GECAFS IGB Basin Focal Project Grant Meeting-2 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 29
About This Presentation
Title:

GECAFS IGB Basin Focal Project Grant Meeting-2

Description:

GECAFS IGB Basin Focal Project Grant Meeting-2 Kathmandu, Nepal 27-28 June 2006 Meeting Objectives Presentation and review of food system descriptions for five IGB ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:135
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 30
Provided by: pollyer
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: GECAFS IGB Basin Focal Project Grant Meeting-2


1
GECAFS IGB Basin Focal Project Grant Meeting-2
  • Kathmandu, Nepal
  • 27-28 June 2006

2
Meeting Objectives
  • Presentation and review of food system
    descriptions for five IGB sites
  • Preliminary evaluation of food system
    vulnerability to water stresses (and GEC)
  • Discussion of generic and regional conclusions
  • Outline and begin report to CPWF BFP management,
    end July 2006

3
Overview of GECAFS BFP grant
  • Challenge Program for Water and Food
  • Basin Focal Projects designed to (i) provide an
    integrated framework for assessing the
    relationships among water and poverty at a basin
    scale
  • (ii) help develop appropriate interventions to
    alleviate poverty and vulnerability to
    water-related stress or problems.

4
GECAFS Objectives- BFP grant
  1. Improve understanding of vulnerability of food
    systems to the stresses induced by GEC
  2. Document food systems and analyze interactions w/
    water stress and management
  3. Develop methodology for basin-scale analysis
    based on five diverse case studies

5
BFP grant outputs
  • 1.1 Literature review
  • 1.2 conceptual framework
  • 2.1 five case studies
  • 3.1 analysis of diversity across regional sites
  • Two regional workshops December 2005, June 2006

6
BFP grant - deliverables
  • October 2006 site descriptions GECAFS
    participation in BFP method meeting in China
  • November 2005 (delayed) Literature review
  • February 2006 mid-term report
  • August 2006 final report

7
GECAFS Research Sites in the IGP
Ludihana, Central Punjab, India wheat and rice
predominate, slow to stagnant productivity
growth, groundwater dependent, lots of
investment, high income levels, functional policy
support.
Ruhani Basin, Terai of Nepal rice preferred,
transition zone, seasonal flooding,
out-migration, sharecropping dominates,
urbanization increasing.
Gujarat, Punjab, Pakistan wheat dominates,
food self-sufficient, mixed irrigation, high
level of infrastructure, moderate income,
policies function somewhat.
Greater Faridpur, Bangladesh rice dominates,
flooding and concern over salt water intrusion,
low income levels, government institutions fail.
Vaisahali District, Bihar, India rice
preferred, low infrastructure investment,
flooding, low income levels, out migration,
little government policy support.
8
Objective 2.1
  • describe food systems and analyse their
    vulnerability to water stress induced by GEC and
    other factors, including water management

9
GEC Food System Interactions
10
Food Systems Research integrates Food System
Activities and Outcomes
Food System ACTIVITIES Producing food natural
resources, inputs, technology Processing
packaging food raw materials, standards,
consumer demand Distributing retailing food
marketing, advertising, trade Consuming food
preparation, consumption
Food System OUTCOMES Contributing to
Source Ericksen, P. (2006) Conceptualizing Food
Systems for GEC Research (in prep for Food Policy)
11
Food Systems Concepts questions defined
  1. What parameters describe food systems so as to
    facilitate GECAFS research?
  2. Within given food systems, which parameters are
    most sensitive to GEC?
  3. Who are the agents within each major food system,
    what are their roles, and how do they interact?

12
Outputs from FS descriptions
  • Key activities and ACTORS
  • Key outcomes and determinants
  • Policy and institutional links
  • Linkages among activities

13
(No Transcript)
14
Food Systems Research integrates Food System
Activities and Outcomes
Food System ACTIVITIES Producing food natural
resources, inputs, technology Processing
packaging food raw materials, standards,
consumer demand Distributing retailing food
marketing, advertising, trade Consuming food
preparation, consumption
Food System OUTCOMES Contributing to
Source Ericksen, P. (2006) Conceptualizing Food
Systems for GEC Research (in prep for Food Policy)
15
Linking outcomes to activities and determinants
District level
Food security outcome - affordability Major Determinants of food security outcome Linked to FS Activity? Or Other Outcome?
Staple grains are cheap if imported expensive if local. Costs of local production higher than foreign. Determined primarily by the activities under Producing.
Fruits and vegetables cheap and available in rural areas. Increasing numbers of farmers moving into horticulture so is surplus. Determined primarily by the activities under Producing.
Fish and beef are luxury foods. Chicken is every day food in urban areas. Fish increasingly scarce because waters over-fished. Beef is for the export market. Poultry is a new growth sector and so is available everywhere. Processing centered near urban areas. Incomes differences between urban and rural areas important (social welfare). Aquatic systems reaching their threshold (natural capital). Beef and chicken price and availability determined by Producing, Processing and Retailing.
16
Group exercise
Food Security outcome Determinant characteristics Which if any food system activities contribute to this determinant? Which other drivers contribute (social welfare, environmental)? Major actors
Availability Affordability Allocation Preference Already reported
Access --- Already reported
Utilization --- Already reported
17
Vulnerability of food systems
  • Vulnerability implies HARM or a negative
    consequence from which is difficult to recover
    food insecurity
  • Is a function of exposure to hazards, sensitivity
    AND coping capacity (internal and external)
  • Arises from multiple stresses

