Response analysis in food security crises: a 'road map'
12
Response Analysis in Food Security Crises: A “Road Map” Dan Maxwell and Heather Stobaugh ALNAP Presentation March 6 2013
Transcript of Response analysis in food security crises: a 'road map'
Response Analysis in Food Security Crises: A “Road Map”
Dan Maxwell and Heather StobaughALNAP Presentation
March 6 2013
Examining the Response Analysis Question
2004: Levine and Chastre et al. “Missing the Point”
Since ~2005:• Major efforts to improve food security analysis• Many new response options in food security
emergencies and chronic vulnerability
Research question:Is improved analysis driving response choice?
Changing Donor Resources
Humanitarian food aid 2001–2011, by source (MT)
Source: WFP-FAIS2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
Triangular PurchaseLocal PurchaseDirect Transfer
Changing Donor Resources
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011$0.00
$500,000,000.00
$1,000,000,000.00
$1,500,000,000.00
$2,000,000,000.00
$2,500,000,000.00
U.S. International Emergency Food Assistance Funding by Program Type, FY2005-2011
OFDA (Agriculture and Food Security)
PRM (LRP)
EFSP (Cash, Vouchers, LRP)
LRP Project (USDA)
In-Kind (Title II)
• “Link between situational analysis and program design” (IPC)
• “The analytical process by which the objectives and modality of program response options are determined, and potentially harmful consequences are minimized” (Study Team definition)
What is Response Analysis?
Situating Response Analysis(FAO 2011)
Response Analysis: The “Road Map”
Factors Shaping Response Choice
• Situational analysis • Needs assessments• Causal analysis• Projection/forecast
Feasibility analysis• Market assessment• Donor resources• Organizational capacity• Partner agency capacity• Government policy• Access and security• Timeliness• Record of past programs
• M&E records/ Lessons learned• Logistics• Cost of compliance• Influence of large agencies• Conditionality/targeting considerations
Internal context• Organizational considerations
• Mandate and mission• Objectives in field• Capacity and skill set
Appropriateness considerations• Internal comparison of response options• External analysis of gaps in response• Risk assessment/prevention of
unintended consequences • Market distortion risks• Staff security and safety • Recipient community security• Risk of theft, diversion, or corruption• Reputational/legal risks to agency• Do no harm analysis
• Cost effectiveness• Assessment of recipient preferences• Evidence of post-distribution dynamics
Factors shaping response choice:Importance and influence of evidence
Response Analysis Tools
Prog
ram
D
esig
n
Res
pons
e An
alys
is
S
ituati
on A
naly
sis
GFD/Market-based (cash, voucher, etc.)EMMA*WFP Market Analysis*S-C-P *MIFIRA*SC Risk Assessment*GPR on Cash ProgramsECHO Decision TreeACF Decision TreeWFP Decision TreeICRC Guidelines & Decision Tree
Supplementary/ TherapeuticWHO GAM Cut-Offs* FAQR Decision Trees
Livelihoods assistance/resilience/ protectionLEGS (PRIM)*Seed Security System Assessment*
Cross Cutting ConsiderationsBenefit-Harm-Analysis Do No HarmTI Corruption
Conditionality/TargetingGPR on Cash ProgramsECHO Decision TreeWFP Guidelines for TargetingTufts Guidelines for TargetingICRC Guidelines for Cash Trans.
Food/Nutrition ProductsFAQR Decision Trees, WFP Decision Tree for Nutrition Products
Overall RA ProcessRAF (FAO)RAP (WFP)Oxfam RA Guide
Which tools help in which decisions?
1st Order Response Options:ACF Decision TreeWFP RA Decision Tree
* Includes data collection/assessment
Assessment Tools
Response Analysis: Next Steps
So what?Can determination of responses in emergencies/ transitions/ chronic vulnerability become more evidence-based?
More work with agencies and donors required
Question still remains:Has the investment in improved analysis and the broader range of response options led to improved program response in diverse operating environments?
(Are programs still “missing the point?” )
