Karel Callens is Chief Technical Adviser and Elizabeth C. Phiri is National Project Coordinator for the Improving Household Food Security and Nutrition Project.
The Luapula Valley of northern Zambia has significant natural resources, and the main road cutting through the valley has attracted many people to the area. Of the population of 207 000, the majority of people live along the lake, the lagoon and the river (Figure 1).
Fishing is the principal economic activity, and agriculture is practised further inland. The diet of most households is based on two main staples: cassava and maize. As relish people consume fish in those areas with access to water resources and a limited number of less abundant and seasonally available food crops such as sweet potatoes, groundnuts, bambara nuts, cowpeas and beans as well as indigenous and other vegetables. Palm oil is also consumed in a few villages where oil-palm trees are found. When in season, indigenous and cultivated fruits such as wild loquat, mobola plum, papaya, orange and mango are also consumed. Until recently, national agricultural policies emphasized maize production to attain food security. Improvements in the production of other important food crops were neglected.
In the Luapula Valley, rates of chronic malnutrition and micronutrient deficiencies are unacceptably high. Preliminary results from two nutrition surveys carried out in the area in September 1997 and May 1998 indicated that about 65 percent of children under five years of age were stunted because of chronic protein-energy malnutrition, while 3.7 percent were wasted during the rainy season and 2.5 percent during the dry season as a result of acute malnutrition. According to a participatory rural appraisal carried out by the Zambian Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services and FAO in 1996, the underlying causes of nutritional vulnerability in the valley are related to the combined and synergistic effects of:
A number of critical factors affect household food insecurity, including:
Community support services such as agricultural extension, credit and marketing infrastructure were found to be inadequate. Households lacked sufficient sources of income. The population experienced serious labour and time constraints, which created difficulties especially for small households, households headed by a single adult and families with very ill or disabled members. Division of labour by gender was also a major problem, as women were responsible for almost all food production activities, apart from land clearing, in addition to their other household chores such as food processing and preparation and child care. These problems affected the households' ability to increase food production and to care adequately for the nutritionally vulnerable.
In April 1997, FAO in collaboration with the Government of Zambia began implementation of an integrated five-year project focusing on household food security and nutrition, with funding by the Belgian Survival Fund. The project aims to improve year-round access to a balanced diet that is adequate in energy, vitamin A, iron and other macro- and micronutrients. Within the Luapula Valley, the project's target area includes the Kawambwa, Mwense, Nchelenge and Chienge (formerly part of Nchelenge) districts.
The project's main objectives include:
The project follows a strategy of community action planning which is rooted in and sustained by the community itself (Figure 2). The community members fully participate in the planning process and take the lead in determining needs, identifying solutions, initiating actions and monitoring progress. The project facilitates this open-ended process and provides essential technical and other support services.
Individuals from the community who work in agricultural extension, health, community development and education have a direct responsibility in planning, implementation and monitoring along with other community members. They form Community Food and Nutrition (FAN) Teams which initiate, direct and monitor the community action planning exercise. The entire process is centred on three interrelated key issues:
The action planning process was initiated through an analysis of the food chain. First, the community identified major food crops and assessed their importance in the diet based on the people's local knowledge of food and nutrition. The group selected one or more food crops of major nutritional importance and looked at who did the various tasks involved in producing the food, who had access to and control over resources and how benefits were distributed among men and women. This exercise provided a good opportunity to discuss major food and nutrition problems and their causes from the perspectives of both the local people and the technical support services staff, including constraints related to the social, cultural and economic organization of the community. This naturally led to a discussion of what can be done to address the problems that have been identified, prioritizing of activities and the development of a plan of action. While this process is mainly a tool for participatory planning of project activities, it also provides a good vehicle for nutrition education and sensitization on gender issues.
Prior to any community meeting, the District Coordinator makes an appointment with the community leader and the community support staff to discuss the purpose of the gathering. The community leader is asked to mobilize the community, including men and women, old and young, poor and better off, and to organize the meeting at a time and location that will ensure that women may be able to participate. After this first meeting initiated by the project staff, the community may initiate consecutive meetings.
At the meeting, all participants introduce themselves (facilitator, community support staff and community members). The facilitator introduces the project and explains the purpose of the gathering. To stimulate participation, the facilitator asks community members what they know about the project, what their expectations are and what they understand by "good nutrition". (The answer to the last question almost always refers to having enough food.) Notes are made on flip charts for the group's reference, and everyone is encouraged to participate in the discussion. The facilitator refrains from interfering in the discussion or teaching, as a well-facilitated discussion will more naturally lead to the right conclusions.
