1

Project Title: “Support to vulnerable pastoralists and agro pastoralists through Pastoral Field Schools and Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction in Hudet Woreda”

Project Donor: FAO

Project code: 743002

Baseline Survey Report

By: Mohamednur Roble April 2012

2

List of Contents

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………4

2. Objective of the survey………………………………………………………………………………….….4

3. Background of the Woreda…………………………………………………………………………………4

4. Sampling procedures and survey area……………………………………………………………………..5

5. Data collection and management method…………………………………………………………………5

6. Findings……………………………………………………………………………………………………6

6.1. General Description of survey populations…………………………………………………………..6

6.2. Socioeconomic systems………………………………………………………………………………6

6.3. Livelihood System and Characterization……………………………………………………………..6

6.4. Potential Market Sources of each Livelihood…………………………………………………………7

6.5. Policies, Procedures and Programs with Regard to Livelihood System………………………………...7

6.6. Historical Trend Analysis………………………………………………………………………………..7

6.7. Livelihood outcomes……………………………………………………………………………………8

6.7.1. Household Food Security…………………………………………………………………………….8

6.7.2. Coping with Food Insecurity and drought……………………………………………………………8

6.7.3. Traditional Coping Mechanism………………………………………………………………………8

6.7.4. Agricultural Production patterns……………………………………………………………………...8

6.7.5. Livestock Production Patterns…………………………………………………………………………8

6.7.6. Pasture and Water availability…………………………………………………………………………9

6.7.7. Major animal diseases and Impact……………………………………………………………………9

6.7.8. Veterinary Inputs………………………………………………………………………………………9

6.7.9. Household income and expenditures………………………………………………………………….9

6.8. Asset Holdings………………………………………………………………………………………….10

6.9. Access to Basic services………………………………………………………………………………...10

6.10. Early Warning Information……………………………………………………………………………...10

6.11. Access to Decision Making……………………………………………………………………………..10

6.12. Household Health Security…………………………………………………………………………..…11

3

6.13. Conflict and Personal Security…………………………………………………………………………11

6.14. Power Relation among Different Social Strata………………………………………………………....11

6.15. Saving and loan practice…………………………………………………………………………………12

6.16. The Role and status of the Customary Institutions………………………………………………………12

6.17. Major Hazards affecting livelihoods……………………………………………………………………..12

6.18. Efforts to prevent or mitigate hazard impacts……………………………………………………………13

6.19. Different stakeholder analysis…………………………………………………………….......................13

6.20. Existing coordination structure on livelihoods interventions……………………………………………13

7. Brief of the findings in each kebele and Recommendations…………………………………………...….14

7.1. Diredima Kebele…………………………………………………………………………………………..14

7.2. Lami Kebele……………………………………………………………………………………………….14

7.3. Luchole Kebele…………………………………………………………………………………………….15

7.4. Dirir Kebele………………………………………………………………………………………………..15

7.5. Haloye Kebele……………………………………………………………………………………………..15

8. Description of findings at Woreda level………………………………………………………………………..16

Appendixes………………………………………………………………………………………………………17

List of Informants……………………………………………………………………………………………….17

Table 1. Population of the survey communities…………………………………………………………………6

Table 2. Wealth status proportion……………………………………………………………………………….6

Table 3. Key livelihood sources in percentage…………………………………………………………………..6

Table 4. Types of livestock and sex composition……………………………………………………………….9

Table 5. Pasture and water availability………………………………………………………………………….9

Table 6. Key expenditures percentage....……………………………………………………………………….10

Table 7. Access to basic services………………………………………………………………………………..10

Table 8. Key Human Diseases…………………………………………………………………………………..11

Table 9. Stakeholder analysis table……………………………………………………………………………....13

4

1. Introduction

Baseline survey for the new PFS project was carried out in 5 Kebeles of Hudet Woreda. The study was preceded by project launching workshop held at Hudet woreda for all the project partners.

The study has been conducted from 27th to 29th of March in the first 2 kebeles namely Dire-dima and Lami and from 8th to 10th of April in remaining 3 kebeles namely Luchole, Dirir and Haloye, under the frame work of the project titled “Support to vulnerable pastoralists and agro pastoralists through Pastoral Field Schools and Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction” in Hudet Woreda of Liban zone, funded by FAO and implemented by Cooperazione Internazionale-COOPI. The study was carried out by three (2) COOPI staffs and 3 DA’s in each Kebele.

Before the survey started, a one day orientation training for the DA’s was made in order to clarify for them the concepts of the questionnaire and data collection methods.

