Review of FAO Cash For Work Programme in Somalia

Transcription

1 Review of FAO Cash For Work Programme in Somalia Volume I: Qualitative impact assessment Maham Farhat, Andrew Kardan and Mohamed Gure April 2014 A study commissioned by FAO from Oxford Policy Management

2 Disclaimer This study was commissioned by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) from Oxford Policy Management (OPM) for the review of FAO s multi-donor Cash for Work Programme in Somalia. The study was made possible through the financial support from USAID office of Food for Peace. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of FAO, nor of USAID or the United States government. Geographic names and administrative divisions, and presentation of the material in the maps, used for the purpose of statistical analysis in this report, do not imply endorsement by the United Nations or any other agencies involved in the production of the report. Similarly, population estimates presented in this report were computed solely for the purposes of this analysis. Specifically, the designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of FAO concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. 2 Oxford Policy Management

3 Acknowledgements This report was prepared by Andrew Kardan and Maham Farhat from Oxford Policy Management (OPM) and Mohamed Gure from Acrid Development. It also benefited from peer review from Dr Sebastian Silvaleander and Rodolfo Beazley from OPM. This study is a result of the hard work of our local team mobilised through Acrid Development, who worked with tireless enthusiasm to meet the stringent demands. The research also benefited from the participation and inputs of Aaron Moratz from the University of Burco in this district. Most importantly, this report is based on a large number of interviews and discussions with community members in many villages and interviews with government officials, NGO staff, money vendors and other community representatives. We are most grateful to them for their generosity and time given to explaining their community and giving us their views and perceptions of the programme. We hope we have managed to reflect their views accurately and adequately. Julie Lawson-McDowall was the focal point for this study and we benefited greatly from our discussions and brainstorming sessions together. Our sincere thanks to her for her suggestions and ideas. Finally, we are also thankful to Penny Wallace from OPM, the administrator on this study, who ensured that the logistics were in place for us to be able to undertake this work. Any errors or omissions are those of the authors and we apologise for these in advance. This assessment is being carried out by Oxford Policy Management. The team leader for this assignment is Dr Sebastian Silvaleander. The process and qualitative assessments of this study were led by Andrew Kardan and supported by Maham Farhat. For further information contact Sebastian Silvaleander sebastian.silvaleander@opml.co.uk or Andrew Kardan andrew.kardan@opml.co.uk. The contact point for the client is Julie Lawson-McDowall Julie.LawsonMcDowall@fao.org Oxford Policy Management Limited 6 St Aldates Courtyard Tel +44 (0) St Aldates Fax +44 (0) Oxford OX1 1BN admin@opml.co.uk Registered in England: United Kingdom Website Oxford Policy Management i

4 Executive summary Objective of this study The overall objective of this report on the Cash For Work (CFW) Programme was to assess the impact of the programme in terms of use of the transfer by beneficiaries and its impact on their food security, how beneficiaries were selected, and the wider social and economic impact at the community. The study aimed to explore the following hypotheses: Hypothesis I. Targeting under the CFW Programme is improved due to self-selection of beneficiaries. Hypothesis II. The CFW Programme results in improved household food consumption through enhanced market-based entitlements. Hypothesis III. The CFW Programme results in wider local economy impacts through increased trade, agriculture production and economic activity. Hypothesis IV. The CFW Programme reduces beneficiary households risk-coping behaviour and improves their access to credit. Hypothesis V. The CFW Programme increases community tension and jealousy between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The CFW Programme CFW projects have been undertaken by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in Somalia since 2007 as part of the wider portfolio of agriculture-related interventions aimed at strengthening livelihoods and improving incomes in rural areas. The CFW Programme was designed and implemented in several phases ( ) with the aims of: providing cash income to eligible households to guarantee the minimum food basket; rehabilitating and constructing community-level productive infrastructure (canals, water catchments and feeder roads); and providing an alternative source of employment at the community level to mitigate the impact of crises and ongoing seasonal shortages. This study primarily focused on Phase IIB (Jun 2013 Jan 2014) but also on Phase IIA (Nov 2012 May 2013), where research sites allowed. The intervention consisted of provision of labour opportunities to poor and vulnerable households for a period of 54 days to rehabilitate selected community infrastructure. The daily rate of US$ 4 US$ 6 was provided to beneficiaries depending on location and role of the worker. All beneficiaries also received allowances for transport and some received vouchers for the purchase of tools or given them through FAO procurement. The programme was implemented through NGOs who were responsible for selection and identification of infrastructure sites and beneficiaries, as well as for ensuring that the infrastructure was being rehabilitated. The payments to the beneficiaries were made by independent local money vendors, which were contracted separately. Research design The research used two principal qualitative methods of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) in answering the research questions. For the FGDs the research utilised Oxford Policy Management ii

