Part I showed how shocks to livelihoods affect the nutrition security of households in different ways, depending on the type of threat and the household's capacity to deal with it. The links and mutual dependence between nutrition security and livelihoods provide the framework for an implementation strategy that not only focuses on saving lives in the short term, but also strengthens livelihoods to ensure that households are less vulnerable to food insecurity in the future. Adopting this approach reduces the dependency effects of relief aid. It requires efforts that look beyond the immediate relief needs of disaster-affected populations towards options for greater self-reliance. This strategy is underpinned by three elements:
Capacity building is designed to reinforce or create the strengths on which communities can draw to offset current and future vulnerability. Capacity building starts off by identifying and building on local coping strategies, resources, resourcefulness and capacity to organize mutual support to deal with crises. Almost all individuals and population groups in emergency situations have been traumatized, self-confidence has been undermined, and normal methods or channels of knowledge transfer have been disrupted. Capacity building is required to respond to the needs for:
Is capacity building appropriate in crisis situations?
Efforts to give capacity building more emphasis in relief and rehabilitation situations are often dismissed as being inappropriate for unstable environments, or only suitable as a development activity and not an emergency one. Capacity building initiatives are also seen as a threat to political neutrality in sensitive conflict situations. However, if existing strengths are overlooked or ignored and capacity building is not included among the required responses, there is more danger of duplicating and detracting from local efforts by setting up unsustainable parallel systems for service provision. External relief agencies will also encounter great difficulties in defining and implementing a transition or exit strategy when immediate relief needs have been met. Capacity building is an investment in the future and is of value in the long term, after a situation has been stabilized and displaced populations have returned home.
Capacity building at the local level is essential in order to protect existing positive coping strategies (e.g. breastfeeding practices, food sharing mechanisms, savings clubs) and promote the strengthening and diversification of livelihood activities that contribute towards nutritional well-being. In some situations, crises can act as a catalyst for more rapid social transformation in areas such as gender relations and human rights. However, changes can have both positive and negative impacts, and capacity building initiatives should at the very least "do no harm". In very unstable situations, external inputs may not reach the affected population groups, and increased organizational and technical skills for local people are likely to be of as great a benefit as any of the physical inputs provided.
How can capacity building be achieved?
A key strategy for strengthening capacity at the local level is the creation or reinforcement of those local-level groups that are already helping to reduce vulnerability in an emergency, or that have the potential to do so. Examples of such groups include faith-based groups, sports associations, neighbourhood groupings, women's groups, care and support groups for the vulnerable (children, people affected by HIV/AIDS, disabled people, orphans), farmers' cooperatives, savings and credit groups, water users' associations, and groups that cultivate gardens. It is important to identify how individuals relate to each other, and how people relate to institutions. This will help in assessing whether and how existing local structures and processes can contribute towards capacity building.
At the national level, actions that support and reinforce local-level efforts include the training of national and government staff in needs assessment and household food security and nutrition data analysis. Policy-makers need to be guided on how to use the information so that they can address nutritional constraints through appropriate policies, which are incorporated into national reconstruction planning. Efforts to increase preparedness for future disasters could include training people in the technical or management/administrative skills that are necessary in an emergency. This is especially important if many educated people have already left the country or been killed. Refugees who have returned to their homes may be a valuable resource, as they will have acquired skills during their time away.
Capacity building also requires the strengthening of intersectoral coordination and collaboration. In situations where State structures are weak or non-existent, capacity building has to help reduce institutional vulnerability. An intersectoral coordination mechanism for food security activities can also play an important role in addressing institutional vulnerability.
The objective of a capacity building strategy is to address the priority issues for training in order to:
enable communities and local institutions to become actively involved in assessing, designing, planning and implementing interventions aimed at protecting and promoting good nutrition;
enable reinforcing and complementary interventions at different levels - individual, household, community, national - and across different sectors.
The strategy should identify priority training needs. It should define: who will be trained at different levels (community, local, national), what training will be provided, the training delivery mechanisms, and the resources and budgets needed, as well as how these will be sourced. The strategy should provide a framework for capacity building activities that interlock both vertically (at different levels) and horizontally (across different sectors). The design of the strategy should be based on the findings of an institutional analysis and a food and nutrition situation analysis.
Identifying institutional capacity and requirements
Institutional analysis will identify those formal and informal institutions that are involved in nutrition and household food security activities. The local population should be asked to describe which institutions are most important to them, and why. Box 16 provides an example of the network of institutional relationships in Angola.