To focus the discussion on nutrition, the facilitator asks the people to mention the ten most important crops they grow and to choose the main staple and relish from this list. The group then reviews the entire food cycle from production to consumption, also looking from a gender perspective at various responsibilities and at access to and control over resources and benefits. This leads to an identification of constraints in the food chain, including issues related to health, water, sanitation, care, knowledge, attitudes, practices and community organization, as most of these issues are interrelated. Through their own analysis and starting from their own perspective, participants realize that achieving good nutrition goes far beyond having enough food. As a result, a number of priority problems are identified and possible solutions formulated. At this stage, the first meeting ends and the group agrees on a follow-up meeting and agenda.
Further action planning focuses on the development of microprojects to address one or more of the key problems identified by the community. The planning involves further in-depth analysis of the specific problems and solutions to be addressed. The following are some key questions.
- What is the objective of the project?
- What activities will be undertaken?
- What is the expected impact on nutrition?
- Who takes responsibility for what and when?
- What resources are needed and how will these be mobilized?
- How can sustainability be ensured?
- What community organization is required?
At this stage, the people have often formed groups to mobilize resources and to implement the project. However, further regular meetings of the community at large are stimulated to maintain the momentum, monitor progress and evaluate the impact on nutrition and the vulnerable groups.
Many communities said that they lacked seeds and planting material of improved food crops. Insufficient amounts of energy- and protein-rich crops were major constraints to improving nutrition. Women in particular emphasized the need to know more about the utilization of nutritious crops such as food legumes and about the preparation of weaning foods. Some farmers did not have access to water for dry-season food production. Access to safer sources of drinking-water and improved pit latrines also figured as prominent needs. Teachers and parents mentioned the poor status of schools, lack of nutrition education material and the failure of school gardening initiatives because of lack of support and lack of community organization.
To address some of these priority problems, microprojects were planned and are being implemented by the communities. The microprojects include community-managed oil-palm nurseries, seed multiplication groups, farmer field schools, small-scale irrigation and dry-season vegetable gardening, school gardening in conjunction with nutrition education, and water user groups.
Based on the plans of action, the communities worked out microproject proposals which clearly and realistically stated the potential impact of the activities on nutrition, how the effects would be measured, activities and work schedules, budgets and the division of responsibilities. Through this process, each community came up with its own unique strategy in terms of activities and community organization.
As community action planning made farmers more aware of their nutrition problems, they showed interest in palm oil as a good source of dietary energy, beta-carotene (a precursor of vitamin A) and extra income. At present, oil-palm trees are only available in a few locations, mainly in the lagoon and lake areas. In general, each household's compound has one or two trees. The Dura type of oil-palm found in most villages produces small bunches of fruits with a thin layer of flesh that contains oil. Tree management is poor and is limited to harvesting bunches.
A main constraint to increasing production is the lack of improved planting material. Therefore the Tenera type of oil-palm was imported from Costa Rica. Since the minimum yield of a Tenera tree is three bunches of 10 kg each per year, a household with five trees could be ensured at least 30 litres of palm oil per year. Under optimal conditions a household could harvest 75 to 100 litres of palm oil, which would be sufficient for home consumption and would give extra income for the family.
Initially, the project established two pre-nursery sites to receive the imported oil-palm seeds. After four months, the seedlings were transferred to the 88 communities that had decided to grow oil-palms and had developed a microproject around this crop. Project staff, agricultural extension workers and district crop husbandry officers make regular visits to these communities for monitoring, continued sensitization on nutrition and community participation and training on oil-palm production, utilization and nutritional benefits.
The community groups (comprising both men and women) and individual farmers established their own nurseries with an average of 160 seedlings per group. Management of the community nurseries was discussed during a series of community meetings. The groups are composed of those community members that have a genuine interest in growing oil-palms and not only producing seedlings for sale. Farmers purchased the seedlings from the central pre-nurseries. It was emphasized by farmers in almost all communities that production of oil-palm trees should be carried out on an individual rather than group basis.
To diversify the local diets, the project suggested various foods such as groundnut, sunflower, soybean, sesame and bambara nut. The communities said they had no access to seeds and that some of the proposed food legumes had a bad taste after cooking. The bad taste was caused by inappropriate cooking practices that can be avoided. Thus, demonstrations in the preparation of legumes were held with men and women. Several communities organized one-day gatherings; community members brought various local food items from their homes and project staff brought seeds of soy, cowpea, pigeon pea and bambara nuts. These activities were used to create greater awareness of the nutritional benefits of food legumes, and agricultural extension staff took the opportunity to elaborate on crop management. Following the demonstrations, farmers realized the potential of food legumes for improving their diet and indicated that they were interested in growing these crops.