5 a number of participatory tools, including social mapping, wellbeing analysis, livelihoods scoring and calendar and institutional mapping. Data collection was conducted in 16 villages across six districts over two periods. During the first period two teams conducted research in parallel in six villages across Burco and Laasqoray in November of 2013 and following one week of training in Hargeisa. The second stage of research was conducted in January and February of 2014 following an additional round of training in Nairobi, covering nine villages in the districts of Hobyo, Belet Hawa, Luuq and Afmadow. The research incorporated a number of quality assurance mechanisms, including: a stepped approach to research, enabling it to adapt to the realities on the ground; piloting of the tools in the research districts; daily debriefs by the research team; regular remote discussions with OPM researchers; completion of templates; capturing of photographic evidence; recording and transcribing of information; and finally coding and analysis of all collected data in NVivo data analysis software. Main findings Characteristics of the villages visited There was a variation in the state of infrastructure development and access to basic health and education services in the sampled villages. Some of the villages were extremely poor, with very little infrastructure, whereas others were perceived as fairly developed. In all of these villages there was a clear division between the rich (those who have) and the poor (those who don t have) in terms of ownership of livestock and housing, access to remittances, and reliance on social support. However, there was no obvious physical segregation (within the village) of households belonging to different clans or wealth categories. Improved targeting under the CFW Programme Whether for the CFW Programme or for an unconditional cash transfer, beneficiaries are likely to be selected by the Village Relief Committees (VRCs), which, as representatives of the different clans and sub-clans and spearheaded by the village elder, determine how the resources within their communities are shared. The selection is dominated by clan and sub-clan considerations, with prominent clans/sub-clans having a greater claim on resources distributed; only once beneficiary numbers are allocated across the various sub-clans are poorer households likely to be included, since informal social support networks and religious obligations are strong. In essence, there is no self-selection in this programme by design and given the excess supply of labour there are more able-bodied individuals who would like to work than jobs available. Nevertheless, the working requirements of the programme and the wage rate being set equal or below the market rate for unskilled labour is likely to dissuade the very well-off from participating in this programme. Some of these individuals will, however, still benefit at the stage when the resources are shared among the various sub-clans, without the need to work. Those at the rehabilitation sites are, on average, likely to be the poorer and more vulnerable households within the community, although those unable to work and with no other able-bodied household members to support them are likely to be excluded from such programmes. Moreover, the work was deemed as inappropriate for women and the communities struggled to meet the requirements of the programme. Where women were involved they were either represented by Oxford Policy Management iii

6 male members of their family (including their husbands) or given tasks such as removing the soil or cooking and brewing of tea, tasks that women elsewhere said are normal in support of infrastructure rehabilitation. By design, it may be argued that it is more difficult to divert funds through the CFW Programme compared to unconditional cash transfers since some activity by at least a number of people needs to take place and some infrastructure needs to be rehabilitated for funds to be released and beneficiaries paid, even if not completely according to design specification of the programme. Moreover, while elements of the programme and how the number of beneficiaries are shared across the community vary across the sites, its design and accompanying requirements are expected to improve the likelihood of poor and vulnerable households who are (or who have) ablebodied persons, being targeted and provided with material benefit. Risk-coping behaviour, increased food security and creditworthiness This study found the CFW money to be used mainly for basic household consumption expenditures, especially food that was normally purchased through repayment of previous credit taken from shopkeepers. Respondents also noted that CFW money had been used to pay for school fees, re-stocking of goats and sheep, and sometimes for the repairing of houses or buying of seeds. Most importantly, the existence of the programme meant that households did not have to sell their animals during the lean season to finance their consumption, thus de facto contributing to their asset accumulation. The research team gained the impression that beneficiaries continued with their existing livelihoods and sometimes shared the responsibility of the work among various members within the household. In this sense, then, the CFW Programme was an additional source of income for these households, and not a substitute for existing livelihoods. Therefore, the programme has likely contributed to improved food security for the CFW beneficiary households. Some beneficiaries noted being more creditworthy because of the programme, and that they were seen in the same light as those receiving remittances and thus provided with credit. However, the delays in payments affected this potential benefit of the programme, as the community was less certain whether these beneficiaries would be paid. Livelihoods The main livelihood sources of respondents included livestock rearing, casual labour on construction, sale of firewood, charcoal burning, collection of stones, and market trading. In the agro-pastoral areas in Belet Hawa and Luuq, agriculture was one of the main livelihood sources. Humanitarian support and remittances were also seen as a livelihood source by many respondents, especially during the dry season. Findings from the livelihoods analysis suggested that, overall, women were targeted more than men for humanitarian programmes. Seasonality played an important role in the composition and dominance of different livelihood options. During the rainy season activities related to pastoralism and farming dominated. These activities were reduced significantly during the dry season and were replaced with causal work and income from humanitarian programmes. The CFW Programme was meant to be implemented during the dry season when casual labour opportunities were scarce. However, delays meant that the programme was implemented during the rainy season when the activity levels of the targeted populations are very high. Nevertheless, given how the CFW Programme was implemented it was not expected to have affected the Oxford Policy Management iv

