5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5) - United ...

5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5)

Reducing Drought Risk in Africa: Measuring Impact, Strategizing for the Future

11-12 February, 2013 Ngurdoto Mountain Lodge, Arusha, Tanzania

ii

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ iv

Disclaimer .............................................................................................................................................. iv

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................ v

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ vi

1. Background ........................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Africa Drought Adaptation Forum ............................................................................................... 1

1.2 The UNDP Drylands Development Centre .................................................................................... 1

2. Forum Proceedings ............................................................................................................................. 2

2.1. Session 1: Opening and Welcome (Chaired by Dr. Pedro Basabe, UNISDR) ............................... 2

2.1.1 Welcome remarks ................................................................................................................... 2

2.1.2 Welcome address and opening .............................................................................................. 4

2.2. Session 2: Introductory Session ................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1. Outline of the forum objectives and structure ...................................................................... 5

2.2.2. Africa drought reduction framework: The guiding principles ............................................... 5

2.2.3. Key regional advocacy messages on drought resilience ....................................................... 7

2.2.4. ECHO: Approach to drought resilience in the Horn of Africa ................................................ 7

2.3. Session 3: Community Based Resilience Assessment Methodology (CoBRA) ............................. 9

2.3.1. Conceptual framework and quantitative impact assessment methodology for resilience .. 9

2.3.2. Small group interactive session and feedback .................................................................... 12

2.3.3. Findings and Lessons Learned from CoBRA field testing in Kenya and Uganda and Comparison of findings with group feedback, discussion on findings from field work ................ 13

2.3.4. Working group discussion (Continued), open discussions and feedback ........................... 14

2.4. Session 4: Panel Discussion - Experiences on resilience indicators and measurement (Chaired by Paul Kimeu, NDMA): .................................................................................................................... 16

2.4.1. COOPIs experiences on Drought Risk Reduction Intervention Indicators: Impact Assessment for Fodder Production, Animal Health Interventions and NRM in Pastoralists and Agro-pastoralists Communities ..................................................................................................... 16

2.4.2. Resilience Indicators and Measurements: Remotely sensed variables .............................. 16

2.4.3. A Joint Resilience Strategy for Somalia ............................................................................... 17

2.4.4. IFRC CBDRR Study, Phase 2: Latin America and the Caribbean ........................................... 17

2.4.5. Key Health Indicators of Drought Resilience: The Health Sector Perspective .................... 17

2.4.6. Question and Answer .......................................................................................................... 18

2.4.7. Break away discussion groups and presentations ............................................................... 18

iii

2.5. Session 5: Community Resilience – Recent Findings (Chaired by Dr. Emmanuel Chinyamakobvu, UNCCD) ................................................................................................................. 19

2.5.1. Assessing Resilience: Components, Relationships, Innovation, Continuity (CRIC) .............. 19

2.5.2. Cost-effectiveness study on DRR interventions in Health and Education sectors in the drylands of the HOA ...................................................................................................................... 19

2.5.3. Community resilience to drought assessments: Tools and methodologies in Ethiopia ...... 20

2.5.4. Community resilience building -Kenya, Burkina Faso and Gambia ..................................... 20

2.6. Session 6: Way Forward ............................................................................................................. 21

2.6.1. Plenary Discussion: Way forward for CoBRA methodology ................................................ 21

2.6.2 Drought Online Discussion Forum Launch ........................................................................... 21

2.6.3. Key Discussion Issues for Regional Platform ....................................................................... 22

2.7. Session 7: Closing Session (Chaired by Ms. Anne Juepner, UNDP-DDC) ................................... 22

2.7.1. Closing Remarks ................................................................................................................... 22

3. Forum Evaluation ............................................................................................................................. 23

4. Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 25

4.1. ADAF5 Agenda ........................................................................................................................... 25

4.2. List of Participants ...................................................................................................................... 27

4.3. Session 4 break way group presentation summary ................................................................... 39

4.4 Evaluation Form .......................................................................................................................... 42

iv

Acknowledgements

The United Nations Development Programme Drylands Development Centre (UNDP DDC) greatly appreciates the participants who attended the Fifth Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5) held in Arusha Tanzania for their time and for enriching the discussions with expertise and experience. Special thanks to the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) for partnering with us and ensuring that this forum was a success. We commend the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania for accepting to host ADAF5.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations including the United Nations Development Programme, or its member states. Copyright © UNDP 2013 April 2013

v

List of Abbreviations

ADDN African Drought Risk and Development Network

ADAF5 5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum

CBDRR Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction

CoBRA Community Based Resilience Assessment Methodology

COOPI Cooperzone International

DDC Drylands Development Centre

DFID Department for International Development

DRM Disaster Risk Management

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

DRRAP Drought Risk Reduction Action Plan

EAC East African Community

EALA East African Legislative Assembly

ECHO European Commission Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection

EU European Union

EWS Early Warning System

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FGDs Focus Group Discussions

HoA Horn of Africa

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

KIIs Key Informant Interviews

LIME Longitudinal Monitoring and Evaluation

MDGs Millenium Development Goals

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

REGLAP Regional Learning and Advocacy Project for Vulnerable Dryland Communities

SLF Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

UN United Nations

UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNDPDDC United Nations Development Programme Drylands Development Centre

UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund

UNISDR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

VSLA Village Saving and Loan Schemes

WHO World Health Organization

vi

Executive Summary

Under the framework of the African Drought Risk and Development Network (ADDN), the United Nations Development Programme Drylands Development Centre (UNDP DDC) and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction’s (UNISDR) Regional Office for Africa, jointly organized the 5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5) that was held in Arusha’s Ngurdoto Mountain Lodge in Tanzania between February 11 and 12, 2013. Since 2005, similar forums have been organized to create an enabling environment for knowledge sharing and to facilitate the up-scaling of proven practices among drought-prone countries, with an ultimate goal of mitigating the risks of drought, building resilience and improving human livelihoods in Africa. The drylands cover approximately 40 percent of the world where about 2.5 billon people live in nearly 100 countries. It accounts for up to 44 percent of all the world's cultivated systems. Many people living in drylands depend directly upon a highly variable natural resource base for their livelihoods, and about half of all dryland inhabitants - one billion people - are poor and marginalized. This accounts for close to half of the world's poor. The DDC takes a people centred approach, whose development objective is to contribute to rural poverty reduction and increased food security for the communities living in the rural drylands in the affected countries. The forum was sponsored by the UNDP DDC, The European Community Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) and The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). The ADAF5 attracted 149 participants drawn from 44 Sub-Saharan African government Focal Points for DRR, experts from UN agencies, NGOs, academic and technical institutions, national, regional intergovernmental institutions, the East African Community and the Africa Union. The ADAF5 was held back to back with the Fourth Africa Regional Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) hosted by the African Union Commission (AU) and UNISDR Regional Office for Africa. The ADAF5 ran through seven sessions. The first session was the official opening of the forum followed by an introductory session which outlined the forum objectives and expected outputs. The Community Based Resilience Assessment Methodology (CoBRA) was covered in session three with panel discussions on experiences on resilience indicators and measurements coming in session four. Recent findings on community resilience were presented in session five. Recommendations and closing of the forum were covered in sessions six and seven respectively. The objectives of ADAF5 were to;

i) Understand methodologies and tools applied to build evidence of impacts e.g. Drought Risk Reduction (DRR) investments/drought risk reduction interventions, climate change adaptation practices etc.

ii) Exchange examples of proven impact/cost effectiveness of DRR practices iii) Agree on a continental way forward to enhance DRR investments in the drylands based on proven

good practices. Findings from the field testing of the CoBRA methodology in Marsabit (Kenya) and, Moroto and Nakapiripirit (Uganda) suggest that financial security was one of the key factors that were listed as leading to resilience. Respondents repeatedly described a resilient household as one that was engaged in successful business or trade, or had a waged family member, through government or NGO positions, or had access to capital/loans or received remittances. In order to strengthen and refine the CoBRA conceptual framework and methodology, the forum recommended that there is need:

vii

For both generic and context specific indictors for resilience measurement

To underscore the importance of context when deriving resilience indicators and their measurement

For revision and wider testing of CoBRA methodology to compliment it with other methods and for comparative analysis. It was further suggested that a working group with different expertise from research and analysis be identified to strengthen the conceptual framework and methodology.

For linkage with other impact assessment methodologies/tools.

At the end of the forum, the key messages to be conveyed to the Fourth Africa Regional Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction were also developed jointly as follows: • Countries and institutions need to develop targets for building resilience across regions; • Intra/inter sectoral coordination mechanisms/platforms must be enhanced for necessary output on

drought resilience; • Increased and sustainable funding for resilience is imperative to consolidate the gain made on DRR

interventions; • DRR initiatives must be better linked to the concept and principles of resilience; • Knowledge regarding the gains made on resilience through various DRR interventions needs to be

identified, documented and made available; • Opportunity to replicate and scale up the proven DRR initiatives and interventions must be explored

further; • There is a need for sustainable funding for resilience building initiatives in Africa; • The efforts to measure community resilience must be linked closely with existing regional

conventions/strategies; • Awareness must be improved on the community based/led approaches which are working well on

resilience building in Africa; • Resilience building requires a multi-sectoral and consortium-like arrangement; and

African governments need to invest more on DRR and resilience building than what they are doing right now.

1

1. Background

1.1. Africa Drought Adaptation Forum

Under the framework of the African Drought Risk and Development Network (ADDN), the United Nations Development Programme Drylands Development Centre (UNDPDDC) and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction’s (UNISDR) Regional Office for Africa, jointly organized the 5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5) that was held in Arusha’s Ngurdoto Mountain Lodge in Tanzania between February 11 and 12, 2013. Since 2005, similar forums have been organized to create an enabling environment for knowledge sharing and to facilitate the up-scaling of proven practices among drought-prone countries, with an ultimate goal of mitigating the risks of drought, building resilience and improving human livelihoods in Africa. The ADAF5 featured methods and tools for measuring the impact of drought risk reduction practices across the region. It also provided practical examples regarding impact and cost-effectiveness of drought risk reduction measures. The first three forums featured a wealth of good practices with ADAF4 focussing on the need for enhanced coordination, early warning and early action. The ADAF5 focussed on elements of a standardized methodology and broad introduction of applicable indicators that evaluate and aggregate short and long term changes and trends in drought resilience. The ADAF5 was held back to back with the Fourth Africa Regional Platform for DRR. Forty four Sub-Saharan African government Focal Points for DRR attended both forums along with experts from UN agencies, NGOs, academic and technical institutions, national, regional intergovernmental institutions and the African Union. ADAF5 was held over two days. The first day focussed on methodologies and tools for measuring drought resilience. The second day presented existing examples and findings which were complemented by key regional advocacy messages and examples of community level drought resilience as well as project impact indicators from the European Community Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) and the Drought Risk Reduction Action Plan (DRRAP) partners working on drought risk reduction in the Horn of Africa.

1.2 The UNDP Drylands Development Centre

The Drylands Development Centre (DDC) is a thematic centre of UNDP dedicated to fighting poverty and achieving sustainable development in the drier regions of the world. It recognizes that achieving sustainable development in the drylands has significant implication for reducing poverty and hunger worldwide. The drylands cover approximately 40 percent of the world where about 2.5 billon people live in nearly 100 countries. It accounts for up to 44 percent of all the world's cultivated systems. Many people living in drylands depend directly upon a highly variable natural resource base for their livelihoods, and about half of all dryland inhabitants - one billion people - are poor and marginalized. This accounts for close to half of the world's poor. The DDC takes a people centred approach, whose development objective is to contribute to rural poverty reduction and increased food security for the communities living in the rural drylands in the affected countries. The immediate objective is to catalyse and energize the implementation of the MDGs in the affected countries by 2015. It is expected that this will result in improved livelihoods and social-economic well-being of communities in drylands. This will be achieved through:

2

i) Effective mainstreaming of drylands issues into development frameworks leading to budgetary allocation for implementing livelihoods options on the ground; advocacy, awareness creation and policy dialogue at national and sub-national levels.

ii) Improving living standards for rural communities living in the drylands through strengthening the rural economy and creating and implementing livelihood opportunities; lessons learnt from these will inform policy and programming processes.

iii) Increasing resilience and sustainability of the rural livelihoods system through improved capacity of local communities for governance and sustainable management of local resources.

