Agriculture Early Recovery Strategy
-
Upload
zulfiqar-khan -
Category
Documents
-
view
113 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Agriculture Early Recovery Strategy
Standard-‐ Setting Guidelines
Early Recovery of Agriculture for population and areas affected by 2010 Pakistan floods
FINAL DRAFT
2
Contents
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5
2. Overview of the Disaster and its Impact ........................................................................................... 5
2.1 Characteristics of the Floods ...................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Flood Damages .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Availability of Information ......................................................................................................... 9
3. Humanitarian Response to the Floods of 2010 ............................................................................... 12
3.1 Pakistan Relief and Early Recovery Response Plan ...................................................................... 12
3.2 Coordination of Humanitarian Response .................................................................................. 13
3.2.2. Cluster System ............................................................................................................................................ 14
3.3 Activities Conducted During the Relief Phase .............................................................................. 14
3.3.1 Key Areas of Intervention ........................................................................................................................ 14
3.3.2 Agriculture Support outside the UN Cluster ................................................................................................ 16
4. Lessons Learned ............................................................................................................................. 16
5. The Early Recovery Framework ...................................................................................................... 18
5.1 Aims of Early Recovery in the Agriculture Sector ............................................................................... 19
5.2. Summarizing Agriculture and Livelihood Support Interventions ................................................ 20
Capacity Building and Institutional ....................................................................................................................... 21
5.3. Guiding Principles for Early Recovery ....................................................................................... 21
5.3.1. Plan interventions on a thorough understanding of the context ........................................................... 21
5.3.2. Participation and Ownership .................................................................................................................. 22
5.3.3. National Agriculture Policy and Strategy ................................................................................................ 23
5.3.4. Social Equity Principle to address Vulnerable Population ...................................................................... 23
5.3.5. Rebuild Peoples’ Livelihoods ................................................................................................................... 24
3
5.3.6. Disaster Risk Management and Reduction ............................................................................................. 24
5.3.7. Monitoring, Accountability and Transparency ........................................................................................ 25
5.3.8. Cross Cutting Issues ................................................................................................................................ 25
ANNEXES .............................................................................................................................................. 27
Annex 1: References for Minimum Standards in Agriculture .......................................................... 27
Annex 2: Strategy for the Control of Water Logging ....................................................................... 27
Annex 3: Disaster Risk Management ............................................................................................. 29
4
ACRONYMS
AJK Azad Jammu & Kashmir DCO District Coordination Officer DNA Damage and Needs Assessment EAD Economic Affairs Division FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN GB Gilgit Baltistan GoP Government of Pakistan IASC Inter-‐Agency Standing Committee IDP Internally Displaced People IRSA Indus River System Authority MDG Millennium Development Goal MINFAL Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock NDMA National Disaster Management Authority NRSP National Rural Support Programme NWP National Water Policy PARC Pakistan Agriculture Research Council PaRRSA Provincial Reconstruction, Rehabilitation & Settlement Authority PDMA Provincial Disaster Management Authority PIDs Provincial Irrigation Departments PIFERP Pakistan Initial Floods Emergency Response Plan R&R Relief and Early Recovery SOPs Standing Operating Procedures UNOCHA United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs WAPDA Water and Power Development Authority
5
1. Introduction
This document is prepared keeping in view NDMA’s mandate and its role stated in the National Disaster Management Act of 2010, to provide direction to the Early Recovery (ER) interventions in the aftermath of the 2010 flooding disaster, which affected the lives and livelihoods of about three million households in Pakistan. While the flood damages are multi-‐sectoral, agriculture is the backbone of the economy in the flood-‐affected areas and pivotal on the path towards livelihood recovery and normalcy.
The assessment of flood damages and the selection of appropriate interventions are building blocks of the Early Recovery phase. The Strategy and guidelines presented in this document aims to guide interventions in the agricultural sector. Given the enormous scale and impact of the flooding, it is important that the provision of assistance is carried out in the best possible targeted and most cost-‐efficient manner. This requires a good grasp of the overall context, a well-‐articulated institutional framework and good coordination amongst the partners.
The first section of the document is devoted to background information on flood damages, assessments taken place to date, which at the same time also provides the basis for the ER response actions. The section also looks into institutional arrangements and coordinating mechanisms. The early recovery interventions are discussed briefly, followed by a more detailed listing of the potential activities relevant to achieving early recovery aims. The section on lessons learned sketches the mechanisms to learn from experience in order to improve the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of ER interventions.
Considerable attention is devoted to the aspect of disaster risk management. Gender and environment are two cross-‐cutting subjects considered in the formulation of different interventions. The vulnerability criteria used for the humanitarian assistance is in the process of being strengthened for a more comprehensive livelihood analysis.
2. Overview of the Disaster and its Impact
2.1 Characteristics of the Floods
6
The monsoon floods of summer 2010 were exceptional in their nature, geographical coverage, and damages. A rare combination of hydrological processes, strong monsoon from the Bay of Bengal, westerly depression, and stream jet, triggered heavy rains during three weeks of July and August, 2010. Prolonged cloudbursts in the northern region generated heavy flash flows. During the same period, higher monsoon rains across the country and coastal regions generated high drainage volumes. An equally important role was played by reduced conveyance capacity of the rivers due to multiple obstructions and non-‐optimal operation of the structures. It leads to historically low velocity of flood flows in the Indus River, causing heavy pressure on the canal and drainage system leading to the over-‐topping or breaching of the protection bunds. The torrential floods in the northern region, especially in Khyber PukhtunKhwa (KPK), washed away major parts of the infrastructure and caused maximum human misery. In Peshawar valley, combined peak flows of Kabul and Swat rivers were the main cause of floods. Damages by the flash floods were aggravated by deforestation and lack of land management, which has eroded water retention capacity of the catchments. The extension and design of agriculture and other infrastructure has further reduced natural resilience and protective capacity of the steep topographic valleys of the north. The Indus River received higher than average flows from its Western and Eastern tributaries. Additionally, hill torrents from the Sulaiman Mountains range hit the Rajanpur and D.I. Khan districts from the west. The river floods and breaches in protection bunds caused damages in highly inhibited flood plains and adjacent areas in four districts. The area has intensive cultivation by the forest department and individual farmers. The capacity of the drainage systems provided to carry over flash floods across the Kachi canal proved insufficient, as well the emergency flood management capacity of the Taunsa barrage. The lower Indus system faced supper floods and an exceptional slow-‐down of the flows due to reduced flood management capacity of the river. The public and private infrastructure constructed within the flood plains, close to the major structures and along the water bodies have reduced the physical capacity of the system. The ambiguities about flood carrying capacity of the system made its regulation far from the optimal. It caused the large breaches in the main river system and numerous secondary breaches in the irrigation and drainage networks. The large areas became under water in Sindh and Baluchistan and remained inundated for three to four months. After six months of floods, water is still standing in low-‐lying areas because of mild natural slope and limited drainage potential.