2. Objective of the Survey

The overall objective of this study is to provide a good picture about the local extension systems, livelihoods and poverty situation and its causes, available resources, potential opportunities and recommendations, all of which will facilitate the formulation of a common vision and a coherent long-term development plan for the Woreda, as well as set a benchmark for evaluating the project impacts.

The specific objectives of the baseline survey include:

� To collect and analyze information from primary and secondary sources on the socioeconomic, cultural and political conditions of the Woreda/kebele. This constitutes collecting detailed information on the demographic characteristics, food security, health, water and sanitation, income and expenditure patterns cross cutting issues such as HIV/AIDs, gender and harmful traditional practices and major development actors.

� To look into the resource potential of the woreda. � Assess and analyze the causes of poverty, including institutional factors and policies � To assess the perception of the community on poverty and its causes � To provide recommendations and strategic options that can be used to reduce poverty and inform

the overall development direction of the woreda. 3. Background of the Woreda

Hudet is among the 6 woredas of Liban zone. The woreda is administratively divided into 13 major and 13 minor kebeles. It is situated in southern Ethiopia or south west of Somali regional state. It is bounded by the north Liban woreda of Guj zone (Oromia ), to the west Arero woreda of Borena zone (Oromia), to the south Dhas woreda of Borena zone (Oromia), to the east Mubarak Woreda, south east Moyale woreda of liban zone, and to the north east Filtu woreda of liban zone.

It occupies an area of 14400 km2. It falls between 39- 41° longitude and between 4° and 45" latitude. The topography of the Woreda is mostly characterized by low land and hilly especially around river Dawa with elevation of between 852-1400 above mean sea level with average annual rainfall of 700mm-1100mm.

5

The population of Hudat Woreda is estimated to be 61,000 out of which 54% are males and 46% are female. 65% of the population is pastoralist, 15% is sedentary, 10% are urban dwellers, and 15% are agro-pastoralists mainly relying on irrigation farms along River Dawa. The woreda is dominated by Garre clan of Somali’s, 100% followers of Muslim religion.

The Woreda is very poor in terms of water resources, in which most of the kebeles are lacking permanent water sources. There is Dawa river and many meandering streams crossing the Woreda. At the moment, ponds constructed by government and NGOs serve as the most important water facilities in most kebeles. The main source of income for the society is livestock rearing which constitute about 85%, trade and others takes the rest.

The Woreda has poor socio-economic infrastructure such as health, education, and communication, though there are lots of efforts from the government to increase the coverage of all from time to time.

The Woreda is endowed with many natural resources and wild life, but not yet fully exploited and thus contribute less to the socio economic development of the woreda. Due to limited financial resource, lack of awareness of the community and lack of skilled manpower the woreda community cannot attain their full potential towards sustainable development. The nature and characteristic of land use of the Woreda (for farming and others) is less than 15% and 85% is for livestock grazing. The Woreda suffered from recurrent drought and resource based conflict among the Somali-Oromo neighbouring populations though to mention very few for the last three years.

4. Sampling procedures and survey area

The survey study has been conducted in the five Kebeles of Hudet woreda, along River Dawa. Community respondents representing the whole people of the five sample Kebeles were selected using purposive sampling technique with criteria of having farmers who practice farming of irrigation farms along Dawa River. The five Kebeles given were Dire-dima, Lami, Luchole, Dirir and Haloye.

5. Data collection and management methods

The data was collected using questionnaire administered by the interviewers, there were 5 data collectors (2 COOPI staffs and 3 government experts). The main characteristics of the data collectors were those are having the knowledge of reading and writing in English, ability to speak local language, good communication skill and good listening ability. Orientation meeting was given to the data collectors on how to handle and deal with the questionnaire.

At each site community gatherings have been conducted for introducing the mission objectives and sought for community collaboration. It was after when Kebele leaders has been requested to appoint the key persons for being a respondent to the interviews. At each site knowledgeable local leaders, youth and women participated in the interviewing occasions. They have been given a short orientation how to give the right responses upon demand of the interviewers. In each kebele 5 data collection gatherings were organized with varying numbers of respondents. In some cases 3-5 people were interviewed, and sometimes 10.

6

6. Findings

6.1. General Description of Survey Population

Table 1. The population of the community in the 5 kebeles of survey area

Under 5 Elderly Youth/Adults Disabled PLWHA Male 2145 879 2673 36 -Not yet studied

Female 2545 645 4860 16 -Not yet studied

Total 4690 1524 7533 52

6.2. Socioeconomic Systems

� Production systems - The main production system in all the survey area is agro-pastoralism as the place is very suitable for farming along river Dawa. The communities in the survey area have very few animals mainly few cattle, oxen for ploughing, shoats and donkeys.