The DDC has a track record of over 40 years of supporting drylands development. Support from DDC is provided through its framework programme, the Integrated Drylands Development Programme (IDDP). This is delivered through the UNDP country offices in line with the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and the UNDP Country Programme Action Plans. The programme is currently operational in 15 countries in sub-Saharan Africa and the Arab States and focuses on:

i) Mainstreaming dryland issues including adaptation and mitigation to climate change risks into development frameworks at national and regional and local levels

ii) Improving community capacity for livelihood enhancements and diversification iii) Building resilience of local communities to manage disaster risks and adapt to/mitigate the impacts

of climate change iv) Promoting policy advocacy on key land governance issues and building and building capacity of

decision-makers and sub-regional organizations to develop and manage sustainable land and agrarian reform programmes

v) Enhancing decentralised governance of natural resources as a basis for mitigating conflicts and promoting resource based economic opportunities.

2. Forum Proceedings

2.1. Session 1: Opening and Welcome (Chaired by Dr. Pedro Basabe, UNISDR)

2.1.1 Welcome remarks

The welcome remarks were delivered by Dr. Calleb Wegoro, (Director for Productive Sectors, East African Community) on behalf of the Hon. Jesca Eriyo, (Deputy Secretary General for Productive and Social Sectors, East African Community) and Mr. Philippe Poinsot (Country Director, UNDP Tanzania).

Dr. Wegoro warmly welcomed the participants to Arusha, the seat of the East African Community (EAC) and thanked the UNDP DDC, UNISDR and ECHO for organizing the forum in Arusha and inviting the EAC Secretariat to participate. He noted that although drought was a normal feature occurring virtually in all climatic regimes, its impacts in Africa had been devastating owing to Africa’s high vulnerability and weak coping and response mechanisms. This phenomenon, he noted, had negatively affected all socio-economic sectors leading to poor productivity, stagnation of economic growth, famine and social conflicts, wildfires, diseases and malnutrition, human migrations, cross border conflicts, stress and discomfort and rise in crime rate. Drought also accelerate HIV/AIDS epidemic – combined with high levels of food insecurity, reduced income, poverty and weak capacities for delivery of critical services by the States. He further noted that the science of weather and climate forecasting had made huge strides reliably forecasting impending droughts and that mitigation efforts therefore, required proactive approaches through preparedness, planning and management of resources once the early signals/indicators of drought were observed since the challenge of drought and

3

other hazards such as floods and climate change were beyond the capacity of any one country to tackle. He proposed some initiatives that could be considered in minimizing drought emergencies and food insecurity (some of which the EAC Secretariat has already put in place). These would include but not limited to:

i) Drought adaptation policies and programs, if implemented effectively and at multiple scales, could help avert the negative impacts of drought and Climate Change. Adaptation must take into account existing social, political and economic tensions and avoid exacerbating them;

ii) Development of autonomous drought management institutions with the necessary funding and government facilitation;

iii) Development of Food Security Action Plan and establish an Early Warning System (EWS) for monitoring food shortage in the respective regions;

iv) Develop and operationalize Regional Emergency plans for Pastoralists in arid and semi-arid areas addressing migrations and cross borders dynamics;

v) Promoting Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) as a proactive approaches to drought risk management and climate change adaptation;

vi) Sharing innovations and approaches for drought mitigation and adaptation with other regions and continents;

vii) Promote joint efforts between nations and Communities in the management of natural resources; viii) Integration of Indigenous Knowledge (IK) in drought early warning systems for managing drought

and post-harvest storage management; ix) Accelerate development of drought proofing structures to improve on the regional water security

and storage capacities, i.e., Rain Water harvesting and better agronomical practices; and x) Making full use of Drought Advisories - Alert, Alarm and Warnings from national Meteorological and

hydrological services and other providers He also reported that the EAC had developed several policy documents and instruments geared towards addressing drought, food insecurity, and natural resources managment in the region. These include:

i) The EAC Climate Change Strategy ii) The EAC Climate Change Master Plan

iii) The EAC Climate Change Fund iv) THE EAC Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary Protocol v) The Early Warning Systems to Monitor Food Security in the region;

vi) The EAC Disaster Risk Reducation and Management Strategy vii) The EALA Act on Transboundary Ecosystems;

viii) The EAC Livestock Policy While extending a warm welcome to the participants on behalf of the UN team in Tanzania, Mr. Poinsot thanked the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania for hosting the forum in Arusha. He also appreciated the Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department of the European Commission for their generous financial support and for making the forum a reality. He noted that many of the countries represented at the forum had witnessed recurrent severe droughts or floods or other natural disasters with increased damage and loss which posed serious obstacles to sustainable development. He also observed that these occurrences had taught us harsh lessons of how progress on achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) could be rapidly reversed if no action was taken to further strengthen the coping mechanisms of developing countries. He further noted that while no country is fully immune to disasters associated with climate variability and climate change, we are all well aware that there is more that can be done to reduce their impacts by better preparing citizens and communities to withstand the related shocks and disruption.

4

He highlighted that facilitating South-South exchanges and cooperation was a centrepiece of UNDP’s mandate with the goal of enabling developing countries to work together to find solutions to common development challenges such as those that were slated for deliberation at the ADAF5. In conclusion, Dr. Wegoro noted that “together, we must build on and take the achievements of the Hyogo Framework for Action further and adopt a robust joint vision and concrete action, which will expand opportunities, tackle poverty and inequality, and build the resilience of countries and their communities to shocks. Reducing drought risk and building resilience offers a way for people everywhere to be equipped with the capacity to cope, to act and to rise to the daunting development challenges of the 21st century”.

2.1.2 Welcome address and opening

The forum’s opening address was given by Mrs. Nachaghe Anna Konyo Nanai (Assistant Director, Disaster Management Office, Prime Minister's Office, Government of the United Republic of Tanzania).

She thanked the UNDP DDC, ECHO and UNISDR and the other stakeholders for organizing the forum and for inviting her to officially open the forum. She gave a warm welcome to all participants and informed them that Arusha was the gateway to Tanzania’s northern tourist circuit. She invited participants to take advantage of their close proximity to the Ngorongoro Crater, Mount Kilimanjaro and Lake Manyara to visit and sample the attractions. Since past droughts in sub-Saharan Africa had negatively affected food security in the region1 she hoped that the outputs of the ADAF5 would pave the way towards an agreement on a continental approach towards enhancing DRR investment and building resilience of the African continent. She lamented that the traditional approach to drought by most governments and especially those in Africa was reactionary crisis management through provision of relief or emergency assistance to the affected areas or sectors. With this approach, drought only receives the attention of decision makers when it is at the peak, which usually coincides with a time when management options are quite limited. This scenario is complicated by the fact that many African countries face institutional problems that hinder the effectiveness of national Early Warning Systems (EWS) as a consequence of lack of drought policies and strategies and political will; poor integration of knowledge and information into government structures; complex relationships between donors and governments; lack of coordination between existing local and international food security information systems and focus on emergency response rather than mitigation. She noted that the vulnerability of rural livelihood systems to drought in Africa highlights the need for any development plan to consider the issues of climate, as most of the rural poor are dependent on traditional rain-fed agriculture. She hoped that the ADAF5 would help influence African countries to come up with drought policies that emphasize on risk identification, early warning systems, awareness, knowledge management strategies, and effective mitigation and preparedness measures. With those remarks, she wished participants successful and fruitful deliberations and declared the 5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum officially open.

1 The droughts of 1972–1974 and 1984–1985, which caused widespread famine in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, affecting 25 African countries and the 1992–1993 droughts that affected Southern Africa resulting in severe food shortages. The Horn of Africa was again severely affected in 2000–2001 and in 2002–2003 and more recently in 2005-2006, 2009 and 2011, the East African region was again hit by drought which resulted in acute hunger and malnutrition, loss of productive assets, and increased vulnerability to other risks.

5

2.2. Session 2: Introductory Session

2.2.1. Outline of the forum objectives and structure

The structure and objectives of the ADAF5 were outlined by Ms. Yuko Kurauchi (UNDP DDC). She pointed out that the forum hoped to:

iv) Understand methodologies and tools applied to build evidence of impacts e.g. Drought Risk Reduction (DRR) investments/drought risk reduction interventions, climate change adaptation practices etc.

v) Exchange examples of proven impact/cost effectiveness of DRR practices vi) Agree on a continental way forward to enhance DRR investments in the drylands based on proven

good practices.

She noted that the expected outputs of ADAF5 were:

i) Landscape of existing methodologies and tools for impact assessments in the region ii) Exchange of proven practices

iii) Action Plan to enhance DRR investments in the drylands of Africa iv) Basis for impact assessments of DRR in the drylands of Africa v) Increased capacity to integrate community DRR impact analysis methodology

Ms. Yuko also took the participants through the agenda (schedule) for the ADAF5 (see appendix 5.1).

2.2.2. Africa drought reduction framework: The guiding principles

Ms. Rhea Katsanakis (UNISDR) made a presentation of the Africa drought reduction framework and the proposed elements of DRR.

6

She noted that the UN Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR) observes that although the causes and impacts of droughts are increasingly being understood, the escalating losses associated with these events indicate that most governments have yet to find effective ways of reducing and managing the risks they pose. She further noted that;

Countries with weak governance are likely to find it difficult to address underlying risk drivers which include degradation of hazard-regulating ecosystems such as wetlands, mangroves, and forests, and high levels of poverty.

Drought impacts most visibly on agricultural production, with significant losses spilling over into other economic sectors.

Globally, drought is still a hidden risk and locally its social and economic impacts are disproportionately concentrated on poor rural households.

Despite progress in forecasting, early warning and response, few countries had integrated policies or institutional frameworks to address the drivers of drought risk with drought being rarely included within broader policy and institutional frameworks for disaster risk management (DRM).

Meteorological agencies may be well equipped to provide increasingly accurate hazard assessments and warnings, but they are not responsible for addressing other risk drivers such as land use, water management, urban development and social protection.

Strengthening drought risk management as an integral part of risk governance is fundamental to sustaining the quality of life in affected countries.

The proposed main elements for DRR converge around the linkages between policy and governance, risk identification and early warning, awareness and education and mitigation and preparedness.

Ms. Katsanakis also presented the critical elements of a contingency plan and the need for standard operating procedures.

7

2.2.3. Key regional advocacy messages on drought resilience

Mr. Achiba Gargule (Regional Learning and Advocacy Project for Vulnerable Dryland Communities-REGLAP) made a presentation on resilience in the Horn of Africa (HoA). He reported that REGLAP works through three main channels:

i) Regional Learning Groups which aim at developing good practice models and strengthening the base for dryland resilience promotion through Community Based approaches to DRR (CBDRR), Water Development for DRR and Strengthening the evidence base for DDR Advocacy;

ii) Country Advocacy Groups which promote appropriate roll out and community consultation on country action plans for ending drought emergencies in Kenya, Ethiopia and Uganda; and

iii) Secretariat.

Mr. Achiba made a case for key resilience principles and why they are important for the drylands. These are:

i) Putting communities and local government at the centre of development and humanitarian efforts which requires that we (a) understand, respect communities, institutions and knowledge systems, (b) build the capacity and resources for local governments and (c) start from where communities are and plan with them;

ii) Recognising and responding to different needs, capabilities and aspirations of different individuals, households and communities;

iii) Understanding and focusing on social and ecological systems rather than individual components; iv) Promoting integrated multi-sectoral approaches across different sectors and scales; v) Increasing emphasis on longer term investments and addressing the underlying causes of

vulnerability; and vi) Doing things differently, but learning from the past.

There are however challenges in realising these principles. For instance, how do we:

Put these principles at the centre of the resilience agenda?

Make these fundamental shifts in the way we work?

Improve our knowledge management so we really reflect on and learn from our mistakes – donors, NGOs and governments alike?