2.2 Flood Damages
7
The major agriculture losses by floods were caused by the full or partial damage of about 2 million hectare crop land in Pakistan, followed by the loss of livestock (table 1). Physical damage to the farmland and irrigation facilities occurred on relatively smaller portion of the flooded land, but remained critical in nature. The flash floods in the north, river surge in heavily inhibited flood plains and long inundation in the south caused these damages. The heavy silt deposits, damaged on-‐farm water channels and tube wells needed to be restored to resume the agriculture activities. In addition to that, household stocks of food, seed and animal feed were destroyed (table 1), causing substantial indirect losses.
8
Table 1: Damages Sustained by Agriculture and Livestock Sectors
Descriptions AJK Balochistan
FATA GB KPK Punjab Sindh National
Flood Affected Area (Sq. Km) 1800 322 7.2 7500 4996 14047 30132 58797 Flood Affected Population (millions)
0.20 0.7 0.1 3.8 8.2 7.2 20.2
Crop Area Damaged (thousand ha)
33 132.5 7.22 7.9 121.5
746.9 1,044 2,093
Large Animals (thousand) 0.3 139.6 6.2 1.3 72.4 2.3 93.7 316 Small Animals (sheep, goat) (thousand)
0.3 1,037 8.4 10.8 67.8 2.5 81.9 1,208
Poultry Perished (thousand) 11.7 625.5 101.2 12.9 621.3
2,012 6,895 10,280
Fishery /Ponds Lost (PKR million) n/a 14.31 -‐ n/a 13.03
319.07 48.9 381
Water-‐courses Damaged 657 47 n/a 960 1,790
2,598 6,990 13,042
Household Stocks of Food, Seed, Feed (PKR million)
75 1,590 n/a 19.1 6,722
35,805 10,488
54,699
Govt. buildings, Infrastructure (PKR million)
n/a 15 n/a n/a 247.2
1,463.8 1.2 1,727
Source: Disaster Need Assessment (DNA Oct. 2010, WB&ADB) Table 2: Estimated Direct and Indirect Losses
As shown above in Table 2, the total damage in crop and livestock subsectors expressed is estimated at $5.1 billion, of which 74% is in the form of direct damage and 26% is in the form of indirect losses. Among the provinces, Sindh suffered most with 46% of total damage, followed by Punjab (36%), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan (8% each), and the remainder
1 PDMA Balochistan
9
shared by FATA, Gilgit Baltistan and AJK. The losses were largest in the crops sector, which includes estimates of damages to Kharif crops; food and seed stocks; irrigation facilities; and support services for crops, as well as indirect damages to the forthcoming Rabi 2010/11 and Kharif 2011 crops. Livestock damages, which include loss of animals, distress sales, and destruction of animal health support services, as well as indirect damages due to reduced milk production, accounts for 11% of total damages. Fisheries losses are estimated at around $4.5 million.2
2.3 Availability of Information The proposed relief and early recovery interventions by the agriculture cluster are largely based on the assessment of damages and recovery needs at the formulation of the response plan in September 2010. While, plans of the Provincial Governments are largely based on DNA October 2010 . The gross damages and needs in the agriculture sector have been assessed by three major initiatives, using to some extent different methodologies. -‐ The first set of rapid multi-‐sector needs and vulnerability assessments was carried out in
August 2010 through two sample studies; the initial Vulnerability Assessment (by WFP’s Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping Unit in Balochistan, KPK, Sindh, and Punjab) and the Multi-‐Cluster Rapid Assessment Mechanism (MCRAM)3 of 2800 households in 28 flood affected districts. The survey data was extrapolated over the whole flood affected area using baseline data of the Provincial Governments.
-‐ The satellite images by SUPARCO and NASA (MODIS) indicated an increase in flood
affected areas due to breaches in the primary and secondary network until September 2010. The assessment of damages by the provincial line departments also showed an increasing trend. Some of this information has been published by the line departments (National Agriculture Research Council (NARC) and the Provincial Agriculture Departments).
-‐ The World Bank and ADB finalized the final and officially accepted comprehensive
assessment of damages and costs in different sectors in October 2010 (called Disaster Need Assessment-‐DNA). The revenue and provincial irrigation departments collected the
2 Page 13, Pakistan: 2010 Flood Devastation, Damage and Needs Assessment Report for Agriculture Sector, 31, October 2010.
3McRAM took place in four flood-‐affected provinces from August 24-‐31. The aim of the assessment was to reach a purposive though not statistically representative sample of the most affected districts
10
Damaged Cultivated Area (2010) as a Percent of total Cropped Area (2010)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Sukkur
Ghotki
Jacobabad
Larkana
Qambar
Shahdakot
Khairpur
Naushehro
feroze Dadu
S.Benazirabad
Thatta
Cro
pped
Are
a 20
10/d
amag
ed A
rea
field data on agriculture losses that appear to be 10% higher compared to SUPARCO satellite imagery.
