EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT IN RURAL AREAS OF TAJIKISTAN

1
EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT IN RURAL AREAS OF TAJIKISTAN

• JOINT WFP/FAO/UNICEF/GOVERNMENT
• FOOD SECURITY,
• LIVELIHOODS,
• AGRICULTURE AND
• NUTRITION
• APRIL/MAY 2008

2
METHOD (sampling)

• 4 steps
• Zoning 19 Zones
• Random selection of 1 jamoat in Zone
• Random selection of 6 villages in jamoat
• Random selection of 7 households in village

3
SOURCES and SAMPLE

• 113 Village Key Informants interviews
• 798 Household interviews
• 559 under-5 children measured
• 113 Village group discussions
• 126 local traders / shopkeepers interviews
• 295 Dekhan farm interviews
• Mix of private, family and collective farms

4
(No Transcript)
5
FOOD SECURITY SITUATION ANALYSIS

• 1) Contextual analysis
• Crops, livestock production
• Shops and markets
• 2) Food security situation
• Food consumption
• Food access
• 3) Coping strategies
• 4) Nutritional status of children under 5

6
SUMMARY FINDINGS CROP COMPARED TO 2007

• Wheat losses around 30 (Khatlon highest)
• Potato losses around 35 (Khatlon highest)
• Vegetables losses around 20, (Khatlon)
• Fruits/Vines losses around 40, (Khatlon)

7
LIVESTOCK LOSSES

• February/March 2008 rapid assessment indicated
• 2 loss in cattle,
• over 4 in sheep/goat,
• 5 in poultry and
• almost 3 in horses,
• many (increased) incidences of abortion
• as a result of severe cold
• MoA reports indicate higher losses

8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
VILLAGE SHOPS AND MARKETS

• Prices have increased since 2007
• At time of assessment, traders/shop-keepers
  reported 25 less sales
• More households are asking for credit
• Main difficulties
• high fuel/transportation costs
• high price of commodities at the source

11
HOUSEHOLD FOOD SECURITY SITUATION
12
FOOD SECURITY GROUPS

• Overall
• 12 severely food insecure (600,000 people)
• 22 moderately food insecure (1.1 million people)
• 66 food secure

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
COPING STRATEGIES

• Most households switched to less preferred/ less
  costly foods
• Most decreased amount of food consumed
• 25 severely food insecure households spent
  entire days without eating
• 33 have consumed seed stocks
• 15 increased animal sales
• 12 decreased agricultural inputs expenses
• 13 food insecure households have taken children
  out of school

16
NUTRITIONAL STATUS

• EFSA 2008 (small sample size)
• 4.7 acute malnutrition (wasting)
• 0.5 severe - 4.1 moderate
• 27.5 chronic malnutrition (stunting)
• 9.4 severe - 18.1 moderate
• MICS rural 2005 (different sampling, large sample
  size)
• 7.1 acute malnutrition
• 1.3 severe 5.8 moderate
• 27.3 chronic malnutrition
• 9.1 severe 18.3 moderate

17
Acute malnutrition by Region
18
CONCLUSIONS

• About 1.7 million rural people food insecure, of
  which 550,000 severely
• Main cause is poor food access
• low food self-sufficiency from own production
  even in normal times
• crop and livestock damages this year
• high market prices
• insufficient income

19
FORECAST 2008/2009

• Market prices expected to continue to rise
• Current harvest insufficient to recover from
  losses of seeds and sales of livestock
• Coping strategies already severe
• Health and nutritional status expected to
  deteriorate next winter

20
RESPONSE OPTIONS

• Objectives
• Protect nutritional status
• Protect and strengthen livelihoods
• 1) Direct food and income support
• Food aid to the severely food insecure
• Cash transfers / Vouchers
• Social protection assistance
• Nutritional and health programmes
• 2) Support to livelihoods
• Agricultural inputs and services
• School feeding
• Food and Cash-for-Work combined with agriculture
  and infrastructure development
• Micro-credit