Move forward on a common vision for drylands areas with a balanced livelihood development, vibrant commercialised extensive livestock production complemented by alternative livelihoods and careful use of irrigated crop that promotes local food security and a balanced model?

He observed that the current and urgent issues in resilience include securing land, education, governance and peace building and empowerment.

2.2.4. ECHO: Approach to drought resilience in the Horn of Africa

Ms. Sylvie Montembault (European Commission - Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection-ECHO) presented the EU/ECHO approach to DRR.

The EU defines resilience as “the ability of an individual, a household, a community, a country or a region to withstand, adapt and to quickly recover from stresses and shocks”. Ms. Montembault listed some steps that might increase resilience and reduce the vulnerability of the world’s most vulnerable people. These include:

8

i) Support to the design of National resilience strategy

ii) Disaster management plans and efficient early warning systems in disaster prone countries iii) Putting forward innovative approaches to risk management iv) Building on the promising results of the commission’s resilience initiative: AGIR- Sahel and SHARE

The DRR framework should have a multi-sectoral approach aimed at reducing risks (mainstream DRR) and improving rapid coping and adaptation at all levels such as DRR between droughts to maximise resilience to the next drought. It should also align humanitarian action with longer term development processes such as expansion/contraction rather than start/stop approaches. The framework should have an in-depth understanding of the underlying causes of vulnerability and a long-term approach to build capacity to better manage future uncertainty and change, while retaining early response capacity. It also requires a focused effort to identify resilience, of whom to what?

The ECHO DRR Programming in the HoA involves a community-based approach with articulation to policy level through:

Building on the achievement of past decisions, continuing to support DRR and community-based operations;

Developing a library of well-documented, context-specific experiences through good monitoring, evaluation, and operational research critical for advocacy (capitalisation); and

Dissemination of lessons learnt, sharing of good practices.

She stressed that in order to increase the impact of our actions, we need to think of the processes beyond the project, think of transition (or transformation) rather than exit, anchor any CDRR action within existing contextual system (government), frameworks (e.g., PRSP, MDGs) and processes (decentralization) and find the balance between government-led/top down processes and community-driven/bottom-up measures. She also noted that measuring resilience was difficult and not much work had been done. This is because resilience is multi-dimensional, is temporal and there are difficulties in aggregating units of analysis and attribution of any changes in resilience to specific factors such as programmes. Ms. Montembault listed ECHO’s preconditions in DRR engagement. These include the need to:

9

i) Align humanitarian action with development frameworks, such as the Partnership Framework Contracts and work closely with development partners (especially the European Commission's Development Aid Department) and governments;

ii) Profile wealth groups and livelihoods in order to design appropriate strategies that focus on geographic areas and specific target groups;

iii) Have a joint humanitarian-development framework to develop common understanding of underlying factors; and

iv) Have multi-sectoral and multi-level engagements. In the interactive session at the end of Session 2, participants recommended that in presentations, it would be important to write ‘DRR’ in full because when abbreviated, it is not clear whether it refers to DRR as a framework or as a hazard. From presentation 2.2.3, a participant sought to know whether there were any internal key messages from the communities themselves as what had been presented looked very much external. On the same presentation, another participant sought to know why “we should focus on dropouts” rather than learn from champions. All clarifications were adequately handled by the respective presenters.

2.3. Session 3: Community Based Resilience Assessment Methodology (CoBRA)

2.3.1. Conceptual framework and quantitative impact assessment methodology for resilience

Ms. Catherine Fitzgibbon presented the conceptual framework and methodology on behalf of her colleague Ms. Courtenay Cabot Venton who was unable to make it for the forum. She noted that the aim of the CoBRA methodology was to come up with a quantitative impact assessment framework that would:

Develop a rigorous conceptual framework and standardized methodology for measuring and assessing the impacts of community-based disaster risk reduction (DRR) interventions on local/national resilience building; and

Introduce broadly applicable and comparable indicators/indexes that evaluate and aggregate short - and long-term changes and trends in drought resilience as a result of various interventions comprehensively in quantitative values.

This methodology will also support the development of two further aims:

Capacity Development: Improve the capacity of local/national/regional disaster management institutions to plan, implement and monitor drought interventions against their contributions to long-term community resilience building.

Policy Advocacy: Raise awareness among decision-makers at local, national and regional levels in the potentials of community-based DRR for drought vulnerability reduction in the Horn of Africa (HOA) and enhancing their capacity to integrate proven practices into policy and planning processes.

In attempting to measure resilience, it will be importance to note that it is a:

i) Multi-dimensional factor of many things e.g. development; ii) Dynamic concept and constantly changing;

iii) Factor of both long term and short term interventions and strategies; and iv) Factor that varies at household level because there is need to identify the nature, scale and impact

of the systemic shock(s) that affect the wider community. Drought may not be the only shock to the system.

Ms. Fitzgibbon reported that the CoBRA methodology was adapted from the DFID/TANGO and EC-FAO models. These two methodologies are presented below.

10

The EC-FAO Model

Ms. Fitzgibbon made a case for a methodology to measure resilience because:

i) Currently no tools exist to measure resilience as a long-term multi-dimensional concept. ii) There is need for a multi-faceted approach to prioritise interventions as appropriate.

iii) Key indicators affecting resilience are not comprehensively collected using any widespread agreed methodology, e.g., insecurity or environmental degradation.

iv) If resilience is to be built and development accelerated in the most disaster prone areas (“fragile-sub-states”), these require closer monitoring than national data collection processes usually provide.

Taken from: Measuring Resilience: A Concept Note on the Resilience Tool. Alinov, Mane and Romano, 2010

11

The following are some characteristics of a resilient community:

The CoBRA framework was presented as shown in the following figure.

The CoBRA methodology is based on the premise that resilience can be measured in two ways:

i) An overall or universal measure or indicator(s) of resilience which enables us to understand whether resilience is increasing, declining or staying the same; and

ii) Contextually, specific indicators or components of resilience enable us to understand how local drivers of resilience are expanding or contracting

Since there is currently no accepted impact indicator to measure resilience, there is a strategic need to agree upon a meta-indicator of resilience. The following five capitals (Social, Financial, Human, Physical and Natural) were given as mapping components of resilience in a cobweb-like diagram.

Agricultural Practice and Technologies

Adaptive Capacity

Formal and informal governance

Infrastructure

Livelihood Strategies

Ecosystem Health

Access to Basic Services

Income and Food Security

Stability

Assets

Social Safety Nets

12

The nine steps of the CoBRA methodology were summarised as given in the table below.

Phase I: Preparation Step 1: Identify target groups and baseline resilience

Step 2: Prepare for data collection

Phase II: Field Work: Data Collection

Step 3: Define characteristics of resilience

Step 4: Score characteristics

Step 5: Investigate pathways to resilience

Step 6: Identify interventions that build resilience

Phase III: Data Analysis and Reporting

Step 7: Data analysis

Step 8: Taking action

Step 9: Repeat Monitoring of Impact and Change

2.3.2. Small group interactive session and feedback

After the CoBRA methodology presentation, each participant was asked to score resilience statements given out to them using bean-seeds. Four scoring stations/“booths” were provided within the auditorium for the scoring exercise. After scoring and tallying, year round access to clean water was ranked first with 74 beans, followed by “safe and secure” with 57 beans. The full results of this exercise are given in the table below.

Record sheet for scoring resilience statements in small groups

Total score for group

Statement Station1 Station2 Station3 Station4 Total

Year round access to clean water 6 15 10 43 74

Safe and secure 11 17 10 19 57

Income has increased, diversified 10 7 31 8 56

Household not reliant on outside help, food secure 14 6 19 16 55

Strong community management systems, associations 9 28 10 1 48

Access to healthcare 6 9 5 26 46

Good governance 8 7 13 10 38

Good land use 0 8 16 12 36

Access to markets-Can sell and buy easily, good prices 4 7 10 1 22

Community organization, contingency planning 5 4 6 1 16

Educated to tertiary level 1 0 3 5 9

Access to credit/loans 1 0 4 1 6

Quality road system 3 0 0 3 6

Women have a leadership role 3 0 0 0 3

Healthy animals 0 0 3 0 3

Transformed relationships 0 3 0 0 3

Access to communication-internet, phones etc 0 0 1 1 2

Remittances 0 0 0 2 2

Ecosystem health 1 0 0 0 1

livestock (numbers, breeds, viability) 0 0 0 0 0

Note: Statement in bold were added to the list by participants

13

2.3.3. Findings and Lessons Learned from CoBRA field testing in Kenya and Uganda and Comparison of findings with group feedback, discussion on findings from field work

Ms. Catherine Fitzgibbon made this presentation and pointed out that field work was undertaken in Kenya (Marsabit) and Uganda (Moroto and Nakapiripirit) using Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). The findings were mapped according to Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) categories. Marsabit findings Financial security was one key factor that was listed as leading to resilience with respondents repeatedly describing a resilient household as one that is engaged in successful business or trade, or has a waged family member, through government or NGO positions, or has access to capital/loans or receives remittances. Pastoralists highlighted some additional characteristics of a resilient household as one that:

Has a large livestock holding.

Has access to markets.

Has a manageable household size.

Sells animals in a timely manner.

Has access to good pasture. Resilience building interventions were reported to have increased resilience among peri-urban/agro-pastoral households while resilience was decreasing among pastoralists. Conclusions from the Kenya study suggest that:

i) The characteristics of a resilient household from communities’ perspective are relatively common yet unique.

ii) Aspirations as to what would make them resilient are not unrealistic. iii) Most communities score incredibly poorly on their identified characteristics in good as well as bad

years. iv) Resilient households are strongly associated with those that have financial security. v) The links between interventions that build resilience is better understood or clearer in communities

that have access to or benefit from greater resilience building interventions.

Moroto and Nakapiripirit findings A resilient household was described as one that has financial flexibility and multiple income sources, higher levels of educational attainment, a large herd size and a large household size. Resilience building initiatives included:

Education – particularly scholarships for secondary and tertiary education Improved health care – better drug supply and in-patient facilities Access to clean water – more boreholes and pumps that work year round Peace initiatives Village Saving and Loan Schemes Activities to support agriculture.

14

Conclusions from the study in Uganda suggest that:

i) The statements/factors that make up resilience from communities perspective are relatively common and regularly cited.

ii) In Karamoja, there was no clear good or bad year (not systemically disaster affected) iii) Key informant interviews reinforced these factors. iv) The interventions that are valued most highly or most desired by communities correlate closely with

the most highly rated statements/ characteristics of resilience

Lessons from the field testing of the draft CoBRA methodology

i) There is need to map interventions in more detail

There were many interventions that were not captured by FGDs or resilient households

There is need for additional key informant questionnaires

It may be prudent to add an extra session to FGDs for evaluative purposes

ii) There is need for more systematic application

There is need for expanded trialling to improve methodology

There is need for sampling criteria for different populations/ livelihood zones

There is also need to analyse how these data compares with large scale household surveys

iii) Policy and Advocacy

Information collected can inform wider debates

Further funding required to continue field trialling

The suggested way forward would be to expanded field testing required to address all the unknowns and systematise the methodology as well as on-going dissemination and sharing lessons with national government and other impact monitoring agencies.

2.3.4. Working group discussion (Continued), open discussions and feedback

Ms. Fitzgibbon observed that the results from resilience statements scored by participants were almost similar to the findings from Kenya and Uganda. Some participants however observed that security ‘should’ have ranked first because insecurity complicates all those other statements on resilience. With good security, households and communities can achieve much on their own. Other participants felt that while the list was not exhaustive, it was duplicative with many statements addressing the same thing e.g. finance. Another observation was that the statements were contextual and would therefore change from community to community. There was a rich discussion on the methodology and findings. A participant sought to know why the presenter suggested for a meta-indicator while characteristics of resilience were contextual. There was also a feeling that sampling for the test needed to have been more inclusive because it was strange that education was being listed first before livelihood streams. A participant sought to know what alternative livelihood strategies were most suitable for communities to build resilience. Another participant sought to know how the methodology introduced the concept of resilience to the community and that given the results, there was need to triangulate quantitative and qualitative data. Should we measure resilience at individual or at community level? These questions and points of clarification informed a very fruitful discussion with the conclusion that the CoBRA methodology was a good start to

15

measuring community resilience although much more needs to go into it before it can become robust. Participants were grouped into four units to discuss specific questions about the methodology.