Based on McRAM, the Agriculture Cluster identified around 2.3 million hectare of cultivated land damaged. The cluster targeted about 1.3 million hectare crops land and more than one million rural households for the early recovery support. The projects submitted by the response plan in September 2010, targeted these households for crop and livestock input packages, recovery of fisheries and agriculture infrastructure. Delay in agriculture activities due to prolonged standing water in parts of the four provinces and gaps between earlier assessments and DNA needed special efforts to support the areas that are expected to miss winter crops (Rabi). More than one-‐hundred and fifty thousand (150,000) households have been added by the new projects including the sunflower initiative. Preference to the twenty eight (28) worse affected districts and the vulnerability criteria guides the focus of recovery activities. The relations between affected households and crop damages vary over a wide range owing to the intensity of farm-‐level damages and the land holding size. The average damaged crop land per flood affected household is only 0.25 ha in Gilgit Baltistan and maximum, 2.56 ha/hh, in Baluchistan. To set the homogeneous and equitable tasks at the household and district
levels would require clearly defined beneficiary selection criteria. The provincial crop land damaged against the total population affected is only indicative of the regional variations. To standardize these numbers, in addition to reliable filed data, demographic information – such as population percentage inside the agriculture sector and land holding patterns -‐ should be available.
11
The need for having reliable base-‐line data at the district level is critical to put the estimated damages in a proper context and plan efficient and effective flood assistance. Without reliable district level land use data, certain variations cannot be properly explained. For example, the range of land damages is 10% to 100% of the cultivated areas in 2010 (DNA October 2010, P&D Sindh November 2010), figure-‐1. The authenticity of “maximum or full damages” is questioned by the later field information. Based on available information, it could not be ascertained that the both areas are measured within the same boundaries. The gross damages include all type of cultivated land; canal irrigated, rain-‐fed and flood plains. While, the normal seasonal recording of cultivated areas outside the canal irrigation system is very weak and limited.
The importance of complete base-‐line land use data is further emphasized in Figure 2. A crude classification of cultivated land based on satellite imagery shows eight major categories of land use (Pie percentage graph). Among the groups shown in the figure, irrigation and revenue departments monitor only canal irrigated land, which is a large fraction but not all of the cultivated land. The district level cropped areas may extend into four land categories (including forest, barrani and range land). Cultivation in the Katcha areas is principally outside the “irrigated agriculture category”. While, some of the districts have a large share of damaged land in the Katcha belt (flood plains).
Land Use Classification of the Gross Affected Area
5%
59%4%9%
13%1%3% 6%
Forest Irrigated Agriculture Rainfed/Rod-Kohi Rangeland Bare Soil Settlements Un-Cultivated land Water Bodies Bodies
Figure 1: Damaged cultivated Area as a percent of total cultivated area in 2010 – data provided by Planning and Development department Sindh
12
3. Humanitarian Response to the Floods of 2010
3.1 Pakistan Relief and Early Recovery Response Plan On 4 August 2010, the Government of Pakistan requested the UN Office for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Geneva for humanitarian assistance and coordination support to respond to the effects of the monsoon floods. Large displacements of the population, heavy damages to Infrastructure, agriculture and property and severe disruption of local livelihoods across the country pressed UN to launch an Appeal for Pakistan. The Pakistan Initial Floods Emergency Response Plan (PIFERP) was launched on 11 August 2010, seeking an initial $459 million to respond to the immediate relief needs of the flood-‐affected people. The revised Response Plan -‐ “Pakistan Relief and Early Recovery Response Plan” requested $1.9 billion on 17 September 2010. The PRERRP document, “takes into account fresh needs assessments, fluctuating beneficiary figures, and an extended planning and budgeting horizon, seeks to enable international partners (UN organizations and NGOs) to support the Government of Pakistan in addressing the residual relief needs and early recovery needs of flood-‐affected families for the next twelve months”. A mid-‐term revision is planned to take place in the first quarter of 2011 to provide more refined data and analysis on early recovery needs. In setting the overall targeted population of the agriculture component of the appeal (PRERRP), the leading agency – FAO and the Agriculture Cluster members were challenged by the lack of detailed information on affected population, by the evolving dynamics of the crisis and by its size. Several assumptions determined the selection of the target population;
-‐ The affected rural population was estimated at 14 M people, although accurate data were still missing;
-‐ 50% of the affected rural population was considered the most vulnerable group of the rural affected population;
-‐ The delivery capacity of the organizations active in the agriculture sector was limited due to the low number of active organizations;
-‐ The geographical coverage of most organizations at the time of the crisis was widely unknown.
Based on such assumptions the total number of beneficiaries in the agriculture sector was established at 1.1 M farmer households equivalent to approximately 7 M people.
Figure 2: Gross categories on the Flooded Land -‐ National level (SUPARCO, NARC October 2010)
13
The Response Plan utilized the following criteria for prioritization of projects to be included in the appeal.
§ Projects that support restoration and improvement of basic conditions for the displaced and affected populations to return and rebuild their lives, in particular access to basic services, transitional shelter and means to repair houses, and food security, with attention to increasing equality for the most marginalized population segments.
§ Projects that support spontaneous recovery initiatives by affected women and men. § Projects that aim to support, restore and improve livelihoods, access to services, local
economy and coping mechanisms of affected populations. § Projects that address the protection of returnees, non-‐displaced affected women and
men, as well as their properties and their rights. § Projects that reduce disaster risk through immediate, short-‐term disaster protection
measures. § Projects that reduce reliance on relief assistance
NDMA developed and applied nine gross project evaluation criteria to streamline the early recovery objectives, individual project modalities (budgeting, costs, staffing) and to check the overlaps of areas and activities. These principles have been applied to screen the projects for financing.