� Social structures – In each of the survey kebeles, there are different committees formed by NGOs and Governments for different purposes. Some of those groups have undergone training while others not yet. Each committee has a goal to achieve within their community. They work on voluntary basis and usually perform mainly awareness rising campaigns to the communities amidst of development and unity. The detail briefing on the local institutions will follow later at the coming sections.

� Resource Management systems – The local community manage the available pasture and water by following certain mechanisms. During wet season the livestock only graze in far thick bush areas while the areas near water sources and villages/Kebeles are kept for during dry season. A local rangeland management by laws is established by some selected elders who can enforce the law and punish those who break. In some places there were public enclosures usually kept for weak animals in emergency drought situations, esp. for permanently settled locations such as those ones visited. For example those who graze in a restricted area are punished. The punishment usually ranges from fine of goat up to camel.

� Wealth status Proportion - poor, medium, rich: Depending on the responses from different interviewed communities, an average was drawn out of all the responses and the below table created. Table 2. Wealth status proportion

Criteria Poor (1) Medium (2) Rich (3) 0-5 Heads, with no farmland � 5-60 Heads, with farmland � 60-300 Heads, with farmland �

6.3. Livelihood System and Characterization

Here, the interviewers tried to get insight towards major sources of earning a living. Different ways of living have been mentioned by the community and all the data was tabulated below in form of percentage.

Table 3. Key livelihood sources in percentage

Livestock Crop Mixed Petty trade Others % HHs 10% 15% 70% 3% 2%

7

6.4. Potential Market Sources of each Livelihood

Market opportunity was one of the main challenges of the Woreda population in General. It was before three years that Hudat livestock market was founded through the government effort and ACDI/VOCA an international NGO. Currently the communities only rely on Hudat market for their animals sale while cereals produced is just sold to shop owners in Hudat town who again sell for retail price. The market opportunity seems to be unreliable and linkage to other markets and traders is very crucial.

� For cattle: The market is Hudat and sometimes Halu Livestock Market, in Arero Woreda Oromia region, esp. for Dire-dima, Lami and Luchole Kebeles.

� Crop: Only Hudat town served to be market for agricultural products such as Maize, Onions, Tomatoes and crop residues. Sometimes there can be opportunistic market such as people who came from Moyale and buy all products at the site, though this happens very rare.

� Gum and Incense: This is one of the livelihoods opportunities in the survey area. People gather gum and incense during critical drought periods for sale which then leads to cash injection for households, which is then in turn used household’s needs.

6.5. Policies, Procedures and Programs with Regard to Livelihood System

Governmental policies with regard to livelihood systems can be many of which the community always remembered two above all. Those two are categorized on two; favourable and non-favourable: Favourable policy/Programs: Just before the last two years the government of Somali region backed by the federal government has drawn along term development strategy for all the woredas of Somali region with annual river flow. That is River Basin Development Plan and Villagization Program (Locally Tafaasas). In Hudet Woreda 6 kebeles have selected for the program, the last year the government managed to resettle around 3000 HH along the river bank. To implement the program, the regional government has provided 143 Generators for the entire entire program. Meanwhile land preparation and bush clearings were going side by side while the resettling program was ongoing. According to Woreda LCRD office, 918 Hectares of irrigable land has been prepared so far. Limitation of the Program During the community interviews, it was noted that the program has good impacts if successfully implemented. But the communities mentioned the following aspects as bottleneck to the program: • The generator type was new to the area with no or very little spare parts. • There are no skilled technicians to maintain generators, and the community lacks know-how on

operation and use. • Almost all the generators are not functional with little attention from the government • Tools were not given for most of the farmers.

6.6. Historical Trend Analysis

In the past 30 years, many changes have been noted in line with the life of the people. Before 30 years, people only depend on milk as food and there are very few farming practices. People are scattered and pure pastoralists who practices nomadic way of life. Only animals’ products such as Milk and meat are solely used for food. There are lots of changes compared to the past 3 decades; some include: • Change in peoples’ life style; from pure nomads to agro-pastoralists • Change towards community development, basic services such as schools, health, water etc. • Great change in climate condition (previously always rains and prosperous periods, but currently

recurrent drought with bad impacts) • Previously there is no good government; there were recurrent conflicts among neighbouring clans but

now all managed by good governance.

8

6.7. Livelihood Outcomes 6.7.1. Household Food Security

As agro-pastoralist, the communities practices modern agricultural irrigation farming, though it is at its’ beginning stage. River basin irrigation farming is highly practiced and reliable unlike opportunistic rain fed farms. Varieties of Crops are harvested every season by most of the inhabitant households. Apart from few of those cereals sold for other needs, the rest are stored for family consumption.