Group 1: Establish an overall meta-indicator of resilience. Can it be done? What should it be? This group reported that there was need for multiple indicators since the five capitals vary in different contexts/disasters. But even if a meta-indicator would be agreed upon, what would be the context? Would it be the drylands? In relation to what? What would be the unit of analysis? (Household or community?) and who sets the indicators? The group cautioned that context is important. Group 2: How can this methodology support or complement other efforts to measure resilience? The group reported that indicators used were quite broad and there was need to focus on drought. Could we look at the poverty indicator as a benchmark? Should the methodology use qualitative or quantitative approaches? The group also observed that other complimentary methodologies existed such as the technical consortium –Horn of Africa, DFID, TANGO, FAO (food security), HEA, LIME (Longitudinal Monitoring and Evaluation), etc. There is however need to define whether CoBRA would be used at household or community level and the time duration (snapshots vs. continuous learning). The group also observed that CoBRA conceptual framework and methodology is already a blend of DFID/TANGO, FAO methodologies and that it was simple enough for use in understanding of resilience. The group proposed that CoBRA methodology needs to be combined with other conventional tools e.g., for statistical analysis and should be adapted to the needs of the communities. Although there is need for validation with other approaches, the methodology can inform cross-national processes. Group 3: How can the tool support specific programme evaluation? The group noted that the CoBRA methodology could supplement/complement evaluations. It could also be used to countercheck community target group priorities and provide a good baseline for subsequent evaluations. The challenges the methodology may face include too short timeframes for projects and low funding to build resilience. The group proposed that programmes should not be sector specific because resilience is multi-sectoral/programmatic. Group 4: Going forward, how should the methodology be further trialled and tested? There group noted that there is need to define the application of the methodology according to characteristics of the site such as pastoralists, agro-pastoralists, agriculturalists, urban settings and country settings/context. Other dynamics that need to be addressed by the methodology include;

Time and timing e.g., should it be used before or after drought?

Sampling was not clearly presented

Testing and feedback

Limitations There is also need to further define resilience framework at household, community and country levels and the methodology should be dynamic so as to take care of the evolution of resilience “changes”, e.g., past, present and future. CoBRA should also look at the resilience thresholds, e.g., low, medium and high resilience. The group proposed that there is need to use more tools to compliment the methodology such as Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), ranking as well as household interviews, mapping and standardized questionnaires. The group noted that the analysis seemed good although there was need to invest more in data collection as well as establish a multi-disciplinary technical team to look at the methodology. The group suggested that perhaps the methodology needs to be peer-reviewed and validated.

16

2.4. Session 4: Panel Discussion - Experiences on resilience indicators and measurement (Chaired by Paul Kimeu, NDMA):

2.4.1. COOPIs experiences on Drought Risk Reduction Intervention Indicators: Impact Assessment for Fodder Production, Animal Health Interventions and NRM in Pastoralists and Agro-pastoralists Communities Mr. Isaac Kamau Wamugi of Cooperzone International (COOPI) presented results of three different interventions by COOPI in Northern Kenya and Southern Ethiopia. These were:

i) Enhancing livestock production to support vulnerable populations along Daua Riverine in greater Mandera District, Northern Kenya. Progress showed that prices of animals fed with supplement hay had over 50% to 200% increase in market sale price compared with free range animals. For the same animals, there was more than 100% improvement in milk yields. Farmers were also able to sell hay at prices of Ksh. 400 to 600 due to the prevailing drought situation and hence fetched more than the targeted Ksh. 5,000.

ii) Support to drought affected pastoralists and agro-pastoralist in Mandera County, Northern Kenya. Results show that during the period, a total of 154,953 animals were given prophylactic treatment to enhance their resilience to drought. It is estimated that at least 95% of the treated animals (150,000) remained at productive state by the end of the project.

iii) Enhanced drought preparedness adaptive strategies in Northern Kenya and Southern Ethiopia. The project is expected to extend the usage of about 35,000 hectares of underutilized wet season grazing areas, by at least 4 months per year (calculated using 3.14r2 assuming a modest usage of 4 km radius for each pan, where 1km2 equals 100ha).

From their experience, Mr. Wamugi listed good practices that contribute to resilience. These include:

Appreciating the traditional mechanisms of survival and improving them, e.g., traditional early warning systems

Realising that Pastoralism is a way of life- “Don’t kill it, strengthen it”

Strategic planning and placement of NRM support infrastructure using the “Do no harm approach” (water points, market structures, settlement centres, new agriculture land)

Participatory planning and implementation of projects.

2.4.2. Resilience Indicators and Measurements: Remotely sensed variables Dr. Said Mohammed of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) presented comparative results for rainfall trends in Turkana (Lodwar) and Garissa based on 12 months Standardized Precipitation Index. The trends indicated more synchronized rainfall between Garissa and Lodwar between 1998 and 2011 whilst the period 1960 and 1998 had large variations of rainfall between the 2 districts. The presentation also covered: i) Crop indicator-Length of Growing Period (LGP),

ii) Vegetation dynamics in Borena, Southern Ethiopia, iii) Adaptation to climate variability in Ethiopia, Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda, iv) Forage and Livestock Dynamics and v) National Drought Management Authority’s Early Warning System

17

2.4.3. A Joint Resilience Strategy for Somalia

Ms. Eugenie Reidy (UNICEF) presented a joint strategy for Somalia by FAO, WFP and UNICEF which involves three building blocks of concerted actions that will help the at-risk Somali society cope with crises on the basis of community initiatives. These include (a) enhanced productive sectors, (b) access to basic social services and (c) safety nets for social protection. These three building blocks contribute to resilience through improved household income, enhanced human capital, and meeting of basic needs. She observed that it is important to consider both qualitative and quantitative methods to measure resilience through household questionnaires, community consultations and other qualitative methods.

2.4.4. IFRC CBDRR Study, Phase 2: Latin America and the Caribbean

Ms. Flora Tonking (IFRC) listed the objectives of the study as (a) confirm the characteristics and key determinants identified in the first phase of the CBDRR Study (conducted in Asia), to begin to identify similarities and differences between geographical regions, (b) identify and document ‘lessons learned’ in the design and implementation of previous CBDRR projects in the LAC zone and (c) contribute to the technical knowledge of the IFRC. Fieldwork was carried out in 24 communities using the following methodology.

2.4.5. Key Health Indicators of Drought Resilience: The Health Sector Perspective

Dr. Kalula Kalambay (WHO Regional Office in Brazzaville) noted that the WHO had spent 55 million USD on life saving operations in the African region in 2012. Of this amount, 60% went to climate (drought and floods) related interventions, 23% on socio-political related interventions, 16% on health system related interventions and 1% on risk management. He also presented the health sector drought risk measurement tools as Health Management Information System/Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response, Health VRAM, Specific surveys, e.g., malaria, HIV, Demographic Health Survey, and mortality. The key components of the Common Country Assessment were listed as:

18

i) Health sector institutional framework for DRM ii) Health sector DRM coordination mechanisms

iii) Capacity for health emergency risk assessment and information management iv) Capacity for response and recovery planning and operations v) Community health support programmes

vi) Safer and prepared hospitals and health facilities vii) Capacity for health, DRM Information, Education and Communication

viii) Human resources capacity development for DRM Dr. Kalambay also presented findings of Common Country Assessment (CCA) in Uganda

i) Community health support programmes:

Community involvement in disaster risk and vulnerability assessment were conducted by NGOs such OXFAM, WVI, URCS, SCiU, etc

The coverage of these activities is limited to a selected geographical area

There is a national village health workers program (VHTs)

No systematic mechanism for involving the VHTs and communities in health DRM

Poor community awareness of health DRM

TOR and training curriculum of community/village health workers does not include health DRM

On the basis of the above findings, the community support programmes was classified as poor.

ii) Roadmap for strengthening the CCA components was developed and is being implemented.

He gave the way forward as the need for multi-sectoral/disciplinary approaches.

2.4.6. Question and Answer

In this interactive session, a participant sought to know how the end users would get this scientific information and data and how all these interventions coordinate with governments. On Mr. Wamugi’s presentation, participants sought to know how resilience would be tracked, whether a study was conducted and the sustainability and transition strategy for the project. On Dr. Mohamed’s presentation, a participant observed that he had missed out on watering points in his presentation. Another participant wished to get further information on the variation between the patterns while another sought to know what contributed to sheep mortality rates and whether standard errors were used in the study. The presenters adequately responded to the information sought.

2.4.7. Break away discussion groups and presentations

Eight break away discussion groups were formed on water, nutrition and health, natural resource management, livestock, agriculture, education, peace and security and infrastructure. The groups discussed three questions in relation to their sector:

i) What are the characteristics of resilience in your sector? ii) What kind of indicators have you been using in your projects to measure resilience at the

community/household level? iii) What are some of the good practices that contribute to resilience from your own experiences?

Each group summarised and presented their thoughts on their sector and the presentation are summarised in appendix 4.3.

19

2.5. Session 5: Community Resilience – Recent Findings (Chaired by Dr. Emmanuel Chinyamakobvu, UNCCD)

2.5.1. Assessing Resilience: Components, Relationships, Innovation, Continuity (CRIC)

Dr. Lance Robinson (ILRI) observed that resilience is very difficult to measure until a threshold has been crossed. Resilience is an emergent property of complex social-ecological systems resulting from dynamic, non-linear relationships among variables. CRIC is (a) Components (Cattle, sheep and goats, Camels, Pastures, Water points), (b) Relationship (Herd mobility, Pasture regeneration processes, Commons institutions governing access to water), (c) Sources of innovation (Diversity and flexibility of livestock species mix, Organizational and institutional linkages, Biodiversity embedded in sacred sites and patchy landscape pattern) and (d) Sources of continuity (Sacred sites, Oral history). The following figure presents examples of threshold indicators.

2.5.2. Cost-effectiveness study on DRR interventions in Health and Education sectors in the drylands of the HOA

Prof. Dewald van Niekerk from (North-West University) observed that the study set out to:

i) Provide a general overview of DRR investment; ii) Analyse the current state of DRR investment in the Horn of Africa with specific emphasis on the

health and education sectors (case study analysis); iii) Document challenges in tracking disaster risk reduction investments; and iv) Provide conclusions and recommendations.

The evaluation used case studies. Two were done in Djibouti (health and education), Four in Ethiopia (3 health, 1 education), One in Kenya (education), three in Somalia (education, health and drought resilience) and one in Eritrea (climate change adaptation). The findings suggest that:

The highest percentage of DRR investment is still from the humanitarian sector.

The targets on DRR spending in development and humanitarian aid are still not enough.

There is low capacity to conduct cost-benefit analysis.

Community organized (ownership) projects are more successful.

Project cost-benefit analysis is often poorly reported.

Elements of the Social-Ecological System Examples of Threshold Indicators

Components • Camels • Pasture and water points

• No. of camels/household • Sq. km. of quality pasture within 20 km. of temporary dry

season water sources

Relationships • Herd mobility • Commons institutions for water

• TLUs in the rainy season based within x km. of permanent water sources

• Ratio of private wells operated as commons vs. private property

Sources of Innovation • Biodiversity embedded in sacred sites and a

patchy landscape pattern

• α diversity of plant species in sacred sites

Sources of Continuity • Sacred sites

• Sq. km. of land respected as a sacred sites or other community-conserved areas

20

Projects which focused on women and children showed greater involvement and level of success.

Integration of projects in development (multiplying factor) brings wider gains.

Integrated, multi-sectoral projects with ‘hidden’ benefits are more cost effective.

Multiple role-players (community, civil society, UN, government) are more successful.

Community based projects should be linked to skills transfer and capacity building.

Long term support is needed.

“Soft resilience” is more effective than “hard resilience”.

Pilot phases are important especially for new projects.