3.2 Coordination of Humanitarian Response Under international humanitarian response arrangements, UN agencies, national and provincial governments are partners in a relatively complex setup. During the flood emergency, the national and provincial governments, Pakistan’s army and the international community were able to provide quick emergency response. The NDMA not only coordinated relief efforts, but also acted as an active partner in the distribution of food, shelter and other aid-‐items including non-‐food inputs, winter clothes and direct cash inputs. NDMA is equally involved in developing the guidelines and criteria for early recovery interventions. The Strategic Planning Unit (SPU) of NDMA is represented in all clusters, for the technical support and two-‐way feedback.
The National Disaster Management Commission was established in 2006, under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister of Pakistan. As an executive arm of the NDMC, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has been made operational to coordinate and monitor implementation of national policies and strategies on disaster management. Provincial Disaster Management Commissions (PDMCs) and Authorities (PDMAs) have been established in KPK, Punjab, Sindh and Baluchistan, while similar arrangements have been made in AJ&K and Northern Areas. The District Disaster Management Authorities (DDMAs) have been notified across the country. The National Disaster Risk Management Framework
14
was formulated to guide the disaster risk management activities. The district and provincial governments have played a key role in the collection of damage assessment data at the provincial level and distribution of agriculture inputs. For the field implementation, UN clusters work with provincial line departments, Provincial Disaster Management Authorities (PDMAs) and District Disaster Management Authorities (DDMAs). 3.2.2. Cluster System The UN humanitarian assistance is organized under eleven clusters for Relief and Early Recovery assistance. The IASC Cluster Approach has been adopted for the Relief and Early Recovery Period. The overall leadership for donor coordination rests with the Economic Affairs Division (EAD), whereas the NDMA is responsible for overall coordination of disaster response efforts by both the government and the international community. Provincial Disaster Management Authorities (PDMAs) play a critical role as an interface for the humanitarian community. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) is the lead agency for the Agriculture Cluster. As of August 2010, the Agriculture Cluster is present in Islamabad, while the provincial AC in KPK was active since 2009 and in the Punjab and Sindh since December 2010. Once the agricultural system was fully established it managed to achieve the following:
▫ Creation and management of the Agriculture Cluster Database. ▫ Development of Agricultural Guidelines ▫ Constant updates to humanitarian community on funding and response ▫ Initiated gap analysis ▫ Support to NGOs in the agricultural sector ▫ Constant lobbying with donor community
3.3 Activities Conducted During the Relief Phase
3.3.1 Key Areas of Intervention The response from members of the agricultural cluster has focused on three main pillars:
▫ Support to crop production
▫ Support to livestock
▫ Rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure (cash-‐for-‐work)
Most of the organizations have developed assistance plans in line with agriculture intervention strategy presented in the PRERRP and according to the needs identified by their local staff.
15
The cluster has assisted members with general recommendations on “packages”, giving details on the inputs needed per household in the different provinces and relative costs. As the crisis progressed, affected households shifted their needs from emergency and life-‐saving to early recovery. At the time of planning for the 2010 Rabi season, some areas in Sindh and Baluchistan were still flooded and not ready yet for agricultural programmes. Moreover, the limited availability of financial resources prevented distribution of more consistent packages, limiting the impact on the households that were reached. Consequently, not all affected households were reached during the initial stages of the relief phase and the packages distributed were often insufficient to allow an optimal recovery of the assisted households. Crop production sub-‐sector The main interventions under this component have been the distribution of agricultural inputs for the 2010 Rabi season and 2011 Kharif season. The average package was sufficient to cover about 1 acre of land, and included cereal seed (e.g. wheat, rice, maize, sorghum) and fertiliser. Some organizations also distributed a range of agricultural tools. The choice of crops considered selection of the appropriate crop varieties suitable to the agro-‐economic conditions, certified seeds and recommended fertilizers. Technical guidance about minimum standards in agriculture is expected to come out during the process, however, some references are provided in Annexure 1. As up to date the approximately 600,000 HH were assisted with crop and vegetable packages for the Rabi season. Approximately 120,000 HH are planned for oil–crop packages during Zeid Rabi. The provision of certified seeds Livestock The rationale of livestock support was based on the objective of keeping existing livestock healthy in an extremely difficult environment, characterized by unavailability of clean water and pastures. Interventions focused on the provision of fodder to large livestock, de-‐worming treatments, provision of clean water. At times, livestock restocking programmes (chickens or small ruminants) were also employed as a quick livelihood restoration strategy. It is estimated that 400,000 HH have benefited from livestock packages of different composition. Rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure (cash-‐for-‐work) The agricultural economy of Pakistan relies heavily on a sophisticated irrigation system. The level of destruction on irrigation channels and watercourses requires considerable investments on the rehabilitation of infrastructure, with particular emphasis on the irrigation system. A number of cash-‐for-‐work programmes have been initiated with the multiple objectives of making agricultural land available to irrigation and injecting vital amount of cash into communities participating into the rehabilitation work.
16
3.3.2 Agriculture Support outside the UN Cluster
The provincial governments commenced a major wheat-‐support program during November 2010 to January 2011. The wheat-‐support scheme announced provision of wheat seeds and urea fertilizers to the full farm-‐unit if the land holding size is less than 10 acres. The large farm owners (holdings > 25 acres in Punjab & KPK, >40 acres in Sindh and Baluchistan) could get subsidized loans. While the middle farmers are entitled to the both subsidies. According to the information provided by the Federal Minister MINFA in the national assembly on 26 January 2011, the federal government has contributed 4 billion(b) Pak Rupees (Punjab=1.44b, Sindh=1.68b, KPK=0.24b, Balochistan=0.638b, AJK=0.077b, G/B=0.26b). According to the Minister, against the Federal package Provincial Governments have allocated in billion Rupees; Punjab 2.603, Sindh 3.36, and KPK 0.48, while Baluchistan has distributed 0.101 billion Rupees.
In addition to the government, key donors are funding crop inputs and special initiatives through the Rural Support Programs and NGOs. The contribution from a third group is substantial. Local philanthropist and non-‐governmental organizations have also run the large agriculture input programs.
For the aid effectiveness and understanding of the local potential of the sector, it is critically important to have a coordinated response mechanism and its complete monitoring from the beginning.