Box 16: Institutional analysis in Angola
|
"The way institutions are implanted in the new place and the attention they give to displaced people influence the process of adaptation to the living and working conditions in the new environment. Displaced people face problems satisfying their basic needs: lack of water, food, and clothing; access to health services...". "Frequently, local initiatives by communities to resolve these problems conflict with the State's institutional culture. A range of different organizations take the central roles in these: so-called 'commissions' normally formed on the initiative of NGOs; various interest groups; churches; more rarely (and only in some places) the private sector; and institutions linked to 'traditional' leadership." "For the interviewees, the nearest figure of authority is their head of family - normally their father or oldest brother. Next comes the 'soba' (traditional leader). The State is in the last place. Most displaced people struggle to understand what the different institutions stand for, and how they are interrelated. The State institutions themselves have difficulty in clearly defining the limits or each institution's power. There is also confusion in people's minds between the State hierarchy and the position of the party committee." |
Source: Filomena Andrade. A life of improvization! - Displaced people in Malanje and Benguela. In Robson, 2001.
In seeking out institutions, it should be recognized that pre-existing State and formal institutions may have collapsed, or exist only partially (e.g. administrative-political structures may have disappeared, but subnational technical departments continue). In a changed or changing situation, informal institutions may still exist, or may be new and evolving.
An institutional analysis focuses on the roles and responsibilities of different institutions (particularly women's organizations) in protecting and promoting good nutrition. It should include information on:
whether the institution is single- or multisector focused;
how it incorporates cross-cutting issues, such as gender and HIV/AIDS;
how effectively it networks with government departments, NGOs, local groups and the private sector;
what technical backstopping support it can draw on from other institutions;
the origins and funding bases of local NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs), in order to understand how potential capacity building actions could affect local power relations;
individuals with knowledge, experience, skills and motivation to work towards improving nutritional well-being.
A food and nutrition situation analysis (see Part III) identifies the factors that affect current and future food and nutrition insecurity, together with the opportunities for strengthening coping mechanisms and reducing vulnerability for different livelihood groups. Analysing this information helps to identify the priority actions that are needed to strengthen coping mechanisms, increase knowledge and skills and reduce vulnerability.
Box 17 gives examples of training for capacity building skills, and provides ideas for food security and nutrition technical content that is relevant to crisis situations.
Box 17: Capacity building for food security and nutrition
|
Options for capacity building skills:
Options for technical training content:
|
Training and capacity building needs assessment
On the basis of the institutional analysis and the identification of key individuals, it should be possible to decide which of the formal and informal institutions and types of individuals have the most potential for working with communities on their priority actions. The organizations or individuals selected should have access to the affected population and be able to offer assistance in a fair and efficient way. For each organization, it is then necessary to assess its:
This information will assist in analysing the gaps and needs for training and capacity building.
Stakeholder workshop
The objectives of a stakeholder workshop are to raise awareness about the need for capacity building regarding nutrition and food security, to discuss the main findings from the assessments, and to identify priority areas for capacity building and training.
Training-of-trainers course
Implementation of the capacity building strategy could start with a training-of-trainers course for participants from different institutions, sectors and/or geographical areas. The new trainers can then continue the training process by developing both facilitation skills and nutrition and food security knowledge in teams, working at the district and local levels. The training approach or mechanism depends on the technical content of the training, the target group, the security situation and the level (local, national, etc.). Box 18 gives some examples of training modalities or approaches for capacity building skills.
Box 18: Different training approaches and modalities in crisis situations
Location and channels
|
Budgets
Budgets for capacity building and training should be flexible in order to respond to new training needs as they arise. In addition to the need for training and knowledge, there is also a need to facilitate an appropriate working context, including the necessary financial and material resources.
Monitoring
Capacity building strategies should be designed in ways that make it possible to learn from successes and failures during implementation. For this, it is necessary that participants evaluate each training event. There is also a need to identify indicators that monitor whether participants are using newly acquired skills and knowledge in their work, and whether the relevant institutions are able to absorb and utilize fully the new expertise that is available to them.
A capacity building strategy and the dual approach of addressing both the immediate and the long-term elements of vulnerability to food and nutrition insecurity require very effective coordination mechanisms and partnerships. Organizational specializations and internal institutional structures can constrain multisectoral activities and/or the smooth transition between relief and development activities.