Initially, high-quality seeds had to be procured from specialized seed companies in the capital, Lusaka, or from research institutions. Consequently, community members decided to establish seed multiplication groups. The farmers are required to follow strictly the technical guidelines provided by the project staff in order to ensure the quality of the seeds. Each group member contributes cash or labour to purchase the seeds, according to the system created by the particular group.
Upon harvesting, the plot is divided into two classes of seed. The second-class seeds are for immediate consumption. The group stores half of the first-quality seeds for further multiplication during the next season. The other half of the first-quality seeds is distributed among the group members for production on their individual plots during the next season. In this way, the community always has high-quality seeds available for further production.
As part of the microproject, community members are trained in seed multiplication and crop production techniques. Training is held on-farm so that women can also participate, as they may not be able to attend residential courses because of their heavy workloads and existing social and cultural norms. The seed multiplication groups are regularly visited by project staff, agricultural extension workers and district crop husbandry officers.
Carlos Humaña
Carlos Humaña
The success or failure of the approach described above largely depends on the capabilities of the people involved in the project. Community support services are available at the provincial, district and community levels and the project currently works with more than 60 staff workers throughout the project area. However, their experience with grassroots community participation in assessment, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation is recent and limited. Farmers and community workers noted that existing extension services are often poorly equipped to address the needs of the farmers. Provision of support to the communities is mostly gender biased. Agricultural extension is often geared towards men, while health, family planning, sanitation and nutrition are commonly considered women's issues. Some of the service providers are also unmotivated because of inadequate resources, knowledge and opportunities.
The project's training programme has three main components:
The project's training programme attempts to reach members of the communities; staff from various community support organizations, including those dealing with agriculture, education, community development and health; and technical staff, district project coordinators and other collaborators.
The core training programme addresses conceptual and technical issues and helps community support staff and project collaborators develop their skills to assist the farmers in planning, implementation and monitoring of community action plans and microprojects. This programme ensures that all staff and community support workers use gender-aware and participatory approaches in all of their community work. Community support staff are also trained in subjects such as seed multiplication, low-input sustainable agricultural practices, food storage and processing, oil-palm cultivation and processing, microenterprise development, nutrition, water and health and sanitation education.
Through the farmer field school approach, farmers and extension workers exchange experiences and knowledge regarding issues arising from the microprojects. While subjects for discussion and training may be very technical, this forum also provides a good way for ensuring that nutrition, gender and participation are properly addressed. From the farmer field schools, community support staff are now able to inform project staff and collaborators about the true needs of the community, thus enabling adjustments in the core training programme and other project activities.
While project operations began little over a year ago, to date more than 100 communities have started microprojects and many more are ready to begin implementation. The attitudes of farmers and community service providers are gradually changing, with farmers reporting to grassroots community support services and even to district and provincial authorities about their accomplishments and needs. Where farmers used to be silent and indifferent to their situation, an active dialogue has now begun and people are taking action to improve their nutrition situation with the assistance of the community support services and the project.
Farmers have also made substantial progress in terms of awareness of nutrition problems and the adoption of integrated and sustainable solutions. During a recent independent monitoring visit to some of the project's target communities, farmers in Chibanga village (Kawambwa district) explained why they had purchased oil-palm seedlings and had started a nursery for growing green leafy vegetables. Their concern about the nutritional well-being of their children figured prominently among other reasons such as income generation and dietary preferences. They were also very eager to voice their opinion that food production alone was not enough and that they were willing to do more. In particular, the construction of a school to educate their children and the improvement of the road for better access to the rural health centre and the market for sale of their produce were considered priorities. Through the project, farmers and extension workers have come to understand that nutrition problems have many aspects and that they should think about solutions in an integrated manner.
For FAO and other development organizations, the project has provided a unique experience and a challenge to adopt similar integrated and participatory approaches in future projects. International organizations require project proposals outlining every objective, outcome, result and activity in much detail; however, the project strategy calls for the ability to respond on a daily basis to the needs and priorities identified by the communities. This requires flexibility in terms of project operations, technical support, communications and, not least, budget management. The experience so far has been positive, and the enthusiastic response of the farmers and the community support staff endorses the approach.