4. Lessons Learned The consistent challenges and recovery trends shown during the relief phase provide an opportunity to extract some lessons and take them forward. There are still pockets of standing water five months after floods and returned rural population in need of humanitarian assistance. Physical damages such as standing water, siltation and smashed infrastructure will be responsible for non-‐revival of agriculture activities during Rabi 2010. Water logging may continue for a longer period in the saline areas. These factors may affect the efficiency of irrigated agriculture even after the revival of the agriculture activities. Early and substantial financial support to achieve the agriculture targets by the Provincial Governments indicates that agriculture and livelihoods is an important priority in the overall humanitarian response. Early interventions in the agriculture sector assisted in facilitating recovery of farming systems. Recovery of the agriculture sector is generally
17
satisfactory as more than 95% of the previously cultivated gross areas are expected to be revived during the early recovery phase. The sector has shown a positive response in a relatively short period for resumption of the cultivation activities. For a complete recovery, donor funding will be critical to sustain the gains made so far. Cooperation and coordination between the Government of Pakistan and the humanitarian community worked well. The GoP’s national and provincial disaster management systems and the humanitarian community support played constructive role in supporting the recovery process. Because of multiple direct and indirect assistance packages and subsidies, the sector has been able to receive substantial support. For rest of the recovery phase, higher coordination at the local level will enhance outcomes of the interventions. The high recovery cost of the agriculture and irrigation sectors is an important factor to be considered, especially for the disaster preparedness and protection through enhanced resilience. A comprehensive analysis of all strategic issues involved in the sector planning, disaster needs assessment procedures, prioritization of assistance and the role of cross-‐cutting sectors should be carried out. Along with lessons learned, it will provide guidance to the recovery phase. The aid-‐effectiveness is influenced by the project design, funding process and efficiency of the field activities. The knowledge of the existing system and capacity to accommodate new developments helps in designing effective interventions. A vigilant, interactive and responsive planning mechanism should be able to monitor and accommodate feedback during the revival process. A static approach based on the first assessment of quantitative damages and costs is not recommended, because: § The damages have high geospatial variation across the sectors and sub sectors, a fact not
fully understood in the early rapid assessments. § Local institutional setups and capacities are limited to provide quick and correct feedback. § Households suffer to different level within and outside the agriculture sectors. § The resilience and preparedness level of the natural systems and communities vary in a
large range. Different agricultural sub-‐systems have shown highly varied recovery potential based on physical, economic and social factors. A part of the flooded land has recovered with better opportunities (mostly informal agriculture). Seed and fertilizer support by the Government and NGOs has facilitated the farming community with investment cost. The soil and water availability are supportive and farmers have selected short duration cash crops (for example onions). Changes in the cropping pattern can be expected without a big upset. Preliminary trends show that the demand side influenced like local livelihood needs and markets play important role in agriculture response. The supply-‐side interventions are refined at user’s end to accommodate multiple factors, hence, needs to be well documented.
18
No good documentation is available, yet though there are several assessments that are planned in the upcoming months by the humanitarian community. Early recovery choices by the farmers may impact overall productivity. Sowing of the small duration crops in some of the flood affected areas and about four months long sowing period of wheat (across the country), indicates potential of the local farming systems. However, higher risk is attached with this pragmatic approach. The large oil-‐seed promotion campaign is not received with a fervor. The actual Rabi performance will determine success of the intervention strategies. However, a need for comprehensive understanding of the cropping systems, feasibility of the alternate crops and the local market factor cannot be underestimated. Leverage other livelihood schemes by the federal and provincial governments. National Rural Support Program (NRSP) and others are examples of strategies by the Government of Pakistan that already have a presence in the most rural, underserved areas. Their presence and programming has to be integrated into the next phase of interventions. Cash for work is a viable option for providing communities with income in the short term to help with their livelihoods needs. The majority of the work is envisaged as labor support for the rehabilitation of agricultural and community infrastructure, closer inter-‐cluster coordination at the field level will be necessary to implement cash/food for work projects. Some interlinked areas can highly influence sustainable agriculture revival § The forest department has the main responsibility for the Katcha (riverine) area and flood
plains management. The rapid development of agriculture in Katcha areas is not well monitored and recorded. The long-‐term institutional arrangements are required between the Forest, Agriculture, Irrigation and Revenue departments.
§ The maintenance of irrigation network, drainage and SCARP tubewell directly influence the fresh water availability and aquifer management. In the saline groundwater zone, raised aquifer levels can cause both salinity and water-‐logging, especially in case of deferred functioning of surface drains and SCARP wells. See Annexure 2 for some referring guidelines to manage the salinity and water-‐logging.
§ Water quality of the water bodies and rivers may have higher link with wastewater/sewage management in the post disaster scenario.
5. The Early Recovery Framework
This section is divided into three parts, the first part list-‐out a generic list of activities in agriculture sub-‐sectors corresponding to three general aims of the early recovery. These
19
activities include the planning process, risk reduction measures and cross cutting areas. The second section presents interventions carried out during Rabi 2010-‐11 . The 3rd section briefly describes the guiding principles to select and prioritize the interventions.
5.1 Aims of Early Recovery in the Agriculture Sector
1. Provide emergency assistance to restore normalcy in agriculture sector by bringing back flood-‐affected people to the crop and livestock systems, while ensuring their self-‐reliance.
To plan accurately is the first task for effective emergency assistance. The need assessment in agro-‐livestock sectors have three distinct features; mapping of reliable base line for agriculture and support sub-‐sectors, assessment of the damages and recovery needs, and identification of the vulnerability parameters for the affected communities. After a widespread disaster, crop inputs and livestock protection become the early demands linked to the onset of a cropping season. The rehabilitation of the farm land and infrastructure is a prerequisite to start cultivation in heavily damaged areas. The horticulture, small local systems support livelihood, which could be more vulnerable.
