5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Present status and lessons learnt

The workshop identified a number of positive outcomes in the rehabilitation process as indicated in the country presentations that have strongly influenced the process of returning the agricultural sector back to some normalcy. However, there are weaknesses that have been identified and were discussed. A synopsis of these factors is presented below:

• It was generally agreed that within the overall rehabilitation process, less attention had been paid towards the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector. This may in part have been due to priorities and the relatively limited physical impact that the tsunami had on this sector when compared to the overall damage sustained. The importance of this sector on the livelihoods of significant numbers of people and the external impact of a functional agricultural sector on the economy were thought to be legitimate arguments for raising the profile of this sector.
• From a socio-economic perspective there is very little data available that would allow a comprehensive assessment of the impact of the rehabilitation efforts on communities and their livelihoods. In a number of cases victims of the tsunami are still housed in Internally Displaced Person (IDP) camps and are dependent on distributed aid. This dependence on aid is a concern to authorities in that it effectively hinders the process of transition between aid dependence and independent livelihood strategies for returning communities and individuals.
• There is still considerable infrastructure rehabilitation that is required before fully functional agricultural pursuits can be implemented. This factor was considered as a hindrance to the initiation of agricultural endeavours in some areas.
• The effect of the tsunami on extension services and related knowledge-based agencies was enormous. Shortly after the tsunami, individuals in the country with the required skills to offer assistance were reluctant to work in affected areas due to fear of further tremors and possible injury. There is a dire need for capacity building in this area and the development and implementation of effective technology transfer strategies to facilitate the re-establishment of new and improved farming systems.
• Weak coordination amongst a range of stakeholders active in the rehabilitation process was identified as a factor impacting on progress towards normalizing agriculture except in a few places such as Nagapattinam (India).
• Soil salinity is recognized as a significant problem in the affected areas, although there has been noteworthy progress with respect to its mitigation. This has largely been due to the positive impact of natural rainfall on leaching/flushing salts from the effective root zone. However, there is a need to continue monitoring this process as there is evidence to suggest that sodicity and crop nutritional imbalances are posing a problem in some areas of Indonesia.
• Not enough attention has been paid to the empowerment of farmer organizations and self-help groups in building coherent communities and enabling community members to revive their communities and build capabilities to undertake the recovery process with community participation.
• The provision of inputs to farmers as they return to agriculture has not been well organized/ coordinated and in some cases sufficient materials were not made available and/or there has not been any follow-up in the supply of further assistance after the initial input.

Some of the lessons learnt in this process were identified as follows:

• Overlapping of programmes, inputs and beneficiaries was clearly evident in some areas.
• There is a need to utilize/work through local institutions in effecting input distribution and rehabilitation efforts.
• Difficulties in the assessment of the extent of damage and poor coordination between actors resulted in challenges associated with targeting immediate response initiatives. There is still a problem of reliability of data and poor coordination between different parties and data sharing.
• Lack of local expertise and support, and consequently a dependency on outside assistance.
• Difficulties in finding a reliable supplier/implementing partners in the affected areas and within the countries.
• The slow pace of the recovery process is attributed to the complexity of the problem that not only addresses the physical agricultural issue associated with the impact of the wave but also the socio-economic parameters. These two components are inseparably linked.
• A lack of information, feedback and appropriate timeframes were experienced. For example, poor data management resulted in inconsistencies between data sets collected on the same parameters.
• In general, there was a lack of a strategic vision for agriculture, this being exacerbated by the paucity of technological interventions or mixed and confusing approaches to address the prevailing complex situation.

Recommendations as to how to move forward in the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector were made. These included:

• A concerted effort in building capacity at all levels from farmers through to institutions. This should be undertaken within a planned timeframe.
• The establishment of some pilot projects that address the issues confronting the return of affected lands to full production that would incorporate elements of monitoring and evaluation.
• Strengthening of empowerment processes among farmer organizations.
• Development of data processing capacity and interpretation within government institutions that would enable sound future planning.

Strategies effecting the overall development of a sustainable agricultural sector were deemed to include:

• A systematic recovery process should be implemented. This would require a greater degree of cooperation between all parties.
• Monitoring of feedback and follow-up activities.
• Improvement of service capacity and identification of service providers and beneficiaries for the long term.
• Sustainable solutions should include vulnerability reduction of people dependent on agriculture, risk transfer and disaster preparedness.
• Income generation through integrated agriculture systems, agribusiness and agro-industry.
• Marketing network arrangement and provision of market information.

