If yes, to which animal, at which season and how much? 60 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 THIS YEAR:
4. Was finding enough power to plough your fields a problem this year? () YES () NO If yes, why?
5. What kind of power did you use this year? Check all that apply () Use own labor (bail) () Use own animals () Share bullocks/oxen available in village () Rent animals () Rent tractor () Rent labor () DID NOT PLANT
6. Do you face any problem for feeding your animal right now? YES NO
7. Do you face any problem for sheltering your animal? YES NO
8. How do you judge the health and vitality of your animals right now? () Good () Normal () Poor () Some will die soon Specify which animal if difference occurs: ______
9. How do you plan to feed your animal next winter? () Hay from own harvest () Purchase complementary hay () Purchase complementary feed If Yes, for which animal, at which season and how much?
() Will sell/sacrifice animal because not enough feed () Other: ______
Other remarks on livestock:
4 – LIVELIHOOD ACTIVITIES AND INCOME
Income: can be cash or in-kind
In order of priority, what are the EU’s main income generating activities now? One year ago? Put participant code + priority (1=most important, 5=least). Include any income received by this EU including from outside the household.
61 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 Participant code A = Head of household (male) B = Head of household (female) C = Adult male D = Adult female E = Children under 14 yrs of age
SINCE THE EQ: IN YEAR BEFORE EQ: from October 05 to October 06 from October 04 to October 05 Partici INCOME Particip pant & Period of Period of INCOME (estimate amount per ant & priorit year (list year (list (estimate amount per month) month) priority y seasons) codes seasons) codes Cash In-kind Cash In-kind 1. Agriculture (household food needs) 2. Agriculture (sell surplus harvest) 3. Fishing
4. Sale of animal products (eggs, milk) 5. Sale of livestock
6. Animal rental income (oxen for plowing, horse for ceremony…) 7. Timber & wood income
8. Local casual labor
9. Domestic labor (produce in the home) 10. Children’s labor (under 14 yrs.) 11. Small trade (carpenter, tailor)
12. Business (indicate type)
13. Other local employment (indicate type) 14. Work OUTSIDE but in Pakistan (say type & location) 15. Work ABROAD (specify where & what kind) 16. Material aid (specify fr NGO, family, zakat) 17. Government check (specify pension or other)
62 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 Remarks:
5 – SOLIDARITY
Describe the types of support (khairat, hosher, zakat) you have received and given to others in the community. Consider especially food-related support.
SUPPORT GIVEN SINCE THE EQ BEFORE THE EQ
Item given Times per month Item given Times per month Harvest & Animal share
Meal & Food share
Emergency support
Other (cultivation help, care for children, shelter, clothes…)
Comments:
SUPPORT RECEIVED SINCE THE EQ BEFORE THE EQ
Item received Times per month Item received Times per month Harvest & Animal share
Meal & Food share
Emergency support
Other (cultivation help, care for children, shelter, clothes…)
Comments:
To what extent have you been dependant on khairat, hosher and zakat since the EQ: To feed family () Very reliant () Occasionally () Not reliant To supplement diet () Very reliant () Occasionally () Not reliant To cultivate () Very reliant () Occasionally () Not reliant To care for children (orphans…) () Very reliant () Occasionally () Not reliant To shelter and clothe family () Very reliant () Occasionally () Not reliant Other: ______
63 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 6 – DEBT
SINCE THE EQ: 1. Did the household borrow money after the earthquake? () YES () NO
IF YES: a. Who does the household borrow from? () family () credit from storekeeper () local money lender Interest rate: ______() bank Interest rate: ______
b. Level of current NEW debt: ______
BEFORE THE EQ: 2. Did the household have debt in the year before the EQ? () YES () NO
IF YES: a. Who did the household borrow from? () family () credit from storekeeper () local money lender Interest rate: ______() bank Interest rate: ______
b. Level of past debt at highest:______Level of past debt at lowest: ______Interest rate: ______
7. ASSETS of the ECONOMIC UNIT
What does the household own now? One year ago? (If none, write 0) Now One year ago (before EQ) Shelter (tent, CGI shelter, SRSP shelter, traditional mud house, cement house) Cultivation & building tools (specify types)
Craftwork tools (sowing machine, other material…)
Household assets (kitchen material, gas burner, wood) Vehicle
Business-related asset
64 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 8 – COPING STRATEGIES
What was your household’s response to the earthquake? (check all that apply) () Household migration
If Yes, Who? () Whole household () Part household Specify who: ______
If Yes, To where? () army tent village () NGO or UN tent village () Family house () rented house () Location: ______
If Yes, has everyone returned? () Yes () No If no, explain:
() Stay on land to retain claim to land () Sell valuable assets If Yes, which ones? () Jewelry () Land () Cattle Type: ______Number sold: ______() Sacrifice cattle or consume seed stock
If Yes, indicate which: ______
() Reduce or change amount and type of food eaten
If Yes, describe change: ______() Spend savings () Take out loan or extend a previous loan
If Yes, specify which: ______() Take in orphaned child or children/new wives/families () Send orphaned child to other home () Send Children to work
If Yes, Where? () local area () outside local area – specify where: ______What kind of work? ______
() Rely on Aid from Government / NGOs () Rely on Kinship and Zakat () ______
Other comments on response to EQ:
65 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 9 – EXPENSES
Identify the priority needs. How much does/did your EU pay for them every month, either cash or in- kind? (consider food, fuel, transport, labor, agri inputs, shelter, medical…) Expenditure per month (average) Needs (specify cash, exchange, own production, or zakat) NOW ONE YEAR AGO 1. Food
2.