The root causes of vulnerability have not yet been effectively addressed.

There is need for regional “pool of funds” to lessen the financial burden during interventions.

There is need to place premium on quality rather than quantity.

2.5.3. Community resilience to drought assessments: Tools and methodologies in Ethiopia

In Ethiopia’s case Mr. Keith Etherington (Tear Fund) noted that there were 20 to 30 groups that had formed strong relationships to save, give loans and work at transforming their lives. Critical thinking skills were important in these groups. Within a year, the groups were talking of breaking the bonds of money lenders. He noted that it takes between three to four years in rural areas to achieve the objectives. There are plans to introduce a product where the groups would borrow twice as much as they saved as well as to integrate a safety nets approach for sustainability.

2.5.4. Community resilience building -Kenya, Burkina Faso and Gambia Based on the IFRC project or Initiatives in community resilience in the above countries, Mr. Buba Darboe (IFRC) reported that in the Gambia, DRR interventions resulted in:

Increased food production in refugee hosting families

Increased earning and income for women in 56 communities implementing community gardens with vegetables production and livelihood activities. (tie and dye).

Reduced hunger in food insecurity operation areas through the provision of the food basket for 4 months

Reduced incidence of severe malnutrition among children in operation areas.

Preventing flooding in communities and improving food production

Improved environment sanitation due to increased acknowledge of communities on the relationship between proper sanitation and community’s health

Support for farmers initiative to increase the production of groundnut a major cash crop which ultimately increased their income and living standard.

The provision of solar lamps to students and labour wards thereby contributed in reducing the risk of household and bush fires, poor lighting of labour wards.

Provision of hand pump wells which increased access to potable water, reduction of water borne and water related diseases

Construction of VIP latrines which contributed to reduced incidences of gastrointestinal diseases in the communities.

The increased capacity of the volunteers to contribute to the NS strength, to assess, manage and mitigate DRR

Saving lives and improving health and wellbeing

Giving the vulnerable the right to a honourable living

21

Interventions in Burkina Faso focussed on food security, water and sanitation and community awareness and these resulted in:

Two vegetable production seasons as a response to failure of rain season crops.

Diversification through the introduction of fruit trees, moringa and sweet potatoes in the Sahel gardens

Village committees of nutrition in 9 provinces In Kenya, the intervention aimed at assisting the recovery of affected communities from the 2007/2009 drought and promote livelihood options that can assist them adapt to future droughts. The Kenya Red cross society (KRCS) undertook an integrated approach targetting food security , water and sanitation and Health. A video of the intervention in the Tana North District of Kenya was streamed. In the interactive session that followed this session a participant requested to get a distinction between soft and hard resilience. Another participant sought more information on how the Moringa project was implemented and who the target was. The presenters responded and provided additional information.

2.6. Session 6: Way Forward

2.6.1. Plenary Discussion: Way forward for CoBRA methodology

Ms. Yuko Kurauchi (UNDPDCC) summarised the way forward for the CoBRA methodology based on the discussions in the past two days. The key concerns include the need:

For both generic and context specific indictors for resilience measurement

To underscore the importance of context when deriving resilience indicators and their measurement

For wider testing for comparative analysis

For linkage with other impact assessment methodologies/tools

For community led consultative processes to identify what makes them resilient and indicators to track

To integrate the output from 8 sectors analysis of the resilience characteristics, indicators and good practice

The immediate actions would include (a) circulation of draft CoBRA conceptual framework and methodology online, (b) production of forum report, (c) further testing of refined CoBRA methodology with partners, and (d) continuous consultations.

Input from the participants

Consider risk assessment baseline where these exist

There is need to revise the CoBRA methodology and compliment it with other methods. Perhaps, there should be a working group with different expertise from research and analysis to build the methodology and the conceptual framework. The methodology should perhaps be peer-reviewed.

There seems to be contradiction in the key concerns presented because on one hand, we are proposing to get context-specific generic indicators but on the other hand, we are proposing to carry out further testing of the methodology and do comparative analysis.

2.6.2 Drought Online Discussion Forum Launch

Mr. Phillip Fong (FAO) launched the drought online discussion forum (www.disasterriskreduction.net). The site will help coordinate, inform, support efforts in DRR. It is partner-driven, simple, easy and scalable. There were 58,466 people who had visited the website from 150 countries. About 55% were ‘returnees’ while 9231 were unique visitors.

http://www.disasterriskreduction.net/

22

2.6.3. Key Discussion Issues for Regional Platform

Mr. Oyundi Nehondo (UNISDR) moderated a discussion to identify the issues to be conveyed to the 4th regional platform for further deliberations. They include:

Countries and institutions need to develop targets for building resilience across regions;

Intra/inter sectoral coordination mechanisms/platforms must be enhanced for necessary output on drought resilience;

Increased and sustainable funding for resilience is imperative to consolidate the gain made on DRR interventions;

DRR initiatives must be better linked to the concept and principles of resilience;

Knowledge regarding the gains made on resilience through various DRR interventions needs to be identified, documented and made available;

Opportunity to replicate and scale up the proven DRR initiatives and interventions must be explored further;

There is a need for sustainable funding for resilience building initiatives in Africa;

The efforts to measure community resilience must be linked closely with existing regional conventions/strategies;

Awareness must be improved on the community based/led approaches which are working well on resilience building in Africa;

Resilience building requires a multi-sectoral and consortium-like arrangement; and

African governments need to invest more on DRR and resilience building than what they are doing right now.

2.7. Session 7: Closing Session (Chaired by Ms. Anne Juepner, UNDP-DDC)

2.7.1. Closing Remarks

Dr. Pedro Basabe (UNISDR) In his closing remarks, Dr. Basabe noted that DRR and related management has a conceptual framework adopted by UN Member States and an Africa Regional Strategy and Programme of Action adopted by the AU and its Member States, which also applies for drought risk reduction and management. There is also need to continue translating these policies and plans into concerted actions on the ground while considering the root causes of drought vulnerability such as environmental degradation and vulnerability to people and their livelihoods. There is need to continue discussing and defining the meta-indicators of resilience as well as follow up on efforts in measuring resilience. He reported that the UNISDR is open to further collaborate with all actors in DRR/M and invited participants to the 4th Africa Regional Platform and related events taking place in the same venue from February 13-15, 2013.

Mr. Almami Dampha (Policy Officer, Forest and Land Management, Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture of the Africa Union) Mr. Dampha noted that the forum was important in taking stock of achievements in DRR. He asked for concerted efforts in reducing drought risks in Africa. He further noted that not every drought should turn out to be a disaster in Africa, and Ethiopia is a good example. The availability of new research methodologies should open a new frontier for dealing with DRR.

23

3. Forum Evaluation

A total of 149 participants attended the ADAF5. Eight of these were from UNDPDDC. Although the evaluation forms were distributed to almost all participants, only 81 completed the evaluation form. See appendix 4.4 for a copy of the evaluation. The results of the evaluation are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1. ADAF5 Evaluation Results (n=81)

Q1 (a). Rating of forum as a learning experience Q1 (e). Rating of quality of discussions

Rating Freq. Percent Cum.


Fair 5 6.17 6.17

Poor 1 1.23 1.23

Average 12 14.81 20.99

Fair 6 7.41 8.64

Good 48 59.26 80.25

Average 23 28.4 37.04

Excellent 16 19.75 100

Good 46 56.79 93.83


Q1 (b). Rating of forum as a networking opportunity Q1 (f). Rating of time allocated for discussions



Fair 2 2.47 2.47

Poor 4 4.94 4.94

Average 11 13.58 16.05

Fair 7 8.64 13.58

Good 40 49.38 65.43

Average 44 54.32 67.9


Good 22 27.16 95.06


Q1 (c). Rating of practicality of forum to your work

Q1 (g). Rating of overall quality of group work



Fair 2 2.47 2.47

Poor 1 1.23 1.23

Average 21 25.93 28.4

Fair 5 6.17 7.41

Good 40 49.38 77.78

Average 25 30.86 38.27


Good 46 56.79 95.06


Q1 (d). Rating of quality of presentations

Q1 (h). Rating of overall organization of workshop



Fair 5 6.17 6.17

Poor 1 1.23 1.23

Average 21 25.93 32.1

Fair 6 7.41 8.64

Good 51 62.96 95.06

Average 15 18.52 27.16


Good 45 55.56 82.72


Overall all aspects of the forum in the evaluation received favourable rating. The highest “good” rating was 62.96% for the quality of presentations while the highest “excellent” score was 34.57% for the forum as a networking opportunity. Question 2 asked for the most beneficial sessions/activities for the participants. Some participants had up to three sessions or activities which they thought were beneficial to them. Of all sessions/activities that were ranked/listed first, 23 (28.40%) picked the CoBRA methodology session as most beneficial. Results for the first rank benefit session/activity are summarised in Table 2. Eight respondents skipped this question.

24

Table 2. 1st ranked most beneficial session/activity (n=81)

Session/Activity Freq. Percent Cum.

24.ECHO Approach to drought resilience in the Horn of Africa 1 1.23 1.23

30.Community Based Resilience Assessment Methodology (CoBRA) 23 28.4 29.63

35.Working group discussion (Continued), open discussions and feedback 2 2.47 32.1

40.Panel Discussion - Experiences on resilience indicators and measurements 16 19.75 51.85

42.Break away discussion groups 13 16.05 67.9

50.Community Resilience – Recent Findings 6 7.41 75.31 52.Community resilience to drought assessments: Tools and methodologies in Ethiopia 1 1.23 76.54

73.Networking and meeting other participants 1 1.23 77.78

74.Presentations 9 11.11 88.89

75.Exhibitions 1 1.23 90.12

Missing 8 9.88 100

Question 3 asked for suggestions for improving future forums. The following are top 10 recommendations for future forums;

i) The 2 days was too short a time for what was on the agenda. Increase it to 3 days ii) It almost looked like the forum had lots of focus on East Africa and the HoA. In future, have

presentations and focus from West, North and Southern Africa. iii) Have more time for discussions, technical presentations and experience sharing from the field about

what is working. There were just too many presentations this time round. iv) The CoBRA methodology was hurried through and it needed to be introduced slowly. There is even

no agreement yet on the indicators of resilience which does not help much yet we spent lots of time on this. There were also too many definitions of resilience and the forum ended without a clarification on a working definition for UNDPDDC. Future forums should conclude sticky things instead of leaving them hanging.

v) Improve on time management vi) Bring in a few members from benefitting communities so we can hear first-hand from them

vii) While the venue’s accommodation was good, shops were not there for purchase of certain crucial items that participants may have needed. In future, choice of venue should take this into account.

viii) Have more panel discussions in future ix) Share the presentations ahead of the meeting, perhaps provide a web-link to such presentations

x) The agenda seemed too loaded and more thought should go into future drafts of agenda.