2. Support local recovery initiatives by building capacities and identifying measures for the risk reduction
Restoring the institutional capacities of local governments will enable them to become rapidly operational within the context of appropriate institutional policies and legal frameworks. In order to effectively manage the recovery process, it is essential to empower communities, restore the capacities of Local and National authorities and determine the root causes and vulnerabilities that make societies disaster-‐prone. External support should build on the existing capacities, knowledge and strengths, and fill gaps where needed.
3. Support the stakeholders in building foundations of long-‐term recovery and
rehabilitation in line with the long-‐term development agenda.
In order to plan Early Recovery Interventions, which take into consider different needs, resources and vulnerabilities of women and men, area specific assessments should be conducted at the early stages of the Early Recovery phase. The assessment will also help to identify National and Local stakeholders that should take part in the planning and programming initiatives and that can lead the development of early recovery policies. Coordination mechanisms in an Early Recovery situation should cast on the local authorities and should take into account different self-‐established and non-‐governmental community institutions.
20
5.2. Summarizing Agriculture and Livelihood Support Interventions
The following section groups the response activities and interventions to be carried out in the relief, early recovery and transitional phases.
Assessment of needs and mid-‐course gaps
§ Preliminary assessment of the agriculture damages and assistance needs § Refine situation analyses and response plans, with a gender perspective and a special
focus on vulnerable groups such as orphans and the elderly. § Help local partners to carry out areas-‐specific need assessment surveys § Focused livelihood survey.
Crop Supports
Major Rabi Activities
§ Distribute critical agricultural inputs, including seeds and fertilizers inputs for the major Rabi crops; wheat, vegetables and fodder, and small agricultural tools The selection criteria for the package consider certification of seeds and quality of fertilizers.
§ Technical support during the cultivation season. § Protect and restore livestock productivity of surviving animals through the provision of
animal feed, medication, and shelter. § Provide vegetable seeds, particularly focusing on women and female heads of
households, to support immediate resumption of kitchen gardening activities in order to respond to immediate food security requirements.
§ Provide, oilseeds package and technical capacities through traininfs to the areas, have missed Rabi crops.
§ Support small/family scale vegetables cultivation with initiatives like kitchen gardening § Support livelihood revival and local markets by introducing especial initiatives like
food or cash for work Kharif Activities
§ Provide crop inputs, seeds and fertilizers for cotton, vegetables and fodder to the small and vulnerable farmers.
§ Support small/family scale vegetables cultivation with initiatives like kitchen gardening § Design special initiatives for the cash and food for work programs
Livestock Support
21
§ Provision of life saving supplementary feed/fodder, § Transitional and emergency animal shelters § Veterinary care § Public awareness campaigns § Restocking of small ruminants and poultry § Support revival of the fish farms and hatcheries Agriculture lands and infrastructure
§ Support clearance and de-‐silting of the critical on farm irrigation infrastructures § Repair on-‐farm infrastructure -‐ water courses, tube wells, water harvesting structures,
drainage structure § Land rehabilitation/preparation
Capacity Building and Institutional § Support to farmer’s associations, water management groups, producer’s groups, women
groups § Strengthening resilience and preparedness of farming community to flood and natural
disasters by putting into place disaster risk reduction measures. § Support improved market information to small and medium scale producers. § Help improving agricultural support services including farmer field schools and training
bodies. § Support rural financial services. § Emphasize regulatory frameworks for agriculture development in flood-‐prone and riverine
areas.
5.3. Guiding Principles for Early Recovery The Early Recovery Framework is guided by a set of basic principles working towards equitable, inclusive and sustainable human development. These principles are embedded in a rights-‐based approach that embraces non-‐discrimination. In addition, all recovery interventions will reflect the articulated priorities and needs of the affected communities through existing and innovative forms of participation. The guiding principles should be applied during the planning and implementation of early recovery interventions in flooded affected areas.
5.3.1. Plan interventions on a thorough understanding of the context As a first step in formulating the Early Recovery Framework, all relevant stakeholders should undertake assessments of early recovery needs in affected areas. Objectives of the early recovery needs assessment should be to assess key needs, resources and vulnerabilities of women, men, and other vulnerable groups (Children, youth, elderly and disabled). It must identify targeted interventions to address these vulnerabilities over the next 12 months; anticipate spontaneous early recovery needs of the affected communities; and identify key program areas to facilitate early recovery and transition from relief in different geographic
22
locations. It is essential that recovery strategies and programs adopt appropriate mechanisms to immediately contain and address these emerging risks while at the same time addressing the longer-‐term needs. Assessments rely on a combination of primary and secondary information. Analysis of secondary information is important, particularly from information sources including development actors working in the affected areas prior to the floods; assessment reports from humanitarian organizations and national authorities; and semi-‐structured interviews with all relevant stakeholders. A comprehensive understanding of the socio-‐economic and cultural conditions of the affected areas prior to the floods is essential in determining viable and enduring options for early recovery interventions. For primary information collection assessment teams specialized in livelihoods, agriculture, should conduct the interviews, including semi-‐structured interviews with affected populations, local government officials, NGO representatives and members of community organizations. Assessments should use standardized sets of sector-‐specific questions that guide the data collection process. Assessments reports developed per sector should follow a format to facilitate a comparative analysis of results across districts and/or regions and the development of a comprehensive early recovery framework. Finally, assessments can assess the use of natural resources by local populations as coping mechanisms in post-‐crisis situations to supplement normal forms of income, and be used to recommend measures for sustainable management of resources, for reduced reliance on natural resources for income and for rehabilitating impacted areas.
5.3.2. Participation and Ownership
Agriculture activities in early recovery should have the participation and ownership of a wide group of stakeholders particularly all levels of government, the international humanitarian community, civil society and the beneficiary communities. Consultation with stakeholders should be intrinsic from assessments to program implementation to monitoring and evaluation. Coordination structures should be as much as possible area based to reflect stakeholders participation in early recovery activities and the geographical, social, economic peculiarities of each province. Information exchange among stakeholders involved in implementation of early recovery programs and existing coordination mechanisms established during the emergency phase must be maintained and enhanced during the recovery process. Strong coordination within the agriculture sector and in the agriculture cluster in particular, should constitute a permanent dialogue and consensus building mechanism with government agencies (NDMA and MINFAL), civil society organizations, nongovernmental actors, donor and other lending institutions. An organizational development capacity approach will be adopted for restoring/developing strong partnerships between the affected communities, community based organizations (CBOs)/NGOs, private sector and government institutions in all aspects of farm household restoration.