Developing a common framework
Intersectoral collaboration can be promoted through the use of a common nutrition and livelihoods framework. This can help to incorporate the perspectives and contributions of different sectors' interests, and illustrate the linkages between immediate and longer-term threats to food and nutrition security.
Fostering partnerships and networking for food security and nutrition
Organizational capacity and partnerships are key to supporting local-level initiatives to improve nutritional well-being. No one government department or organization can be an expert in all fields, and there is a clear need for partnerships that are based on the core competencies and comparative advantages of the different partners. Multisectoral coordination and partnerships need to work vertically (i.e. at the local, regional and national levels), as well as horizontally. Flexibility should be encouraged so that professionals can move between and work in different situations and organizations. This can be achieved through twinning (e.g. local and international NGOs) and secondment arrangements from government departments to organizations. It must also be supported by appropriate training that reflects the need to move between relief and development scenarios.
Effective collaboration can lead to the pooling of resources, minimize the duplication or overlapping of activities, and help projects or interventions to complement each other more effectively.
Identifying a focal point for nutrition
For good collaboration and coordination it is necessary to have a clear focal point that is responsible for coordinating nutrition and nutrition-related activities. If there is no single focal point for nutrition, responsibility falls between the agriculture and health sectors, and is often overlooked. Government agencies (both central and local) have a key role to play in coordinating and implementing nutrition activities in crisis situations. A government focal point or institution for nutrition activities might already exist; however, when an emergency is declared this focal point's mandate and functions may need to be reviewed in relation to those of other institutions. Government departments and personnel have a long-term understanding and in-depth knowledge of geographical areas, population groups and problems. This perspective can provide coherence to coordination efforts during a crisis, and continuity and sustainability in the post-crisis context.
In emergencies, formal institutional mechanisms or structures may have deteriorated or be struggling to manage increased demands on time, personnel and resources. In some cases, a more informal coordination mechanism or a strong partnership approach can provide the flexibility that makes it possible to support and strengthen the capacity of evolving local structures. Such an informal mechanism could take the form of a committee or structure that brings together representatives of the different interested ministries, local authorities, multilateral agencies, NGOs and CBOs.
The activities of a nutrition focal point or coordinating body could include information sharing and advocacy, preparing regular overviews of the food and nutrition situation, identifying information gaps, coordinating the implementation of interventions that add value and increase the impact of individual ministries and organizations, disseminating standards, norms and examples of best practice (e.g. standard methodologies for nutrition surveys, norms for supplementary and therapeutic feeding programmes, standard content for seed packages, and payback mechanisms), and monitoring the implementation of a capacity building strategy.
Intersectoral coordination mechanisms and active partnerships can evolve into formal or informal support networks for household food security and nutrition. These can raise awareness or promote advocacy among policy-makers, planners and donors about issues and activities regarding the food and nutrition situation in vulnerable areas and among vulnerable population groups.
Box 19 provides some examples of inter-institutional collaboration and coordination.
Box 19: Examples of inter-institutional collaboration and coordination
Individuals from the UN or NGOs can work as the coordinators of activities. For example:
Among these coordinators' activities is setting up teams to make the best use of accumulated knowledge, for example, that of people who were working for government departments and NGOs before a war. |
Opportunities in crisis situations include contributing to capacity building, promoting intersectoral collaboration and increasing local-level participation. This section outlines these opportunities and presents some of the ongoing debates regarding the response to crisis situations.
Ensuring common principles for involvement
Relief workers and development workers often apply two different value systems in their work. On one hand, humanitarian aid is guided by the principles of neutrality (i.e. not taking sides in a conflict) and impartiality (i.e. distributing relief goods on the basis of need, regardless of political, religious and ethnic affiliations). On the other hand, development approaches are directed towards empowering vulnerable groups through participation and capacity building.
In complex political emergencies, where both neutrality and impartiality may be under considerable pressure, there may be difficulties in applying these values. The following are some examples of these difficulties:
The "impartial and neutral" provision of relief goods through the humanitarian wing of an opposition group may release funds that are then spent on rearming and military manoeuvres.
The creation or rehabilitation of physical assets (e.g. water points) may attract warring factions.
The distribution of seeds and tools to support agricultural rehabilitation can lead to the looting of crops at harvest time or the implementation of a scorched earth policy.
A participatory approach may unwittingly strengthen the better off at the expense of the poor.
A partnership with a local NGO may lead to ethnic or religious biases in the implementation of interventions.
The consultative structures that are created may be perceived as unrepresentative and externally imposed.