25

4. Appendices

4.1. ADAF5 Agenda

Sunday, 10 February

Time Session

TBC Travel/Arrival/Hotel Check In

Monday, 11 February

Time Session

8:00 - 8:55 Registration and Coffee

Session 1: Opening and Welcome (Chaired by Dr. Pedro Basabe, UNISDR)

9:00 - 9:40 Remark Hon. Jesca Eriyo, (Deputy Secretary General for Productive and Social Sectors, East African

Community) Mr. Philippe Poinsot (Country Director, UNDP Tanzania) Welcome address and opening Mrs. Nachaghe Anna Konyo Nanai (Assistant Director, Disaster Management Office, Prime Minister's Office, Government of the

United Republic of Tanzania)

Session 2: Introductory Session

9:40 - 9:50 Outline of the forum objectives and structure Ms. Yuko Kurauchi (UNDP-DDC)

9:50 - 10:05 Africa drought reduction framework: The guiding principles Ms. Rhea Katsanakis (UNISDR)

10:05 - 10:20 Key regional advocacy messages on drought resilience Mr. Achiba Gargule (Regional Learning and Advocacy Project for Vulnerable Dryland

Communities)

10:20 - 10:35 ECHO: Approach to drought resilience in the Horn of Africa Ms. Sylvie Montembault (European Commission - Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection ECHO)

10:35 - 10:55 Q and A

10:55 - 11:15 Tea Break

Session 3: Community Based Resilience Assessment Methodology (CoBRA)

11:15 - 12:15 Conceptual framework and quantitative impact assessment methodology for resilience Ms. Courtenay Cabot Venton (UNDP-DDC)

12:15 - 13:00 Small group interactive session

13:00 - 14:00 Lunch Break

14:00 - 14:30 Feedback from small group session

14:30 - 15:30 Findings and Lesson Learned from CoBRA field testing in Kenya and Uganda Ms. Catherine Fitzgibbon Comparison of findings with group feedback, discussion on findings from field work

15:30 - 16:00 Tea Break

16:00 - 17:45 Working group discussion (Continued), open discussions and feedback

17:45 - 18:00 Wrap-up of Day One

18:00 - 19:30 Cocktail

26

Tuesday, 12 February

Time Session

8:30 - 9:00 Review of Key Points from Day One

Session 4: Panel Discussion - Experiences on resilience indicators and measurements (Chaired by Paul Kimeu, NDMA)

9:00 - 10: 15 Mr. Isaac Kamau Wamugi (COOPI) Dr. Said Mohammed (ILRI) Ms. Eugenie Reidy (UNICEF) Ms. Flora Tonking (IFRC) Dr. Kalula Kalambay (WHO Regional Office in Brazzaville)

QandA

10:15 - 11:00 Break away discussion groups

11:00 - 11:20 Working Tea Break

11:20 - 12:00 Discussion group presentations

Session 5: Community Resilience – Recent Findings (Chaired by Dr. Emmanuel Chinyamakobvu, UNCCD)

12:00 - 13:30 Measuring drought resilience: Research perspective Dr. Lance Robinson (ILRI) Community resilience to drought assessments: Tools and methodologies in Ethiopia Mr. Keith Etherington (Tear Fund) Cost-effectiveness study on DRR interventions in Health and Education sectors in the dry

lands of the HOA' Prof. Dewald van Niekerk from (North-West University) Community resilience building - Kenya, Burkina Faso and Gambia Mr. Buba Darboe (IFRC)

13:30 - 14:30 Lunch Break

Session 6: Way Forward

14:30 - 15:40 Plenary Discussion: Programming needs in relation to resilience measurement: implementing agency perspective

15:40 - 16:00 Drought Online Discussion Forum Launch Mr. Phillip Fong (FAO)

16:00 - 16:20 Tea Break

16:20 - 17:00 Key Discussion Issues for Regional Platform Ms. Rhea Katsanakis and Mr. Oyundi Nehondo (UNISDR)

Session 7: Closing Session (Chaired by Ms. Anne Juepner, UNDP-DDC)

17:00 - 17:20 Closing Remarks Dr. Pedro Basabe, (UNISDR) Mr. Almami Dampha (Policy Officer, Forest and Land Management, Department of Rural

Economy and Agriculture of the Africa Union)

17:20 - 17:30 Forum Evaluation

Wednesday, 13 February

Time Session

TBC Registration - 4th Africa Regional Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction

27

4.2. List of Participants

1 Mr. Abdou Sane

UNISDR

Dakar, Senegal

Tel: +221 776 595976

Email: [email protected]

2 Mr. Abdulsalam Badamasi Muhammed

Zonal Coordinator

National Emergency Management Agency

No. 8, Ademola Adetokunbo Crescent

Maitama

Abuja, Nigeria

Tel : +234 7067477772\+234 7088886962

Email : [email protected]

3 Mr. Abdulrazaq Musa

Principal Disaster Risk Reduction Officer

National Emergency Management Agency

No. 8, Ademola Adetokunbo Crescent

Maitama

Tel : +234 8058013035

E-mail: [email protected]

4 Mr. Achiba Andrew Gargule

Policy and Advocacy Advisor

REGLAP

P. O. Box 40680-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 2820000

Fax: +254 20 2820105


5 Mr. Adama Alhassane Diallo

Director General

ACMAD

85 Avenue des Ministeres BP 13184

Niamey, Niger

Tel:+227 20734992/+227 20 723160

Fax:+227 20 723627


[email protected]

6 Mr. Ahmed Hassan Ali

Technical Officer

KRDP/ASAL-DM

P. O. Box 8377-00200

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 2347106/7

Fax: +254 20 2211725


7 Dr. Albert Ndayitwayeko

Policy Officer

AUC

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Tel: +251 093 2 210108


8 Mr. Aliou Mamadou Dia

Regional DRR Advisor

UNDP Regional Service Centre for E. & S. Africa

Johannesburg, South Africa

Tel: +27 820 455 319

Fax: +27 11 603 5071


9 Mrs. Alisa Rue

UNISDR

P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya


10 Mr. Almami Dampha

Policy Officer

African Union Commission


Tel: +251 912 035 713


11 Ms. Amy Louise Kirbyshire

Project Officer, Climate and Development Knowledge

Network

Overseas Development Institute

203 Blackfriars Road, London SE1 8NJ, UK

London, UK

Tel: +44 20 7922 0444


12 Mr. Andrew Abkul Guyo

Livelihood Technical Advisor

African Development Solution

P. O. Box 70331-00400

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254721931733


13 Mr. Aneson Ronald Cadribo

DRR Advisor

UNISDR, AUC


Tel: +251 923 298 004


mailto:[email protected]












28

14 Mr. Animesh Kumar

Program Advisor

Govt. of Ethiopia/WFP


Tel: +251 912 797646


15 Anna Konyo Nanai Nyancheghe

Assistant Director

(Operations & Coordination)

Disaster Management Department

P. O. Box 3021

Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Tel: +255 22 211 7266

Fax: +255 22 2128300


16 Ms. Beatrice Teya

Disaster Risk Reduction and Recovery Team

Leader

UNDP Kenya

UN Office in Nairobi, Block M, 3rd Floor

P.O. Box 30218-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 4445


17 Mr. Bekele Moges Kidane

Executive Director ECC-SDCOH

Caritas Germany-ECC-SDCOH

P. O. Box 279

Dire Dawa, Ethiopia

Tel: +251 91 5320159

Fax: +251 251111071


18 Dr. Bekithemba Gumbo

Director

CAP-NET UNDP

Marumati Building 491, 18th Avenue

Rietfontein, Pretoria, 0084

South Africa

Tel: +27 12 3309055

Cell: +27 829281663

Fax: +273314860


19 Mr. Bienvenu H. Djossa

Country Director

WFP (for UNCT)

Bujumbura, Burundi

[email protected]

20 Mr. Brian Otiende

Climate Change Coordinator

East Africa Community

P. O. Box 1096

Arusha, Tanzania


21 Mr. Buba Darboe

Disaster Manager

Gambia Red Cross

P. O. Box 472 Kanifing, Banjul

Tel: +220 9802442/+220 3902442


22 Ms. Catherine Anne Fitzgibbon

Independent Consultant

P. O. Box 47590-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 734 498324


23 Mr. Cristiano Francesco Mandra

Senior Regional Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor

World Food Programme (WFP)

WFP Regional Bureau for East and Central Africa (OMN)

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +256 7077 23106


24 Ms. Damaris Wambui Nyaga

Programme Assistant

East African Community Secretariat (CCPAD)

P. O .Box 1096

Arusha, Tanzania

Tel: +255 76210 2287


25 Mr. Daniel Bolanos Gonzaez

Disaster Management Coordinator, Africa

P. O. Box 41275-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 731667489

Fax: +254 20 271 2777


26 Mr. Daniel Kyalo Mutinda

Urban Risk Reduction Manager

Kenya Red Cross Society

P. O. Box 47050-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 736 440659















29

27 Mr. Daudi Sudi Makabwe

Freelance Interpreter

P. O. Box 75278

Dar es Salam, Tanzania

Tel: +255 713295346


28 Mr. Dejene Fikre Aweke

Senior Humantarian Programme Officer

Trocaire

Gulele Sub city, Catholic bishop conference center


Tel: +251 112788843

Fax: +251 112788846


29 Mr. Denis Mcclean

Chief Communication & Outreach

9-11 Rue de Varembre', CH-1202

Geneva, Switzerland

Tel: +41 22 917 8897


30 Diallo Moustapha

UNDP

P. O. Box 1348

Madagascar

Tel: +261 344 810046


31 Mr. Diane Aboubakar

Permanent Secretary

CONASUR

OI BP SIS

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Tel: +226 70323779


32 Ms. Dulce Fernanda Chilungu

Director of CENOE

UNISDR

2346 Vlapimik Lent Ne

Maputo, Mozambique

Tel: +258 82 313 9420


33 Mr. Ebenezer Kofi Ofori Portuphy

National Coordinator

National Disaster Management Organisation

P. O. Box CT 3994

Cantonment -Accra

Tel: +233 302 781941

Fax: +233 302 781941


34 Prof. Edwin Osawe Iguisi

Director

CDRMDS, ABU Zaria

Ahmadu Bello University

Zaria, Nigeria

Tel: +234 8037 037 516


35 Emmanuel Chinyamakobvu

UNCCD Secretariat

Hermann Ehlers Str 10

Bonn 53113

Germany

Tel: 49 228 815 2819


36 Mr. Epari Charles Ejakait

Senior Consultant

Euro Africa Consult Ltd

P. O. Box 5869-00100

Nairobi, Kenya


37 Ms. Eugenie Laura Reidy

Programme Specialist

UNICEF

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 7133 25240


38 Mr. Ermiyas Abebayehu Kassa

Programme Manager-Africa Com. Resilience

World Vision International

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 731 691518


39 Ms. Evalilian Francis Boma

District Administrative Secretary

District Commissioner's Office

P. O. Box 434

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +255 75935 751

40 Mr. Fanuel Osbert Kalugendo

DRR Focal Point

Prime Minister's Office

P. O. Box 3021


Tel: +255 767 418806

Fax: + 255 22 2128300















30

41 Mr. Faustin Tsimi

Directeur National de gestion des Catastrophes

Croix-rouge

Camerounaise BP 631

Yaounde', Cameroon

Tel: +237 99 62 8021/79327059

Fax: +237 2222 4177


42 Mr. Ferdinand J. Njue

Regional Programmes Coordinator

COOPI-Cooperaziore Internazionale

P. O. Box 3857-00100

Nairobi, Kenya


43 Ms. Flora K. F. Tonking

Consultant

ARUP International Development

13 Fitzroy street, London WIT 4BQ

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 77555719


44 Mr. Foly Sosro Amah Sodogas

Disaster Manager

Croise-Rouge Togolaise

PB 10047

Lome, Togo

Tel: +228 22212110

GSM: +228 90029506

Fax:+228 222 15228


45 Mr. Gedi Abdi Husseini

Local Community Emp. Program

C.S. O.

