South Kordofan Interagency Rapid Food Security Assessment

1. South Kordofan Interagency Rapid Food Security Assessment Presentation of findings

2. Structure of the presentation • Assessment process • General findings • Who and how many are food insecure (and secure)? • Where are the food insecure? • Response options and recommendations

3. Sampling and methodology • Assessing food security of flood affected communities in South Kordofan • Flood impact: 34 communities (176, 881 persons) • Sampling universe reduced to 21 communities (84,761 persons) due to insecurity • Two stage random sampling (15 clusters and 20 households per cluster) • Total sample 300 households • Household and community questionnaires plus focus group discussions

4. Assessment process • Questionnaire design in Khartoum • Training of team leaders and enumerators in Kadugli • Two field teams • Two weeks of field work between 5 – 16 March • Data entry in Kadugli • Data analysis in Khartoum (quantitative and qualitative) • Presentation of findings in Kadugli and Khartoum

6. Participating Agencies and Authorities • WFP • HAC-SRRC • FAO • Norwegian Refugee Council • Save the Children US • Care International • State Ministry of Agriculture • SAAR • State Ministry of Health • RRR

7. Market findings

8. Prices and terms of trade • Average cereal prices • Cereal prices rose by 76% for sorghum and 47% for millet compared last year • Average livestock prices • Livestock prices dropped by 31% for cattle and 37% for sheep and goats compared to last year • Terms of Trade • Terms of trade for pastoralists and wage laborers has declined substantially since last year

9. Findings in the general population

10. Basic demographics

11. Resident groups • Most households are residents • Very few internally displaced persons and nomads sampled

12. Sex of household head • Almost one third of households are headed by women

13. Source of income • Half of households have only one source of cash income

14. Land ownership • Access to land is very high

15. Cereal production • Average cereal production dropped by almost 50 percent • Cereal is sorghum, millet and maize • Y axis measurement is kg/household member

16. 1TLU 10sheep 10goats = = = 1.25donkeys 1.25cattle 1horse 1camel = = = Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU)

17. Livestock ownership • Most households own no or little livestock • Mean tropical livestock unit: 1.51 • Thresholds:1) No or little: 0 - 0.5 TLU • 2) Medium: 0.5 - 2.5 TLU • 3) Large: 2.5 TLU -

18. Access to credit • A majority of households have no access to credit

19. Use of credit • Buying food is by far the most common use of credit

20. Remittances • About one out of five households receive remittances

21. Food shortage and coping • Eating less quantities and getting food on credit are the most common coping strategies

22. Short-term priorities • Food aid is the highest priority for most households, in the short run • Cash assistance is the second highest

23. Long-term priorities • Agricultural inputs is the most common priority, in the long run • Health services and cash assistance comes next

24. Food security

25. Key concepts • Food security Food security = Food consumption + Food access • Food consumption Seven day food consumption • Food access Absolute food expenditure Relative food expenditure Cereal production

26. Food consumption • Majority of households have acceptable food consumption • Thresholds: • 1) 0 - 21 (sorghum daily, pulses twice a week, vegetables once) • 2) 21 - 35 • 3) 35 -

27. Absolute food expenditure • Half of households have acceptable absolute expenditure on food • Thresholds: • 1) 0 – 2 SDG (median of the two bottom quintiles) • 2) 2 – 4.6 SDG (median of the distribution) • 3) 4.6 - Mean absolute food expenditure per capita: 6.7 SDG

28. Relative food expenditure • Almost a third of households spend more than half of their income on food • Thresholds: • 1) 0% - 50% • 2) 50% - 65% • 3) 65% - Mean relative food expenditure: 55%

29. Cereal production • The vast majority of households produce less than half of their requirement • Thresholds: • 1) 0 – 73 kg/person • 2) 73 - 146 kg/person • 3) 146 kg/person - Mean cereal production per capita: 38 kg/person

30. Food security Severely food insecure: 34,022 persons Moderately food insecure:44,490 persons Food secure:17,665 persons

31. Who are the food insecure?

32. Sex of household head • Food insecurity strongly associated with sex of household head • Members of women headed households are vulnerable

33. Cereal production • Dramatic harvest decline 2006-2007 • Decline in harvest hitting severely and moderately food insecure disproportionately

34. Livestock ownership • Food insecure households tend to hold less livestock

35. Food source • Food insecure households rely more on own production and less on the market for food.

36. Food shortage and coping • Severely food insecure households experience more food shortage • About 60% of severely food insecure households eat less than normal (or less preferred food)

37. Where are the food insecure? Zoning: highlands and lowlands

39. Food security • More severely food insecure live in the highlands • More food secure live in the lowlands

40. Sex of household head • More female headed households live in the highlands

41. Main income source – past 6 months • Non agricultural labour is dominant in the lowlands • Sale of firewood, charcoal and grass is important in both areas • Livestock sale is important for the highlands • Remittances are more important in the highlands

42. Cultivation • More households did not cultivate in the lowlands

43. Cereal production • Both areas produced less in 2007 compared to 2006 • Highlands produced less than lowlands in both agricultural seasons

44. Livestock ownership • Households in the highlands in average tend to own more livestock than households on the lowlands

45. Food source • Household in the highlands rely more on own production and from other sources • Household in the lowlands tend to rely mainly on the market • Lowlands’ economies tend to be more cash-based

46. Assets • Households in the lowlands tend to have in average more assets

47. Access to credit • Household in the highlands have less opportunities to access credit

48. Short-term priorities • Food aid for both areas nut higher for highlands • Cash assistance requested especially in the lowlands

49. Long-term priorities • Agricultural inputs felt as important • Drinking water in the highlands

50. Food aid • Households in the highlands tend to be recipient of food aid