210 likes | 308 Views
CONCERN WORLDWIDE (MALAWI) F OOD A ND C ASH T RANSFER. MALAWI CONTEXT 2005-06. A small landlocked, densely populated country Dependant on small holder agriculture Distance from international markets limiting opportunities for diversification
E N D
MALAWI CONTEXT 2005-06 • A small landlocked, densely populated country • Dependant on small holder agriculture • Distance from international markets limiting opportunities for diversification • Poor harvests in 2005 resulted in low income and high food prices • Over 5 million people at risk • Requiring 335,400MT
PROGRAMME CONTEXT • A large food aid programme was planned and implemented • Concern undertook a rapid food security assessment • Destructive copping strategies • Rapidly escalating food prices • Low coverage of food aid • Urgent need for an intervention • Approximately 50% MFE
CONCEPTUALISATION & DESIGN FACT Conceptualisation • Complemented emergency relief programme • Supported those not reached by other agencies • Covered “missing food entitlements” (50%) FACT Design • Beneficiaries = 5,050 households • Duration = 4 months: January–April • Strict financial controls: Zero leakages • Low–key cash handling: Low security risk.
DESIGN FEATURES (1) Food + Cash: Why food? • 20kg maize + 4kg beans + 1 litre oil = 560 kcal = 25% of need • Sphere guidelines: 2,100 kcal; 10–12% protein; 17% fat • Protected food consumption against market failure Why cash? • Empowering: gives beneficiaries choices • Allows non–food needs to be met • More cost-effective than food • Potential catalyst effect on markets
DESIGN FEATURES (2) Banding by household size: Band B (4–6 members): Average K 1,400 Band A (1–3 members): –75% K 350 Band C (7+ members): +75% K2,450
DESIGN FEATURES (3) Cash transfers linked to market price: Month Cost of Total cost Change in ration (Euros) cost (%) January K 1,383 51,690 February K 1,705 66,459 + 29% March K 2,185 81,228 + 22% April K 1,306 48,261 – 41%
TARGETING METHODOLOGY • Initial sensitisation with community leaders • Input into selection criteria • Group village community meeting • Sensitisation and selection • Selection undertaken with Triangulation methodology • 1000 targeted via HIV & HBC groups
TARGETING CHALLENGES & ISSUES • Time constraint led to sub-contracting and non-application of triangulation • Multiple criteria led to some confusion and changes • Elite Capture by (71% headmen included) • Exclusion error of some of the most vulnerable
DIRECT IMPACTS Food: • 80% consumed by the household • 20% shared, mostly with relatives • Very little food sold • Any surplus generally “saved”
DIRECT IMPACTS Cash: • Consumption • Food purchases (maize, sometimes cassava) • Groceries (relish, salt, soap, paraffin) • Health care (hospital bills, medicines) • Food processing (maize milling) • Transport (hospital, market) • Investment • Agriculture (fertiliser, seeds) • Asset accumulation (goats, chickens) • Education (notebooks, pens, fees) • Access to land (rented or bought land)
INDIRECT IMPACTS Agriculture: FACT beneficiaries did less ganyu so were able to work their own land Asset Protection: No need to sell assets Labour markets: Less ganyu by beneficiaries = more work opportunities for non–beneficiaries HIV: Reduced labour requirement = more time supporting the sick, also reduced risk of transmission
MARKET EFFECTS • Very low impact • No sign of inflation • Also did not attract traders • Need to look more closely at this aspect in future
SOCIAL EFFECTS (1) Intra Community Tensions: • Changes the relative wealth/power structure • Concern beneficiaries “included” and “excluded” • Some ethnic minorities excluded
SOCIAL EFFECTS (2) Intra Household Tensions • Some men misused the cash; • To go drinking • Womanising • Women involved community leaders to be given position of the ration • This could lead to conflict and even violence • 77% of MHH discussed cash use with family
APPROPRIATE? • 81 TO 83% of respondents preferred the food and cash mix. • 60 to 70% of the cash was spent on food • In FGDs beneficiaries noted the flexibility • Food was available for sale • Allowed for investment even during time of stress
ADVOCACY • Demonstrated that can be achieved in an emergency i.e. rapid implementation • Modalities used applicable for social protection projects • Initially government sceptical; now involved in their own cash transfer • Has been used in to advocate for cash rather than food for current response
UPTAKE • Great interest from donors, civil soc. And government Impediments: • Action and reaction of the market • Scaling up the modality • Lack of good info re: the demographic and social structures of villages