P. O. Box 24 Habaswein

Kenya

Tel:+254 727 089381


46 Regional Program Specialist

P. O. Box 629-00621

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 710 493 040


47 Mr. Glenn Dolcemascolo

Head of Office

UNISDR - Northeast Asia

Tel: +8232 458 6551-4

Fax: +82 32 458 6598


48 Mr. Godson Majola

Chairperson

Meru District Council

P. O. Box 435

Arusha, Tanzania

49 Mr. Gordon Otieno Muga

Assistant Secretary/DRR

MOSSP

P. O. Box 40213-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 722 806 344


50 Mr. Gossaji Iddi Massaoud

Interpreter

P. O. Box 14211

Dar es Salaam

Tel: +255 754 890238


51 Mr. Guy Nicolas Nahimana

Translator

P. O. Box 22139-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 716 790 885


52 Mr. Hans Charles Komakech

Lecturer IWRM

NM-AIST

P. O. Box 447

Arusha, Tanzania

Tel: +255 764 821 863


53 Mr. Hotense Hien Sombie

Coordinator Food Security

01 BP 4404

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Tel: +226 7025 4844


54 Ms. Irene Njeri

Consultant Advisor

UNES- Observatory

P. O. Box 64562

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: [email protected]














31

55 Mr. Isaac Kamau Wamugi

Project Coordinator

COOPI-Cooperazione Internazionale

P. O. Box 3857-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 722 853 527

Fax: +254 20 258373


56 Mr. Jacob Mwisyo

DRR Senior Programme Officer EA

IFRC

Woodland Road

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 731 688 610


57 Mr. Jacob Wernerman

Regional DRR Specialist

West & Central Africa Regional Office -UNICEF

Dakar Senegal

Tel: +221 72 548 0905


58 Dr. James Kojo Teprey

DPR Focal Point

World Health Organization

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 733 330100


59 Mr. James Robert Okoth

Deputy Disaster Response and Rehabilitation Coordinator

Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN

FAO Representative in Uganda

P. O. Box 521

Kampala, Uganda

Tel: +256 755 442773

Fax: +256 41 4230605


60 Mr. Janvier Ntalindwa

Head of Environment Unit

UNDP

P. O. Box 445

Kigali, Rwanda

Tel: +250788304992


61 Mr. Jeanbaptiste Hatungimana

Secretary of DRR Platform

Burundi DRR Platform

Bujumbura, Burundi

Tel: +257 77 748 994


62 Mr. Jean-Moise Modessi-Waeuedo

Disaster Manager Director

Central African Red Cross Society

Central African Republic

Tel:+236 75 9441/72019505


63 Jean-Claude Adzalla

Regional Director

DEAF AID

P. O. Box 38226-00623

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 2012900


64 Mr. Jean R. E. Boongo

Consultant ONU SIPC

Libreville, Gabon

Tel: +241 0796 2546


65 Mr. Jeffrey Kanyinji

Permanent Secretary/ Commissioner

PB 366

Lilongwe, 3 Malawi

Tel: +265 881 030 265/+265 1788683

Fax: +265 1789142


66 Ms. Jennifer Akumu

Project Manager

Uganda Red Cross

Tel: +256 776 312 344/0774 063036


67 Mr. Joel Shadracks Okal

CARE (K) - ALP

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 728 679 816















32

68 Mr. John Kimbio Mwalagho

Senior Disaster management Officer

P. O. Box 41275-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 283 5000

Fax: +254 20 272 9070


69 Mr. John Nyandoa Kapanda

World Health organization

P. O. Box 9292

Tanzania

Tel:+255 784 305544


70 Mr. John Njuguna Karanja

Interpreter

P. O. Box 12384-01100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 726 984 453


71 Mr. Joseph D. Moyo

Population Movement Manager

Malawi Red Cross Society

P. O. Box 30096 LL3

Lilongwe, Malawi

Tel: +265 338800

Fax: +265 1775509

72 Mr. Joseph Yaw Appiah-Gyapong

Programme Specialist-Environment, Natural Resources,

Energy and Climate Change

UNDP

P. O. Box GP 1423

Accra, Ghana

Tel: +233 208 126 825

Fax: + 233 302 773 899

Email: [email protected];

[email protected]

73 Mr. Jordan Muthiani Kakemu

Monitoring and Evaluation Coordinator

Food for the Hungry (FH Kenya)

P. O. Box 14978-00800

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 2726048


74 Mr. Josiah Ogina

Chief of Mission-Ethiopia & Rep. AU/ECA/IGAD

International Organisation for Migration

P. O. Box 25283-1000


Tel: +251 116 611 133

Fax: +251 116 611 148


75 Ms. Julie Arrighi

Disaster Management Delegate

American Red Cross

Kampala, Uganda

Tel: +256 783 674 676


76 Mr. Kabubi Julius Njoroge

DRR Advisor

EAC Secreatariat

P. O. Box 51033-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 722 752228


77 Dr. Kalambay Kalula

WHO Regional Office for Africa

Congo DRC

Tel: +242 0552 6658


78 Ms. Katherine Mueller

Communications Manager-Africa

IFRC

Addis Ababa. Ethiopia

Tel: +251 930 03 3413


79 Mr. Keith John Andrew Etherington

Country Representative

Tearfund

P. O. Box 1221


Tel: +251 113714013

Cell: +251 910 359589


80 Mr. Kennedy Masamvu

REC

SADC Secretariat

P. O. Box 0095

Gaberone, Botswana

Tel: +267 71864962














33

81 Ms. Khangeziwe Glory Mabuza

Principal Secretary-Government

P. O. Box A33, Swazi Plaza

Mbabane, Swaziland

Tel: +268 760 63020


82 Mr. Kristu Faccer

SNR Researcher

CSIR

Johannesburg, South Africa

Tel: +27 11 358 0261


83 Mr. Kudzai Marovanidze

Head of Sustainable Agric. & Livelihoods

Practical Action

4 Ludlow Road, Newlands

Harare, Zimbabwe

Cell: +263 772 868188

Fax:+263 4 788157

Email:

[email protected]

84 Kuitsouc Dominique

Expert - DRM & CC Adaptation

P. O. Box 2112

Libreville, Gabon

Tel: +241 04 280001


85 Mr. Kuniberth Shamathe

National Coordinator, DRR

Namibia Red Cross Society

Namibia

Tel: 061 413 750


86 Mr. Lance Robinson

ILRI

P. O. Box 30709

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 422 3521


87 Lazarus Ocira

DRR/CCA Advisor

Save the Children Somalia

Tel: 070 3672320/4868230


[email protected]

88 Mr. Lebohang Azere Moletsane

District Disaster Manager

Disaster Management Authority

Private Bag A 453

Maseru 100, Lesotho

Tel: +266 22312183

Cell: +266 58901203

Fax: +266 22324429


89 Ms. Leila Mtinanga

Office Manager

American Red Cross

C/O Tanzania Red Cross Society

P. O. Box 1133

Dar es Salam, Tanzania

Tel: 255 758 333 700


90 Mr. Louis Lwema Taguaba

Interpreter

Pinnacle Interpretation Services

Makumbusho


Tel+ 255 154 432 75


91 Mr. Makinouha Edmond

Coordinator

Disaster Risk Reduction Centre

19 Rue Kimbem

Brazzaville, Congo

Tel: +242 06664 6084


92 Dr. Makuto Suwa

Programme Officer

WMO Regional Office for E&S Africa

Tel:+254 735 565 699

Fax: +254 20 387 7373


93 Ms. Marcella Ricupero

Independent consultant

Climate change Adaptation

Dev. & Climate Change Adaption Specialist

R. Belmonte 551 NTO DA LAPA SP-SP

Brazil

Tel:+5511 97488 6740















34

94 Mr. Mare LO

Director

Direction of Civil Protection

Rue leblanc

Avenue Nelson Mandela

Dakar, Senegal

Tel:+221 33 889 3900

Fax:+221 33 821 0448

Email: [email protected] [email protected]

95 Mr. Mark Van Staden

GIS Manager Deputy Director

National Disaster Management Centre

87 Hamilton Street

South Africa

Tel: +27 092 299 7274

Fax: +27 012 334 0810


96 Ms. Martha Talamondjila Mwandingi

Head of Energy and Env. Programme Unit

UNDP

UN House, 1st floor, 38 Stein Street, Klein Windhoek,

Namibia

Tel: +264 61 851 288 910;

+261 61 204 6111/6231


97 Mr. Mathewos Hunde Tulu

DRR Advisor to IGAD

UNISDR/IGAD

Djibouti

Tel: +253 77 04 9344


98 Mr. Maurice Konje Kiboye

Country Programme Manager

Veterinaires Sans Frontires - Germany

P. O. Box 25653

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 2330401

Cell:+254 727 943488

Fax: +254 20 238 73676


99 Dr. Mlenge Mgendi

Ardhi University

P.O. Box 35176


Tel: +255 716 728 444


100 Ms. Moddy Modiegi Sethusha

Executive Manager

National Disaster Management Centre

87 Hamilton Street Arcadia

Pretoria, South Africa

Tel+082 979 4294/+27829794294


101 Mr. Michael Gitonga

Land and Water Officer

FAO

P. O. Box 30470

Nairobi, Kenya

Cell: +254 722 624050


102 Mr. Mike Nakhabi Wekesa

Senior Consultant: Food Security, Livelihoods & Disaster

Resilience

Euro Africa Consult Ltd

P. O. Box 5869-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 721 588 016/+254 733 780901

Fax: +254 20 210 3704


103 Mr. Mohamed Dida

Country Programme Coordinator

Cordaid

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 721 881397

Fax: +254 20 4446503


104 Dr. Mohammed Yahya Said

International Livestock Research Institute

P. O. box 307009-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: + 254 20 4223001;+254 723 716815


105 Mr. Mohammed Ibrahim

Head of Programmes Disaster Risk Reduction

ECOWAS Commission

101, Yakubu Homon Crescent, Asokwo

Abuja Nigeria

Tel: +23480 38153051


106 Mr. Moise Kabongo Ngalula

Coordinateur Gestion des catastrophes

CROIX-ROUGE RDC

Kinshasa, RDC















35

107 Ms. Naemi Patemoshela Heita

Deputy Secretary General

Namibia Red Cross

2128 Independence Avenue

Windhoek, Namibia

Tel: +264 61 413750

Fax: +264 61 228949


108 Mr. Nicolas Frederic Schmids

UNDP

Kigali, Rwanda

Tel: +250 785634648


109 Hon. Nyerembe Deusdedit Munasa

District Commissioner

P. O. Box 434

Tanzania

Tel: 0713-682040/0767 682040


110 Dr. Olushayo Olu

Medical Officer

WHO

86 Enterprise Road

Harare, Zimbabwe

Tel: +263 772104248


111 Dr. Oliver Vivian Wasonga

Lecturer

University of Nairobi

P. O. Box 29053-00625

Tel: +254 722 258 765


[email protected]

112 Mr. Onesimus Muhwezi

Team Leader, Energy and Environment

P. O. Box 7184

Kampala, Uganda

Tel: +256 716 005139

Fax: +256 414 344801


113 Mr. Pascal Onegiu Okello

DRR Advisor

UNISDR-Uganda

C/O UNDP Country Office

Kampala, Uganda

Tel: +256 772710771


114 Mr. Paul Mutuku Kimeu

National Food For Assets Coordinator

NDMA-Kenya

P. O. Box 53547-00200

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 227982

Cell: +254 713 464651


[email protected]

115 Dr. Pedro Basabe

Regional Director

UNISDR Regional Office for Africa

UN Compound Gigiri, Block N, Middle Level

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 76224119


116 Mr. Phillip Fong

Regional Data and Information Officer

FAO

P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Cell: +254 738 888980


117 Mr. Renatus Kaitira Mkaruka

Disaster Preparedness Manager

Tanzanian Red Cross Society

P. O. Box 1133


Tel: +255 787 882680


118 Rhea Katsanakis


P.O. Box 47074, Gigiri,

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 5157

Cell: +254 733423032

Fax: +254 20 762 4726


119 Dr. Robert Benjamin Kiunsi

Director

Disaster Management Training Centre

Ardhi University

P. O. box 35176


Tel: +254 784 432121














36

120 Mr. Saladin Sumani Mahama

Disaster Management Coordinator

Ghana Red Cross Society

P. O. Box 835

Accra, Ghana

Tel:+233 244 807 440


121 Mr. Samuel Akera

Programme Specialist-DRR &Recovery

UNDP

P. O. Box 30218-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 701446528


122 Mr. Shaban Mawanda

Senior Program Manager

Disaster Risk Reduction

Uganda Red Cross Society

P. O. Box 494

Kampala, Uganda

Cell: +256 776 312056


123 Mr. Sibusisiwe Ndlovu

Deputy Director

Department of Civil Protection

P/Bag 7706

Lusaka, Zimbabwe

Tel: +263 4791287

Fax: +263 4703 715


124 Mr. Sirak Abebe Temesgen

Regional DRR Delegate

Netherlands Red Cross

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 731191172


[email protected]