General comments

Agriculture did not receive the priority it should have been afforded. There were several reasons for this, including:

• In the aftermath of the tsunami the focus by most aid agencies and donors was on the physical damage caused to infrastructure that was most visible. This was at the expense of a somewhat less visible, but equally important, agriculture sector.
• The logistics of moving large quantities of inputs (i.e. seed, fertilizer) required to re-establish agriculture was seem as a further hurdle to overcome in the process of rehabilitating the sector.
• The availability of technical experts and individuals who were prepared to go to affected areas limited progress.
• The initial focus on rehabilitation was on salinity and the reclamation of salt-affected lands at the expense of livelihoods.
• It is impossible to implement an agricultural project within the time frame that donors and aid agencies work within. In general it takes between three and five years to implement a successful agricultural programme. Hence there is a need to educate donors and aid agencies on the benefits of investing for the long term.
• There is a need to focus on an integrated approach to natural resources management of which agriculture is just one of the components.
• Our ability to quantify the extent of damage and the long-term impacts on livelihoods was not well articulated to donors, except in a few places such as Nagapattinam (India). There is a need to address this.

There is a need to strengthen the coordination function at the operational level. Several NGOs established partnerships without local government consultation, making the coordination process extremely difficult. Along with this there is a need to strengthen the acquisition, assessment and evaluation of data within the national governments in order to target more specific interventions. This could be facilitated by appointing a single body within the government as a central hub/depository of information. In addition, there is a need to strengthen the capacity with such organizations in data evaluation and interpretation.

In some cases there was inequity in compensation payouts to farmers that caused considerable dissatisfaction. In this respect, farmers that leased land in India were not eligible for compensation packages or assistance, but some farmers received coverage through the efforts of NGOs.

There is a need for designing rehabilitation activities to suit the specific location and circumstances that prevail in the different countries affected by the tsunami.

Farm labourers who were dependent on the agricultural sector for their livelihoods seem to have been neglected in the overall approach to re-establishing the agricultural sector. There is a need to consider the plight of this sector of the community.

Challenges that are posed over the long term were discussed and identified as follows:

• The problems associated with heavily damaged/impacted agricultural areas has, to date, been avoided. There is a need to now consider approaches and interventions that would address these more difficult or recalcitrant affected areas.
• Technology transfer and capacity building is required at all levels.
• High unemployment rates in tsunami affected areas needs addressing. The agricultural sector may assist in providing job opportunities, particularly where there may be significant changes in this sector, i.e. establishment of plantation crops.
• Keeping the momentum with donors and other stakeholders.
• There are policy restrictions in some cases that are hindering the rehabilitation process. These need to be addressed.
• Acknowledgement of the role of traditional agricultural systems in the rehabilitation process and its incorporation into such programmes needs to be recognized.

Priorities for long-term rehabilitation and development

The overarching priorities for long-term rehabilitation and development need to incorporate these four elements:

• Integrated coastal area management plans: All countries affected by the tsunami are encouraged to develop policies and strategies to incorporate coastal buffer zones. This would include the establishment of Green Belts. Further, the concept of a coastal management plan would incorporate coastal water management; waste management; sustainable livelihoods development; research and information sharing; and the mainstreaming of traditional knowledge into development plans.
• Mainstreaming disaster management into national planning and strategies: The events of 26 December clearly demonstrate an inadequacy within this area that needs urgent addressing when developing medium- and long-terms plans in the rehabilitation process.
• Development of an effective monitoring and evaluation system: To facilitate the process of ongoing learning, there is a need for monitoring and evaluation in order to adjust plans and strategies as progress in the implementation of rehabilitation programmes takes effect.
• Long-term priorities in meeting rehabilitation of the agricultural sector: The overall long-term goal in the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector is to build a better and more robust agriculture that is environmentally sustainable. In order to achieve this, four key criteria need to be addressed. These include the following:
1. Address land use and land tenure issues: Land use changes are inevitable with the redevelopment of these coastal areas. This includes the re-zoning of land for specific purposes that may not coincide with that prior to the tsunami, i.e. establishment of Green Belts. Hence there is a need for effective planning and consultation at all levels to effect these changes in land use. In addition, issues over land tenure and rights need to be resolved.
2. Capacity building: There is a need for ongoing and long-term commitment to capacity building at all levels, i.e. from farmers to institutions. The tsunami had a devastating impact on human resources that will take considerable resources and time to reinstate.
3. Holistic approach to agricultural development: In order to effect the development of the agricultural sector that will meet the aforementioned criteria, there is a need to develop agribusinesses that incorporate micro-credit schemes, focus on markets and market development, and promote the development of agricultural enterprises, such as livestock, in areas that may not have undertaken such activities in the past. There is a need to revitalize the sector and the concept of agribusiness where seen as a possible mechanism that could incorporate the active participation of governments and the private sector in the rehabilitation process. It is important that social equity and gender sensitivity be given high priority in this process.
4. Support to state-of-the-art and traditional agricultural technologies: The development of a revitalized agricultural sector should be framed within the context of introducing new and innovative technologies along with the incorporation of traditional practices. In the latter case there are numerous examples of traditional agriculture practices that would assist in the rehabilitation process as well as enhance the productivity of these changed agricultural environments. For example, traditional or commonly grown crop and vegetable varieties that are suited to saline soil conditions should be promoted and encouraged.