This can create tensions between humanitarian assistance and development programming. However, the growing tendency to integrate humanitarian assistance with the protection and promotion of human rights can provide the basis for actions that address both the immediate and the long-term food and nutrition needs in a coherent way. This calls for an in-depth situation analysis and needs assessment that incorporate an understanding of political and power relations and security conditions. This can then form the basis from which to determine whether a developmental relief approach is ethical, appropriate and feasible. Box 20 shows an example from southern Sudan.
Box 20: Assessing conditions for transition in southern Sudan
|
In southern Sudan the following conditions were proposed as ways of helping to assess a transition situation:
|
Source: Macrae et al., 1997.
Ensuring the right of access to adequate food at all times
A developmental approach to relief assistance is frequently justified by the desire to avoid making beneficiaries dependent and the concern to ensure that interventions are sustainable. However, this approach is often adopted in preparation for an exit strategy when funds for relief assistance are of limited or declining availability. The initiation of longer-term interventions that aim to support strengthened livelihoods cannot be used to justify the cutting of basic entitlements to food and health care. This may result in severe anti-humanitarian consequences on the well-being of affected population groups. A rights-based approach can ensure that access to adequate food is upheld at all times.
Creating and strengthening institutional memory
High staff turnover, particularly in international NGOs, can contribute to poor institutional memory and failure to act on lessons learned in previous situations. A review of staff profiles and staff training requirements can highlight the need to broaden the disciplinary base (e.g. by adding group facilitation and communication skills). Training could be provided to strengthen and encourage intersectoral work and the flexibility to work under different scenarios.
Advocating for donor and government commitment
Development programmes aimed at rehabilitating social and production infrastructure and systems require high levels of investment and adequate public financing to cover recurrent costs. Donor funds are normally categorized for either relief or development objectives, and subject to regulations regarding the type and duration of activities that can be supported. In relief situations, it is important to react, and to be seen to act quickly. Planning and funding horizons are short-term, and implementing agencies are acutely conscious of accountability to donors and the fundraising public. There is less concern about accountability to the affected populations and communities. Advocacy and the lobbying of national governments and donors are required to ensure that there is political commitment to release funds that support activities with a long-term perspective in emergencies.
Feurerstein, M.-T. 1993. Partners in evaluation. Evaluating development and community programmes with participants. TALC. Macmillan.
FAO. 1993. Guidelines for participatory nutrition projects. Rome.
FAO. 2000. Guidelines for national FIVIMS. Background and principles. The Inter- Agency Working Group on Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information Mapping Systems (IAWG-FIVIMS). IAWG Guidelines Series No. 1. Rome.
FAO. 2001. Handbook for defining and setting up a food security information and early warning systems (FSIEWS). FAO Agricultural Policy and Economic Development Series No. 6. Rome.
Frankenberger, T.R. 2001. The role of non-governmental organisations in promoting nutrition and public health. 17th International Congress of Nutrition. Vienna.
IDS. 1991. Early warning in the Sahel and Horn of Africa: The state of the art. A review of the literature. Vol. 1, by S. Davies, M. Buchanan-Smith and R. Lambert. Research Report No. 20. Brighton, UK, Institute of Development Studies (IDS).
Lautze, S. & Hammock, J. 1997. Coping with crisis: capacity building, coping mechanisms and dependency, linking relief and development. New York, Department of Humanitarian Affairs, UN.
Macrae, J., Jaspars, S., Duffield, M., Bardbury, M. & Johnson, D. 1997. Conflict, the continuum and chronic emergencies: a critical analysis of the scope for linking relief, rehabilitation and development planning in Sudan. Disasters, 21(3): 223-243. Oxford, UK, Blackwell.
Marsden, D. & Oakley, P. 1990. Evaluating social development projects. Development Guidelines No. 5. Oxford, UK, Oxfam.
Maxwell, D. & Watkins, B. 2003. Humanitarian information systems and emergencies in the Greater Horn of Africa: logical components and logical linkages. Disasters, 27(1): 72-90.
Pirotte, C, Husson, B. & Grunewald, F. (eds). 1999. Responding to emergencies and fostering development. The dilemmas of humanitarian aid. London and New York, Zed Books.
SADC-FANR. 2000. High-Level Vulnerability Assessment Technical Consultation. Zimbabwe.
Technical briefs (Part VI)
Brief 3 provides guidance on using participatory tools in household food security and nutrition assessments in crisis situations.
Woman going to market
FAO/24051/D. Mincohn