125 Mr. Solomon Elungat

Senior Disaster Preparedness Officer

Office of the Prime Minister

P. O. Box 341

Kampala, Uganda

Tel:+256782070076


126 Ms. Sophie Baranes

Practice Coordinator

UNDP Regional Centre

Senegal, Dakar

Tel: +221 77 332 1417


127 Mr. Stephen John Njoroge

WMO Representative for E. & Southern Africa

P. O. Box 1395-00606

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 722 521 396

Fax: +254 20 38 77 373

Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

128 Mr. Stern Mwakalimi Kita

Principal Mitigation Officer

Department of Disaster Management Affairs

Private Bag 336, Lilongwe 3

Malawi

Tel: +265 999 430940

Fax: +2651789142

Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

129 Ms. Suada Ibrahim

Disaster Risk Reduction Manager

Kenya Red Cross

P. O. box 40712-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 721 791229


130 Ms. Sylvie Montembault

Regional DRR Coordinator

DG ECHO

Nairobi, Kenya

Cell: +254 734 482 985


131 Tadesse Bekele Fanta

Disaster Risk Mangement & Food Security Sector

Ministry of Agriculture



132 Mr. Takele Teshome Demissie

Programme Analyst

UNDP

P. O. Box 5580, ECA Building


Tel: +251 115 444146

Fax: +251 115 514599















37

133 Mr. Thomas Oyundi Nehondo

Project Coordinator

UNISDR

P. O. Box 30218-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 721 293 206


[email protected]

134 Mr. Umar Abdu Mairiga

Disaster Management Coordinator

Nigerian Red Cross

No. 7 Lingu Crescent, Wuse 2

Abuja, Nigeria

Tel: +234 802 3404919


135 Mr. Victor Orindi A

Ministry of Northern Kenya & Other Aridlands

P. O. Box 3772-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 720 689 909


136 Mr. Waheed Mohammed Sadek Kam

Information Researcher

IDSC C

Cairo Egypt

Tel: 0020 100520 4004

Email:

[email protected]/ [email protected]

137 Mr. Wilhelm Andrew Kiwango

Assistant lecturer

University of Dodoma

P. O. Box 395

Dodoma, Tanzania

Tel: +255 763 927866


138 Ms. Winnie Wanjiku Karanu

Project Manager, Africa Initiatives

Microsoft East Africa

P. O. Box 64736-00620

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 721 515781


139 Mr. Yitaaesu Zewdu Zeraowu

Project Officer

UNISDR

Addis Ababa

Ethiopia

Tel: 251 911 73 4501


140 Mr. Youcef Ait-Chellouche

Deputy Regional Coordinator


UN Compound Gigiri, Block N, Middle Level

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 6401


141 Mr. Zamoyoni Suleiman Pazi

Administrator

District Commissioner's Office

P. O. Box 434 USA-River

Tel: +0787 258229


UNDP Drylands Development Centre

142 Ms. Agnes Ndegwa

Executive Associate


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 4640

Cell: +254 733 622323


143 Ms. Anne Juepner

Coordinator, Nairobi Cluster


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 4642

Cell: +254 735-882 181


144 Mr. David Ngonde

Driver/Clerk


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 4512


145 Mr. Francis Opiyo

Project Coordinator-IDDP ECHO Project


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 4476

Cell: +254 733 770 496















38

146 Mr. Martin Kinuthia

Finance/Admin Assistant


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 2292

Cell: +254 733 622 323


147 Ms. Ruth Mwathi

Programme Associate


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 2300

Cell: +254 737 687990


148 Ms. Sarah Anyoti

Programme Specialist


P.O. Box 6541, Pretoria 0001

South Africa

Tel: +27 12 354 8133

Fax: +27 12 354 8111

Cell: +27 83 4018977


149 Ms. Yuko Kurauchi

Programme Specialist- DRM


P. O. Box 30552-00100

Nairobi, Kenya

Tel: +254 20 762 4509






4.3. Session 4 break way group presentation summary

Group Q1: What are the characteristics of resilience in your sector?

Q2: What kind of indicators you have been using in your projects to measure resilience at the community/household level?

Q3: What are some of the good practices that contribute to resilience from your own experiences?

Water Availability throughout the year; Accessibility: distance to water points; affordability; Quality: clean and safe from source to the household; Affordability; Adequacy; Reliable and sustainable source

Distance to water points; No of litres/person/day for both human and livestock; How regular is the water available?; Types of water storage facilities; Quality of water:((sphere standard); Management and maintenance of facilities; Clear governance structures/institutions; Incidences of water-borne diseases; Number of users/water point; Location and safety of water point/environmental concerns

Rainwater harvesting and storage; Availability of functional water user associations/providers; Cost recovery for maintenance; Education and awareness on ‘wash’; Use of early warning systems for moderation of usage; Integrating water systems to other livelihood systems e.g kitchen gardens; Linking water users to government institutions; Water conservation practices; Privatisation of critical water systems depending on context (e.g mechanised systems in parts of Somalia); Incorporation of DRR into the design of water points.

Nutrition and Health

Community: Social determinants: access to safe water; food and nutrition security; women empowerment; education level; Community health status; Available and accessible health services Health system: Safe Health facilities; Adequate staffing and medical supply and equipment; Good Governance

Nutrition status; Health status; Level of Health awareness (Health extension); Coverage of community based health initiative; Mortality and Morbidity rates; Coverage of sanitation and safe water; Availability of counselling services

Decentralization of health services and information; Extension Health workers Program; Integration of health DRR in school curriculum; Integration of community based disease and nutrition surveillance to early warning system; Consideration to health sector in drought forum; Well-coordinated approach ( national authority leading the process)

Natural Resource Management

Land/soil; Water; Forests; Fauna; Minerals; Aquatic life; Wetlands; Healthy ecosystem (Clean air, Clean water, Soil and nutrients) Maintained biodiversity; Rangelands able to regenerate and recover from shocks; Ability to support livelihoods; Able to protect people from disasters; Adaptive capacity; Management; Mechanisms for ensuring equitable access and continued productivity

Access benefit sharing to the lowest level; Existence of alternative livelihoods options diversification; Existence of policies and regulatory mechanisms; Level of household income in the long term; Livestock sector productivity; Species diversity and richness; NDVI

Area enclosure and cattle carting systems; Integrated land use planning/landscape planning; Building community institutions; CBRM; Watershed analysis and planning efficiency; Alternative energy sources; Water harvesting; Establishing fodder banks; Community to community learning

Livestock Low morbidity; Healthy mixed species herds; Optimum livestock numbers; Type of breeds (drought resistant, suitable, adaptable); Alternative livelihoods (to support the livestock sector); Access to support services e.g. markets; Mobility; Research and development; Security/peace; Knowledge; Access to early warning information

Access to improved rangelands; Mortality; Birth rates; Milk/meat production; Body condition; Prices; (Demand and supply forces, Domestic versus international markets); Nutritional status of children under 5yrs; Availability and access to water; Species diversity (Camel ownership)

Proper maintenance/ rehabilitation of water sources; Collective action (Herding, tracking resource (Marsabit, Kenya)); Grazing reserves; Rangeland management committees to regulate use of pasture for water (MERTI, Kenya); Enclosures (Southern Ethiopia); Community gardens (Alternative/fall back activity (West Africa)); Livestock corridors (West Africa); Bush management and range reseeding; Fodder bulking/reseeding(Northern Kenya); Animal healthcare

Agriculture Soil structure and fertility; Land tenure systems; Rainfall characteristics and patterns; Land holdings; Crop types and varieties; Soil moisture characteristics; Farming technologies; Agriculture policies; Extension services; Market linkages; Group negotiations and bargaining; Roads and infrastructure; Export of produce to other regions or countries; Sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures; Agricultural information sharing and training; Field exchange tours and educational visits; Seeds and fertilizers; Crop and plant varieties; Land and water management practices; Wetland and dryland technologies; Healthy ecosystem

Crop yields per ha; Productivity trends; Rainfall variability and impact on crop production; Performance of different crop types and varieties against time; Post harvest management and technologies; Gross margin analysis of different crop enterprises; Farmer participation and involved in Common Interest Groups and cooperatives; Level of household income in the long-term; Security of land tenure systems; Sustainability and viability of technologies adopted by farmers over time; Market and marketing trends of produce; Policy support instruments aimed at improving agricultural production and marketing

Viable land holdings and security of tenure; Affordable soil fertility technologies e.g. use of organic manures, etc.; Appropriate soil and water management systems; Sustainable water and land management technologies; Up to date technologies that are affordable by farmers and easily taken up, not too complex; Labour availability and affordability, particularly during peak labour demand periods; Quality of extension services and promotion of viable technologies; Choice of crops and crop varieties;

Infrastructure Access (Fit for purpose, suitable for needs; Connected, Secure, Affordable, Stakeholder-engaged, Balanced and sustainable eco-engineering infrastructure) Distance to key services and markets e.g. schools, hospitals and emerging services Disposable income to access costs (Numbers/availability of services and skills e.g. teachers, Equality of access e.g. girls versus boys and pupil teacher ratios) Subsidized basic services (Community consultation, Flood proof housing and community management groups, Local materials, Cash or food for work)

Durability; Functionality; Inclusiveness to reduce vulnerability for the disadvantaged

Long term as opposed to short term investments options for infrastructure projects; Adhere to engineering tenets to minimize disasters and losses

Education Education is more than schools; Education is the driver of resilience (hf1 3)

INFRASTRUCTURE/ ENVIRONMENT Schools to be safe; Schools to continue through shocks ; DRR to be integrated into infrastructure Infrastructure to be inclusive – for gender, for disabilities; CURRICULUM Learning-based to support lifelong learning; Support productivity (local and non-local economies); Enhance life skills – health, hygiene OTHER BASIC NEEDS SUPPORTED Nutrition; WASH; Security INCLUSIVE AND ADAPTED Disability-sensitive ; Gender equality in enrolment and progression; Adapted to cultural realities including mobility – e.g. alternative models of education for pastoralists; LOCAL COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP BALANCED WITH POSITIVE SOCIOCULTURAL CHANGE Local management and ownership essential; Wider processes of social changes e.g. FGM, gender equality, need integrating PROMOTE PRODUCTIVITY (LOCAL and IMMEDIATE), ADAPTIVITY, LIFELONG LEARNING Through curricula and teaching environment; INTEGRATE ASPECTS OF CITIZENSHIP, DEMOCRACY, ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, LIFE SKILLS – the building blocks of resilient future communities Through curricula, extra-curricular, teaching environment

Child-focused DRR initiatives; Integration of DRR aspects into curricula and infrastructure; Gender-sensitive WASH facilities; Disability-sensitive facilities/teaching; Community-level management of schools supported for their continuity and relevance; Civic education components integrated into curricula or as extra-curricula activities; Adapted forms of education (e.g. nomadic education) adopted, modelled and supported at policy level; School feeding provided where needed; Safe water supply provided; Local capacity building of teachers from local area; Adult education initiatives; Productivity components integrated; Self-help groups supported to address education; Support for community education in democracy, development, peace-building; Peer to peer clubs supported that focus on life skills and other key issues; Coordination between agencies and sectors – e.g. education with WASH, nutrition, livelihoods

Peace and Security

Peace is an outcome of several processes. It could be profiled as follows; Tolerance, Living in harmony, Freedom of movement and expression, No conflict, Justice, Dialogue, Equity, Land use

Revival of economic activities (resumption of livelihood activities); Reduced criminality(raids); Number of returnees; Evidence of integration within community; Existence of and equitable access to basic social services (Health, Education)

Integrated/multi-sectoral approach; Cross border and intra ethnic initiatives; Conflict/Early warning systems; Peace Rings; Exchange visits

42

4.4 Evaluation Form

5thAfrica Drought Adaptation Forum Evaluation Form

1. How would you rate the following (please place a check mark in the appropriate column)?

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

a. Forum as a learning experience

b. Forum as a networking opportunity

c. Practicality of forum to your work

d. Quality of presentations

e. Quality of discussions

f. Time allocated for discussions

g. Overall quality of group work

h. Overall organization of workshop

Further comments (Optional)

2. What aspects of the sessions/activities did you gain the most benefit?

3. Have you any suggestions about how the forum could be improved in the future?

Thank you for completing the questionnaire.

5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5) - United ...

Documents

Transcript of 5th Africa Drought Adaptation Forum (ADAF5) - United ...