On top of that, the government also has a program of providing relief food every three months for most of the poor families in the kebeles. Each kebeles has allocated number of beneficiaries and the assessment team understood that most of the people in the kebeles are receiving this privilege. Maize, wheat, cooking oil and sometimes rice are some of the types given in three months interval in most cases. During critical periods, incase all the above mentioned food chains are not reachable, then the people get foods on sale from Hudet markets, except few who receive from Moyale and Nagelle through orders.

6.7.2. Coping with Food Insecurity and drought

When a drought hazard occurs, the communities through the support of government agents and NGOs have their own mitigation and prevention strategies. Those who have quite large number of animals sell some to save the rest and get food for their families. As a coping mechanism, those households who lost majority herds during recent droughts or completely dropped out of the pure pastoral system started settling around Dawa River and increasingly involved in opportunistic farming using rain fed and micro irrigation systems. This shows that crop production is considered as a way out and alternative livelihoods option for the pastoralists affected by the hazards using small scale irrigation.

6.7.3. Traditional Coping Mechanisms Mainly the community practices good asset management systems in times of crises. Indigenous knowledge of the locals is of great importance in contributing to survival in most cases. Animals are the most important asset to the pastoralists, and when it comes to animal mortality pastoralists are highly affected mentally and psychologically. To address the issue; many strategies are always employed to form barrier for such calamity. It includes: keeping area enclosures for critical periods, grazing in far areas during prosperity, strengthening resource management systems at local levels, having strong relationships with governments and good reporting on existing situations etc are some of the coping strategies.

6.7.4. Agricultural Production patterns

Seasons: Mainly farming practices take place in two seasons; the Gu’ and Deyr (rainy seasons). During the Gu’ which is the main prosperous period during normal times, in the area people receives a sufficient amount of rainfalls. As those government generators are not yet very functional, rain fed farming is the main practice. Hence most of the crops are farmed in the mentioned two seasons while the remaining seasons, meaning (Xaga & Jilal) land preparations takes place. Type of Crops: The main types of crops are: Maize, Onion, Tomato, Sorghum, and Beans. Challenges: Lack of hand tools, proper generators with spare parts, fuel, crop invading insects, wild animals eating crops, lack of training on farming skills etc. are some of the main challenges with crop farming in the Woreda.

6.7.5. Livestock Production patterns

Livestock usually gives milk, meat, skin and money. Livestock owners have very big chance to attain their financial needs at the convenient time possible through selling.

9

Above all the person who owns large number of animals has high prestige and respected in the community.

Table 4. Types of livestock and sex composition in the 5 kebele: Camel Cattle Shoats Donkey Male 926 1292 2940 145 Female 2779 3878 11764 119

Total 3705 5170 14704 264

6.7.6. Pasture and Water availability Pasture and water are the main survival needs for animals’ esp. during critical periods. In the 5 surveyed kebeles, the water source is Dawa River which flows continuously throughout the year. Thus water shortage is not an issue, despite lack of cleanliness. Therefore, for the water everyone can access freely without any hindrance. Pasture remains the main concern in the area as all these 5 kebeles located on the route to water, the pasture condition is depleted earlier before other kebeles. To maintain forage availability, the community applies different strategies such as grazing far areas during rainy periods, cutting evergreen plants for animals, collecting green grasses from river banks etc.

Table 5. Pasture and water availability 0 1 2 3 4 No, fair, good, very good, Excellent Jilaal/Winter Xaga/Summer Deyr/Autumn Gu’/Spring Pasture 1 2 3 4 Water 1 3 3 4

6.7.7. Major animal diseases and impact

Internal and external parasites and infectious diseases, such as Pneumonia, wounds, tick born disease, unknown diseases of camel etc. are some of the most important and prevalent diseases in the area. The effect of those diseases on animals ranges from bad weakening to death cases. When animals are infected usually, the community tries to do the treatment either traditionally or modern drug administrations.

6.7.8. Veterinary inputs: In most of the kebeles, esp. those selected for the baseline survey, there are animal health post constructed by government. Most of those clinics are functional though the drug availability is very low, sometimes very few drug types with little quantity are found at the kebeles. This is only attributed to poor financial capacity of the Woreda government which always plans the same for all the 26 kebeles of the woreda. The drug quality is very good given that they purchase from Ethiopian vet drugs agencies in Debrezeit or Addis ababa. AHT (Animal Health Technicians) are the key experts running the vet clinics in the kebeles. Most important, CAHWs are seen to be the best veterinary service providers in remote places where formal government services are low. In most of the kebeles around 2-3 CAHWs are available who received training by different NGOs and government. They had direct linkages with woreda LCRD office which serves as their main port from which they purchase drugs. With their little bug containing basic equipments and drugs, they are mobile and move very place to place to attend sick animals’ cases. Their treatment costs are fair and affordable according to the communities. Some of the CAHWs become drop out from their profession and joined other businesses due to lack of attention and support from government. To make the services of the remaining CAHWs more sustainable, they deserve to be strengthened from grass root level to make them more operational.