3.
4.
5.
10 – FOOD & CONSUMPTION
How many meals does your household take each day, NOT including tea: NOW: ______Before EQ: ______
How often does/did the household take these foods? (never/yearly/monthly/weekly/daily) NOW 1 YEAR AGO How often? Specify if only some How often? Specify if only some members take members take Egg
Milk, lassi, yoghurt, raita Meat (specify type) Fruit & Nuts (specify type) Vegetables
SINCE THE EQ: 1. Since the earthquake has any household member: Reduced the amount of food eaten? () YES () NO Substituted for less quality food? () YES () NO
Explain:
2. Are you ever worried you will not be able to provide enough food for your household? () YES () NO How often? () every day () once every week () once a month
3. Have you faced shortages of certain foods? () YES () NO In which months? ______Which items? ______
4. Are members of your household sometimes faced with hunger? () YES () NO
66 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 How often? () every day () once every week () once a month
5. Does your food stock currently contain food aid items? () YES () NO
6. If you have cows or chickens, do you use the animal products (meat, milk, eggs) for household consumption? () YES () NO () N/A
7. How many days will your current food stock of atta, rice and/or maize cover your needs? ______
BEFORE EQ: 8. Were you ever worried you could not provide enough food for your household? () YES () NO How often? () every day () once every week () once a month () a few times a year
9. Have you faced shortages of certain foods? () YES () NO In which months? ______Which items? ______
10. Were members of your household sometimes faced with hunger? () YES () NO How often? () every day () once every week () once a month () a few times a year
11. If you had cows or chickens, did you use the animal products (meat, milk, eggs) for household consumption? () YES () NO () N/A
COMMENTS on food access & market prices:
11 – NEEDS & FUTURE STRATEGY
What are your needs, in order of importance? CURRENT URGENT NEEDS: FOR THE NEXT YEAR & AFTER: 6. 1.
7. 2.
8. 3.
9. 4.
10. 5.
(Consider agriculture and livestock needs, irrigation/drinking water needs, shelter needs, availability of work and if market prices are affordable)
What is this household’s strategy for the future? (consider plans for rebuilding, plans for migration, plans for livelihood…)
Final Observations
67 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006
6.5 Table of Interviews and Focus Groups Completed by Cluster
Table 35: Interviews and Focus Groups Completed by Cluster Male Female Population HH Cluster Ward Villages Focus Focus (HHs) Interviews Groups Groups Manoor Bishla, Munshian 1 Bishla 398 20 1 1 Valley Sehri
2 Rethar Kundian Kundian 56 21 1
3 Badal Gran Harian, Badal gran 320 20 1 1
4 Badal Gran Shikaran 200 19 1
5 Jabba Buttan 92 20 2
6 Jabba Dogan, Challi 80 29 2
7 Bunda Jabra 50 19 3
8 Sehri Chari 55 20 1 1
9 Sehri Biari 175 20 1 1
Jared 10 Jared Gran 115 20 1 1 Valley
11 Jared Sahri 50 20 1 1
12 Dhanu Gali 65 18 1 1
13 Dhanu Maneen 160 20 1 1
14 Nakia Dharian, Khatar 120 20 1
15 Nakia Nakiyan, Biari 135 20 1 1
16 Chelai Chalai 150 19 1 1
17 Chelai Khil, Thanger 85 19 1 1
18 Ochiri Buttan Bala 150 20 1
19 Ochiri Totan 60 19 1 1
20 Ochiri Ochiri, Ochiri Lower 130 21 1 1
TOTAL 404 24 13
68 ACTION AGAINST HUNGER – PAKISTAN Food Security Survey 2006 References
Food and Agriculture Organization, Pakistan. “Post-Earthquake Rapid Livelihoods Assessment”. FAO Livelihood Support Programme and Department of Agriculture Muzzaffarabad. November 2005.
Food and Agriculture Organization, Pakistan. “Pakistan Earthquake Second Rapid Livelihoods Assessment”. FAO Livelihood Support Programme and Department of Agriculture Muzzaffarabad. July 2006.
Overseas Development Institute. “Remittances in crises: a case study from Pakistan” by Abid Qaiyum Suleri and Kevin Savage. An HPG Background Paper. November 2006.
World Food Programme, Pakistan. “Rapid Food Security Assessment, March 2006”. Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (VAM) Unit. Islamabad, Pakistan.
World Food Programme and UNICEF. “Pakistan Earthquake: Joint WFP/UNICEF Rapid Emergency Food Security and Nutrition Assessment”. November 2005.
Map of ACF area of intervention and survey area
To Kaghan N KAMALBAN CHAPARH
0 1 km JAMAL MARJ
DHANO
.2832.8 MAHANDRI NALA
KUNHAR RIVER MANOOR VALLEY
DOHAR SHALAI
DADAR JARED NAKA
2718.0 NAKIAN
BELA TUTA
JABRI SINDHU SHINO BASTI TARLL
GANHAR OCHRI
NURI ZIARAT BUTTAN OCHRI KATHA To Balakot
JARED = WARD River DADAR = Mohalla Road Mahandri Union Council WARD border Track JARED area enlargement ACF base Mission PAKISTAN Sketch map based on a Pakistany Army Map 69