23
An action-‐oriented integrated participatory approach needs to be adopted for the restoration of agricultural lands and infrastructure, the repair of fish farms and hatcheries and reviving on-‐farm and fisher livelihoods, and the restoration of forestlands and stabilization of landslide prone areas. Experience has shown that gender analysis can help planners and policy makers improve the performance of their endeavors.
5.3.3. National Agriculture Policy and Strategy Early recovery efforts in agriculture should lay the foundation for the medium and longer term strategies for crops, livestock, irrigation and infrastructure, forestry and fisheries that are in-‐line with the National Agriculture Policy (NAP). The Ministry of Food, Agriculture And Livestock (MINFAL) sets out four main focus areas in NAP that include food security, enhanced productivity of the crops and livestock sectors, profitable farming and improved marketing of the agricultural produce. The policy targets to keep agriculture growth rate higher than the population growth rate. During the last two decades livestock and fisheries have emerged as big sub-‐sectors. The Medium Term Development Framework of the Planning Commission proposes several key strategies including introduction of new high yielding varieties, new techniques to enhance productivity, high export varieties including oilseeds, horticulture and tea, better on-‐farm practices and increased water use efficiency through land leveling, watercourse lining, and promotion of modern irrigation systems. The crop sector is sensitive to the global and local markets. The support price mechanism is effective, as shown by an increase in wheat area and production after an increase in support price in 2009.
5.3.4. Social Equity Principle to address Vulnerable Population
The early recovery process faces a major challenge of providing equitable support services to the households having inequitable resource base. The concept of social equity in public services was introduced by H. George Frederickson in 1968, basically to surpass the inequitable ownership of the resources. While possession of natural and economic resources is unequal in all societies, the access to livelihood, education and other services is highly unequal in rural Pakistan like other third world. The post flood recovery of agriculture and livestock requires providing fair, just and equitable provision of services to those having small or no direct possessions.
Within agriculture community, flood affected farmers are predominantly tenants (land less sharecroppers or farm labor) followed by small land owners, while the highest percentage of the land is owned by a small percent of big land holders. The women and children form a
24
group more vulnerable during and after disaster, because of their lack of mobility and limited involvement in production and economic processes. The vulnerability criteria ensure an access to the marginal rural communities and households. In addition to the mainstream agriculture, livestock, and horticulture, women focused and community oriented projects are important. The disaggregated data collection and differential monitoring and evaluation should be integrated into proper M&E procedures.
5.3.5. Rebuild Peoples’ Livelihoods Before the floods, the agriculture and livestock sectors were and continue to be the backbone of national economy and the rural social structure. The sector supports about 40% of the work force, provides 24% of the national GDP and have critical role in livelihoods and food security. ‘Livelihoods’ refers to the capabilities, assets, activities, and strategies required and pursued by households and individuals for a means of living. The livelihood assets (financial, physical, social, human, and natural) not only include those owned or controlled directly by households or individuals, but include publically owned assets and more intangible assets related to social and cultural relations. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with, and recover from, stresses and shocks. This entails the ability of affected population to quickly re-‐engage in economic activities (maintain and enhance its capabilities and assets), while not undermining the natural resource base. Livelihoods programming should be designed and implemented following an analysis of the link between power and vulnerability and the relationship between the economy and livelihoods in order to understand and simultaneously address both the short and long term dimensions of the crisis, as well as the immediate and underlying causes and structural deficiencies. A consultative approach is required to involve to help improve and diversify livelihoods. In this prospect programs should not focus only on agriculture but also to stimulate economic recovery and development to create an enabling environment for investment that will result in equitable dividends (market led approach).
5.3.6. Disaster Risk Management and Reduction
The level of risk during a disaster and its management has physical, institutional, and environmental properties. These characteristics evolve during pre-‐flood developments, response to the floods and post flood behavior of the hard and soft systems.
The Risk Management during and after a disaster is closely linked with capacities and preparedness of the institutions, communities and physical systems. The acquired resilience of a system or sector depends upon many factors including good knowledge of the disaster
25
impacts and management skills of the institutions. To control and minimize the disaster impacts, effective response and recovery is the central, which to a large extent depends upon the national capacity to plan and to guide the recovery process. The quantification of risks includes two important components, quantification of the vulnerabilities and the gap analysis. Actions in the agriculture sector can be divided into three groups, as listed in Annexure 3.
In the shorter term, practices to maximize use of natural resources/assets such as reduce water wasteage (i.e. use of run-‐off in small scale vegetable gardening), improved irrigation methods that minimize evaporation and building/rehabilitation of water harvesting structures in rain fed areas are just a few examples. In the medium term, available information (i.e. advanced satellite imagery, measurement of rainfall, changing meteorological maps) should be used to provide farmers with coping mechanisms for droughts, floods and other inevitable natural disasters and phenomena. The introduction of cropping methods that are resistant to diseases, pests and droughts, as well as crop varieties with shorter cycles of maturation, are a few ways to help farmers to weather climate change.
5.3.7. Monitoring, Accountability and Transparency A monitoring system should ensure effective multi-‐stakeholder monitoring of activities supported under the Early Recovery framework. It will also foster accountability and transparency in the use of financial resources. Due to the nature of early recovery it is recommended to monitor both activities and results. Monitoring activities will include on-‐site surveillance, regular reporting, and financial expenditure tracking. The monitoring of field responses from the beginning is important to identify corrective measures and improve original planning. Evaluation of the recovery pattern of different sub-‐sectors of the rural economy is important to plan long term actions. Monitoring of results refers to the monitoring of outcome and priorities, which may need to develop additional outcome indicators. The progress reporting as a part of agriculture cluster will be based on the Single Reporting Format (SRF). The SRF is launched as the main tool to monitor the progress or issues concerning; project budgets and expenditures, partners, project locations, beneficiaries, activity types and key performance indicators. The monitoring mechanism has been with consideration to the indicators included in the Appeal by a specialized agency IMMAP and the support of the Agriculture Cluster.