6.7.9. Household Income and Expenditures

The Key sources of income for the different community groups are mainly agro-pastoralism (farming), labour works, collection and selling of natural resources such as gum and incense etc.

10

The kind of labour works in the area include building local houses, extracting masonry stones and sands for construction, loading and unloading etc. which is then in turn used for different expenditures.

Table 6. Key expenditures Food Clothes Medicine School Others

Proportion 70% 15% 6% 4% 5%

6.8. Asset Holdings

Type of assets owned by HHs: in the proposed kebeles for PFS implementation program, the main assets owned by Households are Farmlands, Livestock, Plot of lands, etc.

6.9. Access to Basic Services

� During normal times: The woreda government provides necessary drugs for both human and animals. Health professional (Health extension workers & Vet experts) are assigned to the kebeles to provide the services for the community. Primary school teachers are always stationed at the kebeles to entertain teaching-learning process. PTA’s (Parent teacher associations) are the most important bodies at community level with the role of mobilizing community to educate their children along with Drop out Committees. Those HH who fail to bring their children to school are not granted registration for food rations in the kebele, one way of motivating the pastoralists towards education. School drop outs are followed up by the committee to return to school.

� During drought: As it can be necessary during drought period, all the government programs are focused on emergency support program with less attention to all the above described social services. Water trucking mainly takes all the government and NGOs concern in critical period.

� Key challenges: Poor financial capacity of the government, lack of proper health and vet professionals, lack of community skill, lack of knowledgeable teachers, lack of drugs etc remain the most important challenges to attain better community services.

Table 7. Access to Basic services 0-4 Health Market Veterinary Education Water

Normal times 4 2 3 4 4 During drought 3 1 2 0 4

6.10. Early Warning Information

At Woreda level there is the government department called DPPD under which Early Warning Desk works. The said department has an Early Warning Expert, but no actions seen towards establishment and promotion of early warning systems at community level. In all the 5 kebeles in which survey was conducted, unfortunately early warning system EWS doesn’t exist. EWS serves providing warning services before any looming hazards and warns the community to take necessary prevention or mitigation strategies which then minimize the effect of hazards on the pastoralists and their assets. When there is a crisis, the EWS information reaches the community through government experts and officials who visit the PA’s on routine basis. Even the one from government is not very effective and reliable as the government lacks proper knowledge and skill on EWS information dissemination methods.

6.11. Access to decision making

In majority of the households, decision on income and utilization of money is reached through joint discussion of husband and wife. Adult children are sometimes incorporated in decision making issues.

11

Within the traditional behaviours, in few cases the decision is made by only the male which is very discouraged at this time.

6.12. Household Health Security

Human health services in the kebeles are very poor provided that there are health post and HEW’s at each kebele. But the main problem is lack of drugs in those clinics. Most of them are not functional since construction while the rest are partially functional with few basic drugs. While there are programs of 16 package training for model households in kebeles by health extension workers, there are good knowledge of HIV/AIDS. The local communities themselves are mentioning mode of transmission and prevention of HIV/AIDS. There has been constant awareness risings on public hygiene, toilets use, water hygiene etc. thus people has enough knowledge on ways of keeping hygiene despite poor or lack of resources. Harmful traditional practices esp. FGM have dramatically decreased as there are always campaigns of alleviating such practices. Still most sections of the community practice the Clitoridectomy method (partially cutting clitoris and leaving without stitching). HEW are always making great efforts to make the community totally stop the practices, but this needs great deal of work and time.

Table 8. Key human diseases 1=Low and 5= Very high Diseases Impact on adult 1-5 Children under 5 years Pneumonia 2 5 Malaria 3 5 Diarrhea 4 5

6.13. Conflict and personal security

Generally in the Woreda, there was bad conflict between the Borana (Oromo) and Garre (Somali) clan which dates back to many decades or even centuries. As both communities are neighbouring, their conflict mainly related to resource sharing and equally important: territory. There has been great hostility among the two communities and recurrent conflicts which claimed great losses of lives and assets. Their conflict used to happen every two years inflicting very bad negative impact on both sides. But within the last three years, there were no conflicts as a result of government efforts made such as general peace talks organized at many places. Local communal penalty by laws were drawn which is signed and ratified by the leaders of the previously conflicting communities. Sporadic killings and constant lootings of animals have drastically decreased and now the kebeles seemed to have permanently settled.