7 beneficiaries livelihood activities. Beneficiaries generally did not spend more than two or three hours a day at the sites and did not necessarily come every day. Households also sent different members to attend the rehabilitation work, when they were in a position to do so. The local economy CFW Programme payment days were reportedly busy market days, as recipients spent money on food and paid back previous debts. The programme was seen as a significant injection of money in some of the communities visited: shopkeepers and other business people noticed increased sale of goods, including rice, meat and sugar. The tea shops, restaurants and miira dealers also noted increases in their activities. Some households also paid for schooling, invested in the purchase of animals or spent money on their housing. Commodities were priced according to the cost of transportation and prices fluctuated across the seasons rising especially during the hagaa season when the seas were rough or during the gu and deyr rainy seasons if the roads were inaccessible. The CFW Programme itself, however, had no observable impact on commodity prices during the payment days. The programme was viewed as less physically demanding than other infrastructure work, but it is unlikely that it had any significant impact on the supply of labour, especially in relation to casual work. This is because casual work was in high demand and low availability during the dry season and in low demand during the rainy season. Where there was substitution with other livelihood sources this was with casual labour activities such as charcoal burning or firewood collection and sale, and households would revert back to these activities once the CFW Programme came to an end. Community relations Clan elders are responsible for resolving conflicts and maintaining peace within the community. As mentioned earlier, they also preside over the VRC that is responsible for sharing resources within the community. Religious leaders also play an important role given their moral authority and standing in the community. The CFW Programme has had no significant impact on power structures or community relations. As decisions on sharing assistance were made by community leaders, these were accepted by all residents and there were no reported conflicts or tensions arising within the community as a result of the CFW targeting processes. Payments to beneficiaries Delays in payments affected beneficiaries willingness to work and their ability to access credit from the shops, putting stress on their relationships with non-beneficiaries and within their households. The foremen and NGOs were often blamed for these delays, therefore undermined their credibility. However, once they had been paid beneficiaries stated that they received all the money as stipulated on their vouchers and were not required to pay any taxation to either the money vendor or local authorities. Beneficiaries were generally satisfied with the payment mechanism, which they felt minimised abuse and corruption. That said, in some instances they thought it would be easier if the payment was delivered to their communities, especially if they were far from the money vendors. Oxford Policy Management v

8 Infrastructure rehabilitation In the villages visited as part of this research it was evident that work had been carried out and infrastructure rehabilitated; however, it was less clear how this was done. In some of the villages it was noted that the area to be rehabilitated was divided between the various sub-clans, with each being responsible for their areas, while elsewhere there were specific targets per individual according to programme guidelines. The realities on the ground suggest that perhaps not all beneficiaries work every day or for a long period of time during the day. From the perspective of infrastructure rehabilitation this may be viewed less favourably, but on a more positive note it has meant that the other livelihood sources of the beneficiary households have remained intact. There was a sense that women should be provided with other tasks more appropriate to the prevailing gendered cultural norms and not included in the programme in exactly the same way as men. Most of the current benefits of the CFW Programme were in the form of payments made to beneficiaries, as the rehabilitated infrastructure had either just been completed or was in the process of completion. Observation of the infrastructure rehabilitated suggests significant variation in quality and completeness. Therefore, expectations regarding any long and sustained impact will need to recognise this. The quality of the infrastructure may improve if the infrastructure identified for rehabilitation is aligned with the priorities of the community and what they deem as important. Community preferences and suggestions The community members interviewed as part of this study had clear ideas on what they preferred. Overall, the CFW Programme was preferred to non-cash-based interventions. Beneficiaries appreciated the intrinsic value of working for their money and that it was building an asset for the community. However, they noted that unconditional cash transfer may be more appropriate for labour-constrained and elderly households. Beneficiaries also noted the need for more appropriate interventions for women, while in terms of programme operations they wanted the programme to be implemented during the dry season, for payments to be made on time, and for the money to be delivered in their communities. Moreover, the community members wanted the value of the transfer to be increased and for it to cover more individuals. Finally, community members noted a plethora of needs that they felt should also be considered including cement pools, flood mitigation infrastructure as well as schools and health clinics. Recommendations This report makes a set of recommendations that should be considered in conjunction with the recommendations made through the review of the processes described in the second report (Volume II). These include: I. Rationalising the objectives of the programme, given the difficulty in meeting all the existing objectives under one programme. The programme has a number of different objectives (food security, livelihoods and employment) and such a multi-pronged approach requires a very sound design and implementation, which is normally difficult to deal with under one intervention. As such, there is a need by FAO to rationalise its objectives and adjust its programme design and implementation accordingly. It is understood that the programme is aiming to move from increasing short-term food access and reducing displacement to rehabilitating infrastructure, with a view to improving the resilience of vulnerable households in rural areas to future shocks, albeit in a stressed environment. However, the programme is currently continuing its focus on food security. If the focus is to improve resilience through infrastructure then the programme may need to improve its design, especially around how Oxford Policy Management vi

