Resilience Concepts and Measurement Workshop

1. Resilience Concepts and Measurement Workshop 2.3 Further Applications of Resilience Analyses Tim Frankenberger TANGO International Washington, D.C. January 12, 2017

2. Session 2.3 Overview • Brief overview of resilience studies and analyses from: • Ethiopia PRIME IE RMS – Further analysis • Enhancing Resilience & Economic Growth in Somalia Baseline • Zimbabwe Resilience Research Initiative (ZRRI) Study

3. PRIME IE RMS • Recall: • Over the 1-year period between March 2014 and March 2015, households in the two areas in Ethiopia chosen as sites of the PRIME project’s impact evaluation, Borena and Jijiga, experienced unusually severe drought conditions. • TANGO employed data collected before the drought occurred (with a baseline survey in December 2013) and after, the latter from a panel of 414 households included in the 2014-2015 Interim Monitoring Survey (IMS).

4. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis RQs • Which resilience capacities enabled households to recover from the drought? • What were the coping strategies that the capacities enabled (or helped prevent?) • Which resilience capacities should be bolstered to increase households’ resilience to drought in the PRIME project’s operational area?

5. PRIME IE RMS: Methods • Three sets of methods were applied: • Growth regressions-The change in food security over each drought wave was regressed on a variety of indicators of household and community resilience capacity while also controlling for the degree of shock exposure, initial food security, and household characteristics. • Positive deviance analysis-A group of households that fared far better than average over the course of the drought waves. • Descriptive and regression analyses to determine which capacities enabled or prevented different household coping strategies.

6. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis Results Which resilience capacities enabled households to recover from the drought? • Across all analyses, the capacity that is most consistently associated with households’ ability to recover from the drought – and for which the strongest evidence exists from this analysis—is: • Access to financial resources

7. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis Results Five other capacities also show up as having supported households’ ability to recover across the shock waves and methods of analysis: • Bonding social capital (bonds between community members); • Access to informal safety nets; • Availability of hazard insurance; • Asset ownership; and • Access to communal natural resources.

8. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis Results • In terms of coping strategies used by positive deviants (PD), the two most widely used were • Participate in food-for-work or cash-for-work; and • Receive food aid. • PD households were better able to maintain stability in their food security in the face of the drought by relying on formal sources of assistance. • The formal assistance prevented them from turning to other negative coping strategies

9. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis Results • Recall: • The PRIME project’s goal is to enable households to become more resilient to future droughts in a self-reliant manner. • The project seeks to identify the resilience capacities that are associated with less reliance on food aid during the drought • The PRIME project would also aim to discourage the use of negative coping strategies that undermine households’ long-term resilience.

10. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis Results • The resilience capacities that are likely to reduce households’ reliance on food aid, encourage the use of positive, self-reliant coping strategies, and/or to reduce the use of negative coping strategies: • Bonding social capital, • Access to informal safety nets, • Asset ownership, • Bridging social capital, • Access to financial resources, • Human capital, • Access to communal natural resources, and • Social protection in communities.

11. PRIME IE RMS: Further Analysis Conclusions • Life-saving assistance such as food aid and assistance in the event of livestock loss (“hazard insurance”) will continue to be needed in the future. • Timely social protectionprevents households from engaging in negative coping strategies and contributes to their recovery as demonstrated by the positive deviant analysis. These are critical investments that support resilience. • The PRIME project’s investments should also continue to help build those resilience capacities that enable households to become more resilient to future droughts in a self-reliant manner.

12. Studies: Somalia Baseline • Enhancing Resilience and Economic Growth in Somalia Program: Baseline Study (2014-2017) • USAID Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) • Office of Food for Peace (FFP) • East Africa Regional Mission (EA) • Projectgoals: • Increase the capacity of households and communities to adapt to recurrent shocks • Build on the ecological, social, and economic capital of households and communities • Increase learning of communities, implementers, USAID, and other stakeholders • Program beneficiaries, IPs, and geographic location: • STORRE (CARE): Southern Somalia; primarily peri-urban • PROGRESS(Catholic Relief Services): Somaliland; primarily rural • REAL (World Vision); Southern Somalia; primarily urban • Data • Baseline (2016) Somalia Operational Map

13. Somalia Key Findings Majority of households exposed to at least one shock in the year prior to survey across project areas. Most shocks are environmental (drought, flooding, late/variable rainfall). Poorest HHs- highest exposure to shocks. Military conflict/trade disruptions (PROGRESS). On going stressors (lack of health facilities; lack of schools). Across project areas, all resilience capacities are at very low levels.

14. Somalia Key Findings • Absorptive capacity does not appear to contribute to improved food security or recovery. • Lack of transformative capacity explains low household recovery. • Households have such low capacity levels that they are particularly dependent upon community-level capacities. • In areas of higher community-level capacities, such as access to markets and infrastructures, households show better recovery.

15. Study: Zimbabwe • Zimbabwe Resilience Research Initiative (ZRRI) Study • Funded by the European Union; Implemented in partnership with Mercy Corps Zimbabwe and the Institute of Environmental Studies (IES) at the University of Zimbabwe. • Project goals: • Identify factors that contribute to HH/community resilience of vulnerable populations in the face of recurring shocks/stresses. • Geographic location: • Mbireand Mberengwadistricts • Data: • Exploratory baseline survey (Oct/Dec0 2015) • Qualitative RMS (May 2016) • Endline survey (Aug 2016) Mbire and Mberengwa Districts

16. ZRRI Study: • How did households respond to the drought? • Reduced food consumption; • Selling/slaughtering livestock; • Reliance on formal assistance (GoZ; NGOs); • Casual labor (agriculture, mining, safari tours); and • Social capital and remittances • Erosion of social capital as drought wore on.

17. ZRRI Study • Did household responses affect their resilience to the drought? • Engaging in reduction of food consumption  less resilient. • Use of formal assistance (GoZ/NGOs) to cope with the drought contributed to HH resilience. • Level of assistance was low.

18. ZRRI Study • Did household resilience capacity affect how households responded to the drought? • Access to assets  prevented food consumption reduction strategies (Mberenwa). • Social capital, particularly in the absence of informal safety nets (Mberenwa). • Access to formal safety nets tendency to prevent selling of assets (Mbire). • Access to information (early warning) did not help prevent negative coping strategies. • Diversification into livelihoods with different risk profiles less likely to resort to negative coping strategies (reduce food consumption) but did not contribute to resilience • Livelihoods with low returns.

19. Programming Considerations (ZRRI)

20. ZRRI Study Summary • HHs in both districts have fairly low existing capacities for dealing with drought. • Wide array of program initiatives appropriate. • Timely food assistance triggered by a shock/stress critical for helping HHs maintain well-being and building resilience. • Requires stable food production/income generation over time.

21. Plenary Discussion • To what extent does greater resilience capacity reduce the negative impact of shocks on well-being?

22. References • Smith, Lisa C., and Frankenberger, Timothy R. Ethiopia Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement and Market Expansion (PRIME) Project Interim Monitoring Survey 2014-15 Deep Dive: Uncovering the pathways to resilience. TANGO International, November. (forthcoming). • USAID. Baseline Study of the Enhancing Resilience and Economic Growth in Somalia Program. Submitted by Save the Children in partnership with TANGO International. Prepared by Mark Langworthy, MaryadaVallet, Stephanie Martin, Tom Bower and Towfique Aziz. Draft. 1. • Nelson, S. 2016. Zimbabwe Resilience Research Initiative (ZRRI): Final Report. Draft. Prepared by TANGO International for Mercy Corps. 28 December.