6.14. Power Relation among Different Social Strata

At Kebele level, there is government structures (meaning kebele administration bodies) composed of 11 people in most cases. As the kebeles are inhabited by different sub-clans, each sub-clan is allocated a representative in the government structure. The tactics of handling political and socio-economic issues is dealt with most possible due care to avoid friction amongst the leaders and all sections of communities. The majority sub-clan at that specific kebele may be granted the chairman by the consent of the inhabitants, then the rest likewise. There are no minority group who are underprivileged as all the people are the same community who share same language, religion, race and ethnical background. As each sub clan is already represented in the seat of local structures, each community is pre-assured to get any support that comes to the kebele. This seems to be good strategy to keep the community united and equally share benefits and burdens.

12

6.15. Saving and loan practice

Saving is one the best livelihood practices with very good promising results. Modern saving mechanisms and loan practices are not available in the area. The communities hardly know about saving and loan practices. Traditionally the saving mechanisms are very low, there are no such practices.

6.16. The Role and status of the Customary Institutions

In each kebele there exist different committees established by government and some by NGOs. They have different roles and responsibilities within the community. Some of those committees include:

A. Water Management Committee: has responsibility to manage the available water resources in the kebeles, ensure proper utilization and wise use of water. As the assessed kebeles depend on river as water sources, the role of the committee in this case is very minimal as there are no restrictions towards uses of water.

B. Rangeland Committee: As the areas concerned are along river Dawa, this particular committee is very crutial as they are there to apply seasonal grazing areas to ensure fodder availability in their vicinity during drought periods. The committee is formed by Woreda LCRD office before 2 years to promote better use and management of range resources.

C. PTA (Parent Teacher association) Committee: Formed by Worda Education Office, this is the school committee who are there with the purpose of collaborating with teachers to ensure smooth teaching-learning process. They are responsible to restrict school dropouts and awareness rising towards educating children

D. Health Promotion Committee: in collaboration with Health Extension Workers, HEW, they mobilize the community to attain proper hygiene and sanitation standards through toilet excavation, practicing hand washing, promotion of family planning and discouraging bad traditional practices.

E. Peace Committee: Formed by Woreda Peace and Justice Office, this particular committee is responsible to promote peace in the neighbouring communities, avoiding conflicts with neighbouring clans on resource sharing and territory etc.

F. Farming Committee: This committee is formed by woreda LCRD office to work side by side with DA’s in each kebele. Their main role is to mobilize the community to cultivate and prepare their land to become self-reliant. Some of their works include taking land from lazy farmers to be used by hard workers.

While the above are modern structures brought by government and NGOs, traditionally there are some customary institutions such as Abba Olla (nomadic village leader) who is responsible for deciding on issues facing pastoralists and their animals. Usually suggests and decides the movement patterns, periods and locations.

6.17. Major hazards affecting livelihoods

The main hazards affecting livelihoods in the kebeles is Drought and associated human and animal diseases. Drought is natural phenomenon which happens as a result of failure of the expected seasonal

13

rains which in turn leads to pasture depletion and failure of crops. Drought affects the livelihoods of pastoralists in many ways. Their livestock dies and children starve if not well managed. Previously drought cycles are very less and with long duration of its absence, but recently it became highly cyclic and recurrent. This is mainly attributed global climatic changes, erratic and uneven distribution of rains, delay and early cessation of rains, high population pressure, overgrazing etc.

6.18. Efforts to prevent or mitigate hazard impacts or increase preparedness of the communities

There are very few efforts focused on mitigating drought effects from the government and NGOs in the kebeles. Drought preparedness programs are barely available, with no or less skill improvement efforts. In the selected river basin kebeles, animals die in huge quantities every dry period which is attributed to lack of fodder rather than water. As Dawa River remains the only permanent water during critical periods, almost all the kebeles flee to the area with their animals which in turn exacerbates the fodder availability condition and leads to total depletion. There are no saving and credit services which can be benefitted by the communities during the hard times.

