1 / 21

CONCERN WORLDWIDE (MALAWI) F OOD A ND C ASH T RANSFER

CONCERN WORLDWIDE (MALAWI) F OOD A ND C ASH T RANSFER. MALAWI CONTEXT 2005-06. A small landlocked, densely populated country Dependant on small holder agriculture Distance from international markets limiting opportunities for diversification

phelan-franklin
Télécharger la présentation

CONCERN WORLDWIDE (MALAWI) F OOD A ND C ASH T RANSFER

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CONCERN WORLDWIDE (MALAWI)FOODANDCASHTRANSFER

  2. MALAWI CONTEXT 2005-06 • A small landlocked, densely populated country • Dependant on small holder agriculture • Distance from international markets limiting opportunities for diversification • Poor harvests in 2005 resulted in low income and high food prices • Over 5 million people at risk • Requiring 335,400MT

  3. PROGRAMME CONTEXT • A large food aid programme was planned and implemented • Concern undertook a rapid food security assessment • Destructive copping strategies • Rapidly escalating food prices • Low coverage of food aid • Urgent need for an intervention • Approximately 50% MFE

  4. CONCEPTUALISATION & DESIGN FACT Conceptualisation • Complemented emergency relief programme • Supported those not reached by other agencies • Covered “missing food entitlements” (50%) FACT Design • Beneficiaries = 5,050 households • Duration = 4 months: January–April • Strict financial controls: Zero leakages • Low–key cash handling: Low security risk.

  5. DESIGN FEATURES (1) Food + Cash: Why food? • 20kg maize + 4kg beans + 1 litre oil = 560 kcal = 25% of need • Sphere guidelines: 2,100 kcal; 10–12% protein; 17% fat • Protected food consumption against market failure Why cash? • Empowering: gives beneficiaries choices • Allows non–food needs to be met • More cost-effective than food • Potential catalyst effect on markets

  6. DESIGN FEATURES (2) Banding by household size: Band B (4–6 members): Average K 1,400 Band A (1–3 members): –75% K 350 Band C (7+ members): +75% K2,450

  7. DESIGN FEATURES (3) Cash transfers linked to market price: Month Cost of Total cost Change in ration (Euros) cost (%) January K 1,383 51,690 February K 1,705 66,459 + 29% March K 2,185 81,228 + 22% April K 1,306 48,261 – 41%

  8. TARGETING METHODOLOGY • Initial sensitisation with community leaders • Input into selection criteria • Group village community meeting • Sensitisation and selection • Selection undertaken with Triangulation methodology • 1000 targeted via HIV & HBC groups

  9. TARGETING CHALLENGES & ISSUES • Time constraint led to sub-contracting and non-application of triangulation • Multiple criteria led to some confusion and changes • Elite Capture by (71% headmen included) • Exclusion error of some of the most vulnerable

  10. DIRECT IMPACTS Food: • 80% consumed by the household • 20% shared, mostly with relatives • Very little food sold • Any surplus generally “saved”

  11. DIRECT IMPACTS Cash: • Consumption • Food purchases (maize, sometimes cassava) • Groceries (relish, salt, soap, paraffin) • Health care (hospital bills, medicines) • Food processing (maize milling) • Transport (hospital, market) • Investment • Agriculture (fertiliser, seeds) • Asset accumulation (goats, chickens) • Education (notebooks, pens, fees) • Access to land (rented or bought land)

  12. COPING STRATEGY INDEX (FHH)

  13. INDIRECT IMPACTS Agriculture: FACT beneficiaries did less ganyu so were able to work their own land Asset Protection: No need to sell assets Labour markets: Less ganyu by beneficiaries = more work opportunities for non–beneficiaries HIV: Reduced labour requirement = more time supporting the sick, also reduced risk of transmission

  14. MARKET EFFECTS • Very low impact • No sign of inflation • Also did not attract traders • Need to look more closely at this aspect in future

  15. SOCIAL EFFECTS (1) Intra Community Tensions: • Changes the relative wealth/power structure • Concern beneficiaries “included” and “excluded” • Some ethnic minorities excluded

  16. SOCIAL EFFECTS (2) Intra Household Tensions • Some men misused the cash; • To go drinking • Womanising • Women involved community leaders to be given position of the ration • This could lead to conflict and even violence • 77% of MHH discussed cash use with family

  17. APPROPRIATE? • 81 TO 83% of respondents preferred the food and cash mix. • 60 to 70% of the cash was spent on food • In FGDs beneficiaries noted the flexibility • Food was available for sale • Allowed for investment even during time of stress

  18. ADVOCACY • Demonstrated that can be achieved in an emergency i.e. rapid implementation • Modalities used applicable for social protection projects • Initially government sceptical; now involved in their own cash transfer • Has been used in to advocate for cash rather than food for current response

  19. UPTAKE • Great interest from donors, civil soc. And government Impediments: • Action and reaction of the market • Scaling up the modality • Lack of good info re: the demographic and social structures of villages

More Related