5.3.8. Cross Cutting Issues Gender is recognized as an important cross-‐cutting issue within agricultural livelihoods. Issues such as land ownership/access, available assets, ability to have credit, general mobility are
26
some of the key considerations that need to be addressed within livelihoods programming. Gender programming in agricultural livelihoods is important in the context of access to inputs, land, water, information/techniques, markets, credit and technology. Gender disaggregated data provides insight to livelihoods to address the needs of vulnerable populations. The vulnerability criteria in the response plan are made gender sensitive. However, planning of livelihood activities need to analyze gender issues in more details.
Environment: The vast agriculture areas of Pakistan face multiple environmental challenges, from the old issues of water and land quality to the emerging challenge of Climate Change. Current super floods just eight years after a prolonged draught of two years, are an example of increased frequency of extreme events. In both cases agriculture has been the major sufferer. Current glacier melt and monsoon patterns indicate higher probability of erratic and intensive rains, late monsoons, dry winters, and prolonged dry spells are expected.
The environmental sustainability of water bodies is threatened on multiple accounts, some fragile ecosystems like mangroves are already at stake, endangering livelihood of the local communities and resilience of the water bodies. The deteriorating groundwater quality directly influences coping potential of the agriculture systems and freshwater access to the communities. A substantial flood affected agriculture areas lie in saline groundwater zone,
27
ANNEXES
Annex 1: References for Minimum Standards in Agriculture Major Crops
• Wheat and Rice Advisory Boards. • Standing Committees of Agricultural Prices Commission on various crops. • Governing Board of Pakistan Agricultural Research Council. • Governing Body/Standing Committees of Pakistan Central Cotton Committee. • Board of Directors of Pakistan Cotton Standard Institute. • National Seed Council.
Fertilizers and Pesticides Agricultural Pesticides Ordinance (APO) was promulgated in 1971. A registration policy was introduced in 1992. The Government has enforced following laws to regulate the quality of the agriculture items:
• Pakistan Animal Quarantine (Import and Export of Animal Products) Act, • 1985. • Pakistan Plant Quarantine Act, 1976. • Pakistan Fish Inspection and Quality Control Act, 1988. • Seed Act, 1976. • Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority Act 1994. • Agricultural Produce (grading and marking) Act, 1937. • Pakistan Pure Food Laws 1960. (Provincial)
Annex 2: Strategy for the Control of Water Logging Some salient steps to manage and control the water logging and salinity. • Encouraging the installation of small, shallow tubewells to pump groundwater wherever it
is useful for irrigation. • Effective control of irrigation in the permeable soil areas, controlling cultivation of rice and
sugarcane wherever it is already not allowed. • Improvement and extension of the drainage system wherever required (preferably with
open ditches) in the waterlogged areas. The bed and furrow (an approximate depth of 1 to 1.5 meters) cotton growing areas has been helpful in the field drainage.
28
• Guiding farmers to adjust field size and irrigation timings according to the
physical properties of the soil: a smaller field size for relatively sandy or more permeable soils and larger fields for clayey or less permeable soils; short watering periods to check flooding in the more permeable soils.
• Temporarily embanking and slightly lowering the level of small saline patches within
cultivated fields would effectively leach their excess salts; for the reclamation of slick spots, gypsum would have to be used (1-‐1.5 kilograms per square meter of the affected area) alongside the above practice.
Use of Saline Groundwater (Tubewell) in Irrigated Areas • Testing of quality of groundwater used for irrigation: The maximum permissible Electrical
Conductivity (EC)/salt concentration, Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) and Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) values of irrigation water for different kinds of soils have been standardized by WAPDA and PARC. However, new standards are required by keeping in view extended uses by the saline groundwater.
• Disposal of poor quality groundwater pumped by tubewells through drainage ditches or canals and distributaries, instead of use for irrigation, locally. This water may be used for the irrigation of sandy soils and for growing a few salt tolerant crops.
• Amelioration of soils affected by poor quality water through the application of gypsum (2-‐
3 tones per ha) since most of these soils are afflicted only by sodicity. Popularizing the continuous use of gypsum on soils already affected by poor quality water or where irrigation with poor quality water is unavoidable.
29
Annex 3: Disaster Risk Management
1. Assessment of Risks § Identify key risks: physical and social economic, like hydro-‐meteorological (flood and
draughts) events, food insecurity profile, social and legal insecurity. § Identify key DR indicators and areas, like frequent flood prone areas, low lying areas
having drainage problems, socially vulnerable areas. § Hazard mapping at different levels using an appropriate set of technical and socio-‐
economic indicators, national, provincial and below. 2. Preparedness and Warning: • The preparedness has to take care of not only potential risks but, also the resilience
level and available cushions of the system. The enhancement of capacities and § Sharing DR data with stakeholders. § Technical safeguards and standard criteria in recovery process, for example avoiding
farm structure and check-‐dams within high flood-‐risk area. § Promoting programs of contingency crop planning; like crops having low financial risks
and shorter duration, crop diversification. § Trainings and institutional settings from National to the Village level. 3. DRR measures during Response and Early Recovery • Providing certified seeds, fertilizers and pesticides • Improve agriculture services. • Follow design and resource use criteria developed by the NDMA or line agencies (exp.
constructions inside flood plains or Katcha areas. • Develop and implement flood resilient structure for food and feed stocks. • Supplementary income generation from off-‐farm and non-‐farm activities. • Revival of ecological sites and water bodies. There is a scope to do better in case of
some water bodies.