Medium-term priorities and strategies

In order to achieve the long-term objectives for the agricultural sector, there is a need to address some immediate constraints. These constraints are outlined below:

• Land rights - securing land rights and titles for individuals would facilitate the initiation of farming activities in some areas.
• Infrastructure development and rehabilitation - there is still considerable restoration work to be completed that includes the construction and rehabilitation of rural roads, building of dykes and the construction of markets, to name a few.
• Irrigation and drainage - the rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage canals would facilitate the reclamation of tsunami affected lands and water bodies.
• Alternative crops and the breeding of salt tolerant varieties.
• Ecosystem management - covering soil erosion control and management and incorporating a holistic approach to managing watersheds.
• Capacity building.
• Research, development and information sharing - documentation and data collection of the impact on and recovery of tsunami affected agriculture and ecosystems, with a strong focus on sustainable livelihoods development.
• Facilitating upstream-downstream linkages that incorporate local knowledge into planning and encouraging greater participation of all actors including local community groups.
• Development of sustainable livelihoods - the focus would be on the development of income generating activities, micro-credit schemes, establishing market chain linkages, and community empowerment.
• Development of an effective monitoring and evaluation systems.
• Ensuring a smooth transition of affected individuals from the emergency phase to the mid-term rehabilitation phase with a focus on agricultural livelihood activities.
• Agricultural development - this includes the production and distribution of seed and planting materials; crop diversification that includes or incorporates cash cropping options; plant protection; livestock; and improved agricultural practices that incorporate local knowledge.

In order to achieve these outcomes, there is a need to put into place policies and a legal framework governing the management of coastal buffer zones.

Mechanisms for coordination and exchange of information

Several issues were identified and recommendations in overcoming these impediments were suggested. The issues highlighted were as follows:

• Full-fledged coordination mechanisms for disaster events such as the tsunami were not in place prior to the event. The lack of an overarching coordination body in each of the affected countries negatively impacted upon the initial relief efforts. Coordination has predominantly been on a sectorial basis with some sectors performing this role effectively. Coordination is not mandatory and hence even though an organization may require registration with the government there is no mechanism or requirement for the organization to coordinate its activities with other stakeholders. In addition, cross-sectorial activities often escape coordination. In order to overcome this limitation there is a need to establish a permanent disaster management and coordination authority (which is in process in a few countries) in each of the countries whose role would be to take charge of the coordination of relief/aid during disasters. In this respect it would be mandatory for all international and national NGOs to sign a memorandum of understanding with the coordination body. This would assist in the coordination efforts and assist in the regulation of these actors. Experience had shown that some NGOs were unscrupulous in their activities and hence by making registration compulsory the coordination body would be in a position to regulate and assess their activities thereby "black marking" organizations that did not meet specific criteria in their relief efforts.
• Coordination needs to be decentralized. For effective coordination to occur there is a need to decentralize the coordination effort down to the district/local level. This will require the establishment of such bodies that will facilitate an effective communications linkage between the community at the lowest level and top level decision-makers at the highest level.
• Lack of capacity and leadership to coordinate. There is a need to strengthen the capacity of coordination bodies to effectively manage such disasters as the tsunami. In addition, it was clearly evident during the initial stages of the relief effort that there was a lack of leadership and authority to make decisions at various levels. There is a need to strengthen leadership skills and devolve the decision-making process to lower levels in the chain of command.
• Coordination is not mandatory. To date there is no requirement for relief organizations to coordinate their activities with other stakeholders. It was recommended that it should become mandatory for all organizations to coordinate their activities through a single national disaster management and coordination authority.