Rethinking principles of assessment in complex emergencies: the food economy alternative

When aid agencies respond to food needs in situations of chronic conflict and political instability (SCCPI), do they consider livelihoods carefully enough? How can they better analyse the effects of hazards on household access to food and income? Is it possible to increase communication between political economists and food security analysts?

A paper from the Overseas Development Institute describes how the food economy approach, bolstered by evidence from several African states, can link livelihood information to analysis of the effects of political, economic and social change on household access to food and cash income. It is adaptable to war and peace, town and country. The authors show how it can help determine appropriate targeting of relief and development interventions. Despite the difficulties, it is possible to conduct livelihoods assessments in situations of chronic insecurity.

In SCCPI, targeting relief is notoriously difficult. Lacking tools to include in their assessment the entire population of a geographic area or to make meaningful disaggregations amongst them, agencies resort to traditional categories of ‘vulnerable’ individuals (elderly, disabled, children, and so on). Rapid assessments may not reach the household level but simply ask officials how many people are affected. Agencies may not notice the unintended effects of targeting: the concept of ‘do no harm’ gets overtaken by pressure to ‘get the food delivered’.

Can the food economy approach do better? The authors argue that it is distinguished from other livelihood assessment approaches by its:

• quantification of food and cash income and cash expenditure into common ‘food equivalent’ units – thus making possible a comparative analysis of seemingly incomparable groups of people and geographic areas
• disaggregation according to common food economy zones – thus promoting appropriate targeting and enabling analysis of how different groups will be affected by the same set of shocks
• predictive analysis using scenarios based on changes in weather, policy, economy, conflict or other political events – thus enabling an earlier response
• ability to determine appropriate responses: in Mozambique it showed that food was not the best response and that developing markets, tackling HIV/AIDS and other development interventions was more appropriate
• ability to add detail of how poor people cope: in North Kivu in the Democratic Republic of Congo it revealed major livelihood differences amongst displaced people who were conventionally lumped together as a homogeneous group.

In Zimbabwe it was possible in a situation of severe political instability to establish an urban livelihood baseline to monitor the effects of macro-economic shocks on household access to food, cash income and such basic services as health and education. In Kenya the food economy approach to problems facing pastoralists changed relief assessments and allowed for the inclusion and incorporation of development messages in the findings and outputs.

The authors suggest that the new approach can get emergency and development planners working together. They recommend that food economy information should be used:

• not simply for its relief-related output, but also to provide post-conflict details on livelihood resources and goals
• to highlight areas at high risk of food insecurity in post-conflict situations and suggest starting points for community-level planning
• to co-ordinate information gathering and analysis, help build consensus around findings and conclusions and bring about more timely and informed decision-making.

 

Source(s):
‘Food Economy in Situations of Chronic Political Instability’ by Tanya Boudreau and Philippa Coutts, Working Paper 188, Livelihoods and Chronic Conflict Working Paper Series, Overseas Development Institute, December 2002. Pages 1-14 Full document.
Pages 15-37 Full document.

id21 Research Highlight: 1 August 2003

Further Information:
Overseas Development Institute
111 Westminster Bridge Road
London
SE1 7JD
UK

Tel: +1 717 677 6921 (Tanya) or +44 131 551 5701 (Pippa)
Fax: +1 717 677 6921 (Tanya)
Contact the contributor: tboudreau@blazenet.net

Contact the contributor: pippac@clara.co.uk

Overseas Development Institute, UK

Other related links:
'Famine in Ethiopia: is food aid the answer?'

'Freedom from hunger: how long must we wait?'

'Forever facing famine? Rethinking food insecurity in Africa'

'Food aid: how effective is it?'

'Highland Ethiopia: permanent basket-case?'

'World Bank and IMF agricultural reforms: contributing to famine?'