6.19. Different Stakeholder analysis (Who is doing what and where)

Table 9. Different stakeholders in the Woreda No NGO Woreda Kebele Type of Activities 1 COOPI Hudat Voucher treatment support, vet support, aqua

tabs distribution, CAHWs refresher trainings,

2 Save Children Hudat Nutrition program, Birka/pond rehabilitations,

3 ZOA Refugee care Hudat All Kebeles

IDP support, but not yet started

4 PSNP Government Hudat All kebeles

Public works, road maintenance, food for work

6.20. Existing coordination structure on livelihoods interventions

At Woreda Level: The DPPD (Disaster prevention and preparedness department) is the main bureau with the mandate to coordinate, collaborate and closely supervise the livelihood interventions in the Woreda. Different line departments such as Water Bureau and LCRD Bureau followed by Administration jointly work with DPPD to monitor NGOs. These bureaus are those who are signatories of partnership agreements and to which NGOs refer for focal person etc.

The woreda government has the obligation to directly communicate with the Zone and Region if there are such needs. The woreda has monthly and quarterly reports to be directed to the Zone head. Some time there are evaluations at regional level in which all the Woreda officials are invited. There are NGO coordination meetings always held quarterly at the zonal headquarter or any other location decided by the zone.

At Community Level: The kebele structure is the main bodies to which NGO refer during their intervention. They are responsible to provide necessary supports and human labour in times of need.

14

Furthermore, they decide the magnitude of community contribution and involvement in relief and development works if there is any. In some rare cases, independent committee is formed for working with NGOs if the kebele structure is may be busy with some other works.

7. Brief Description of the findings in each kebele

7.1. Diredima Kebele:

It is located 17 km northwest of Hudet town. The kebele was established 7 years ago by few farmers who used to practice farming along the river Dawa which flows 2 km from the Kebele. The kebele has 356 HH or approximately 2136 people out of whom 600 are children U5, 170 elderly, 5 disabled and the rest are adults. The kebele has 159 hectares of irrigable land and of this 100 hectares are prepared for irrigation purposes. The main sources source of income is farming (agro-pastoralism). The population of the livestock in the kebele is estimated as 90 camels, 320 cattles, 1040 shoats and 45 donkeys. Some of the basic social services include only Human health post with very few drugs. To support the River basin irrigation program, the government provided 15 generators for the kebele to serve 159 hectares of land (1 generator for 10 HH), but unfortunately all are still nonfunctional as the community lacks know-how and spare parts for the generators are hardly available.

There are no any other NGO programs in the kebele. It seems that this kebele is among those with very limited basic services. Drought preparedness programs are not in place while every dry period animal die due to lack of fodder. The community lacks access to clean water; hence water purification chemicals are not available.

Recommendation

• The kebele is selected for PFS program implementation since the site proved to be very strategic in terms of market linkage and availability of PFS facilitators.

7.2. Lami Kebele:

Located only 15 km north of Hudet, Lami kebele is inhabited by a population of about 378 HH (2268 people). The total population of the livestock in the kebele is 2085 heads out of which 3.1% is camel, 24% cattle, 71.9% shoats and 1% is donkey. Like diredima, agro-pastoralism is the main source of income. There are 82 hectares of irrigable land in the kebele which is under preparation. Provided by the government, the 9 generators for irrigation purposes are not yet functional due to same problem as mentioned above. The access to basic services is very minimal. There are school and health post which is partially functional. NGO programs in the kebele is currently nil. Fodder production activities are not there to uphold livestock survivability during critical periods.

Recommendation

• Due to easy access to market, highly convincing soil nature, presence of farmers training center etc. the site is selected for PFS program.

15

7.3. Luchole kebele:

It is located northeast of Hudet 17 km. Established 6 years ago, it got 615 HH approximately 3695 out of which 1350 are male and 2345 are female. The livestock population is 300 camels, 350 cattle, 5865 shoats and 100 donkeys. River Dawa is 6 km from the kebele residential area and 46 hectares of land is now prepared for irrigation farming. The kebele has school and health post. The cultivable land of the kebele is very small compared to the number of farmers.

Recommendation

• The kebele cannot be selected for PFS implementation program due to limited area of cultivable land for fodder production.

7.4. Dirir Kebele:

It is a kebele located 40 km east of Hudet along river Dawa. It has a population of 2700 people (450 HH). Located in a bit strategic wet and dry season grazing area, the kebele is among those with highest livestock populations. It has 3200 camels, 3800 cattle, 6000 shoats, 79 donkeys, 10 mules and 203 hens. The basic social services in this community include school, health post, vet post and FTC (farmers training center). This kebele has 215 hectares of irrigable land and the irrigation practices are among the model in the woreda. Fodder production activity is low, despite community received trainings on Fodder production, Storage and Management given by COOPI last year under SCMDRR project. One site was cleared for fodder production, generators given and only grass seeds remaining.

Compared to other locations, Dirir is on the best stage in terms of drought preparedness programs while still improvements are very crucial.