18
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE (GEC) Change in type,
frequency magnitude of environmental threats
Capacity to cope with /or recover from GEC
FOOD SYSTEM SECURITY / VULNERABILITY
Exposure to GEC
SOCIETAL CHANGE Change in institutions, resource
accessibility, economic conditions, etc.
19
Integrating FS Vulnerability Research examples
for food utilisation water availability
Key determinant Determinant characteristics Sensitivity to water availability Vulnerability to water availability
NUTRITIONAL VALUE  
Food diversity Rice, lentil, milk Cows need four months rain to produce milk High Mild drought makes milk scarce as no dairy market
Primary protein Lentils Lentils need two months rain Low Severe drought makes lentils scarce but buffered by market
SOCIAL VALUE Community celebrations cohesion Special foods for key celebrations, e.g. onset of monsoon Increased variability of monsoon disrupts and diminishes role of celebrations Medium Significance of celebration foods declines leading to reduced social cohesion
Kinship / Etiquette Luxury foods (e.g. eggs) for guests NA NA
FOOD SAFTEY Storage conditions Low-quality, water-pervious baskets Baskets can get damp / flood High Toxic build-up (e.g. aflotoxins) in stored food
20
Integrating FS Vulnerability Research in the
IGP example for Nutritional Value component of
Food Utilisation
Determinant food diversity milk
Determinant principal protein lentil
GEC Issue Increased incidence of drought
GEC Issue Increased incidence of drought
FS VULNERABILITY RE FOOD DIVERSITY HIGH
Exp. to GEC
FS VULNERABILITY RE PRINCIPAL PROTEIN LOW
Exp. to GEC
Cap. to cope
Cap. to cope
Socec. Issue Strong lentil market
Socec. Issue Weak dairy market
Source Multi-authored analysis of IGP food
system vulnerability to GEC. GECAFS Report. In
prep.
21
Vulnerability of IGP food systems
  • Function of
  • The vulnerable parameter
  • Stress
  • Exposure
  • Sensitivity
  • Coping capacity or resilience
  • In context of multiple stressors
  • Results in disrupted outcome

22
Task
  • For each food system activity or outcome
    determinant,
  • List
  • Type of water-related stress that threatens
  • Sensitivity to water-related stress
  • Coping or adaptive capacity
  • Overall vulnerability CURRENTLY
  • Tomorrow will assess the implications for whole
    system
  • Tomorrow will look at future possible
    vulnerability

23
System vulnerability
  • Does the vulnerability of the activity or outcome
    determinant affect any outcomes?
  • Is this true across the district?
  • Is it true all of the time?
  • Or is the shock severe enough that has long term
    effect?

24
BFP grant Objective 3
  • Understand relationships of water and food
    systems at multiple scales and integrate across
    sample sites
  • Trends in vulnerability
  • Connections among the five sites and importance
    to food systems.

25
IGP General Characteristics
  • Western Region (1, 2 3)
  • high productivity food surplus
  • high investment in infrastructure
  • major use of fertilisers and ground-water for
    irrigation
  • in-migration of labour
  • Eastern Region (4 5)
  • low productivity food deficit
  • poor infrastructure and low inputs of fertilizer
    and water
  • high risk of flooding
  • out-migration of labour

26
GECAFS Research Sites in the IGP
Ludihana, Central Punjab, India wheat and rice
predominate, slow to stagnant productivity
growth, groundwater dependent, lots of
investment, high income levels, functional policy
support.
Ruhani Basin, Terai of Nepal rice preferred,
transition zone, seasonal flooding,
out-migration, sharecropping dominates,
urbanization increasing.
Gujarat, Punjab, Pakistan wheat dominates,
food self-sufficient, mixed irrigation, high
level of infrastructure, moderate income,
policies function somewhat.
Greater Faridpur, Bangladesh rice dominates,
flooding and concern over salt water intrusion,
low income levels, government institutions fail.
Vaisahali District, Bihar, India rice
preferred, low infrastructure investment,
flooding, low income levels, out migration,
little government policy support.
27
Contrasting and integrating across sampling sites
  • Using standard characterization techniques at
    each site to understand commonalities and
    differences among the five food systems and their
    vulnerability to water stress and management.
  • Assessing trends or gradients in vulnerability,
    resulting in a set of parameters which
    collectively describe the links between food
    systems and water stress for the basin as a
    whole.
  • Looking for the presence or absence of
    connections among the five sites and evaluate
    their importance to the food systems.

28
Basin-wide questions
  • Which food system drivers are common to all
    sites?
  • Which vary by case study site?
  • Which water stresses are common?
  • Which water stresses vary?
  • Are there connections between the water stresses
    across the basin?
  • Are there connections in the food systems across
    the basin?

29
Format/ outline for CPWF report
  • Methodology
  • Conceptual framework-- POLLY
  • Site selection process POLLY and you
  • Site descriptions
  • Standard data-- YOU
  • Food system description
  • Nine determinants of food security outcomes YOU
    then VARSHA and POLLY
  • Try to link activities and outcomes YOU then
    VARSHA and POLLY

30
Report (2)
  • Vulnerability assessment POLLY to introduce
  • determinants per food security element (assess
    the intra-element importance) YOU
  • Exposure, sensitivity, coping capacity,
    vulnerability YOU
  • Basin findings
  • Food system and vulnerability compare POLLY then
    YOU
  • Connections YOU
  • Generic approaches JOHN POLLY then YOU
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com