Recommendation:

• Given the site has many cultivated communal lands for expanding fodder production activity with skilled CAHWs to be PFS facilitators, Dirir is selected to be one of PFS implementation kebeles.

7.5. Haloye Kebele:

It is one of the most marginalized and remote communities of Hudet Woreda. It is 82 km aeast of Hudet along the river. The inhabitants of the kebele (around 500 HH) are of lower class poor households who lives mainly depend on farming practices. The livestock populations are among the lowest in the area as almost all the animals died within the last 3 years consecutive droughts. Currently 200 cattle, 300 shoats, 50 camels and 20 donkeys are what are termed as livestock. On average basis, each HH owns 1.1 animal. Dawa river is 3km from the location of the PA and 154 hectares of irrigable land under use for farming. The access to basic services is something ruled out. The main challenges of the kebele is lack of proper access road to Hudet and other neighbouring kebeles as it is located after many meandering streams/wadi and endless hills.

16

Recommendation:

• The kebele community needs different kinds of supports esp. skill improvement on drought preparedness programs by strengthening indigenous knowledge on use of fodder and hay making. This is vital since the kebele lost much of livestock due to lack of animal feeds.

• Given there are vast needs in the kebele which can be attended to; the kebele has to be considered for PFS program

Data collection at community level during the survey

8. Brief Description of the finding at Woreda Level

Currently the Woreda government of Hudet is mainly concerned with one important program. It is river basin irrigation and villagization program (Tafaasas) along Dawa river. As Hudet Woreda, there are 5 kebeles which are now working on the river basin irrigation. Around 5000 HH are planned to be restleed along the river in 5 kebeles and practice irrigation. The regional government has provided 140 Generators for the program which are distributed to the communities in the 5 riverine kebeles. Around 2000 hectares of irrigable land has been prepared and the irrigation activity is under progress, though there are so many ups and downs.

The Woreda cabinet members usually make field missions to the river kebeles on monthly basis to ensure mobilization of the communities towards the general program trend.

17

List of Informants

No Name of Informant Kebele No Name of Informant Kebele

1 Mohamed Issaq Lami 33 Ibrein Jilo Haloye

2 Hassan Tulicha '' 34 Ibro Hassan ''

3 Malim Bishar Alqer '' 35 Madker Malim Edin ''

4 Khadija Golo '' 36 Ibrahim Edinow ''

5 Adow Edin '' 37 Hassan Dhoko Matoye ''

6 Abdiaya Ibrahim '' 38 Issack Jilo Godana ''

7 Haway Hassan '' 39 Hasanow Abdirahman Ibrahim

''

8 Isaack Adow '' 40 Hassan Golicha Ali ''

9 Hassan Ibrahim '' 41 Hassan Abdi Roble ''

10 Issack Godana '' 42 Issack Emed Midow ''

11 Issackow Edin '' 43 Ibrahim Edinow Sheq Nura

''

12 Hassanow Ibrahim '' 44 Issack Hussein Bagaja ''

13 Ashu Edin '' 45 Hussein Adaw Luchole

14 Mohamed Alow Diredima 46 Issackow Aliow Roba ''

15 Shura Aliyow '' 47 Dhiisow Abdulla ''

16 Aliow Abdi '' 48 Duba Satu ''

17 Abdi Ibrahim '' 49 Abdiya Gababa ''

18 Haway Aliya '' 50 Habiba Yaldes Alo ''

19 Ibraye Abdi '' 51 Ibrahim Mohamed Hassan

''

20 Adan Aliow Abdiarahman '' 52 Adow Hassan Haydar ''

21 Abdow Aliow Abdirahman

'' 53 Hassanow Nurow ''

22 Halima Mohamed '' 54 Aliow Hussein Doyow Dirir 23 Hassan Madker '' 55 Ibrahim Eymoy Dambala ''

24 Habiba Hassan Madker '' 56 Abdullahi Hasan Adan ''

25 Hassan Hussein '' 57 Yaqub Mohamed Ali ''

26 Diyara Malow '' 58 Mustafe Abdi Ali ''

27 Mohamud Madker '' 59 Enow Aliow Hassan ''

28 Shukri Malim Hassan Haloye 60 Edin Ali Abey ''

29 Ache Edin Mohamed '' 61 Faduma Mohamed Abdi ''

30 Aliqer Hassan '' 62 Sadia Ali Adan ''

31 Bilow Malim Hassan '' 63 Fayley Issack Edin ''

32 Alqer Edinow Sheikh '' 64 Gababdu Aliow Ibrein ''

'' 65 Mako Malim Aliow ''