9 the infrastructure is selected, with greater emphasis on productivity. In reality, given the situation in Somalia, a portfolio of different interventions may be required to address the more immediate humanitarian assistance and food security needs in certain instances and geographical areas, as well as longer-term interventions aimed at the resilience of communities through infrastructure rehabilitation in areas less affected and where deemed more appropriate. II. In moving to a more long-term approach, the application of a broader and more bottomup approach to the design of the programme that takes into consideration a wider group of stakeholders with the aim of better understanding local needs and requirements. If the objective of the programme is to improve the resilience of the community through the building of livelihood assets, then a more bottom-up approach is required that takes into consideration more localised needs and requirements. This will be more resource intensive and difficult to implement, especially in the context of conflict and inaccessibility. Part of this approach will require a broadening of the stakeholders engaged, including more engagement with the local authorities at the district, NGOs and research organisations and the need for alignment of such plans with district and regional strategies (where these exist). III. Reconsider the workload of the programme, recognising the challenge in setting individual targets as well as the difference in the nature of infrastructure and terrain. The link between payment and outputs is appropriate if the objective of the programme is to improve the quality of the infrastructure rehabilitated. The target for the infrastructure output (excavation undertaken) may need to be group based or site specific given the challenge in predetermining workloads in a uniform manner without consideration of the nature of the infrastructure and terrain involved. This will also require more presence by FAO staff in the field to ensure it is operational. IV. Adapt to the localised needs of the community and assess the appropriateness as a CFW intervention. There is a need for the programme to be more adaptive to the localised needs of the community. Although the programme can become more adaptive and flexible in the menu of infrastructure it can rehabilitate, there is an implicit trade-off that needs to be acknowledged in that the infrastructure that is most useful for the community may not be the one that is most suitably delivered through a programme that targets unskilled labour. V. Consider a more integrated approach to the rehabilitation of infrastructure. Focusing on the infrastructure assets as a means of improving resilience and productivity within the community may require the need for a more integrated approach to the rehabilitation of infrastructure that includes machine-based interventions combined with labour-intensive activities. This will require better coordination within FAO with the team responsible for large infrastructure. This will also require the need for a longer period for implementation and more support and training for staff hired, which will in turn affect the availability and type of labourers engaged in the programme. This will also require a review of the targeted population. VI. Establish longer-term partnerships with NGOs that provide greater flexibility in the procurement of the goods and equipment necessary for improving the quality of infrastructure. A move toward longer-term programming requires more investment in the design of the programme and longer contracts with NGOs, as well as greater flexibility in enabling NGOs to procure the inputs necessary for enhancing the quality of the infrastructure rehabilitated. Oxford Policy Management vii

10 VII. Regardless of direction, the programme needs to adhere to simple operational guidelines including appropriate timing of the intervention and a regular and timely payment of wages. Oxford Policy Management viii

11 Table of contents Acknowledgements i Executive summary ii Objective of this study ii The CFW Programme ii Research design ii Main findings iii Recommendations vi List of figures, tables and boxes xi List of abbreviations xii 1 Introduction Objective of the assessment The CFW Programme Somali context Report structure 3 2 Approach and methodology Conceptual framework Key research hypotheses and underlying assumptions Methods used Sampling Training and piloting Data collection, debriefings, coding and analysis Study limitations 12 3 Research findings Characteristics of villages visited Beneficiary selection Use of transfer Livelihood strategies Local economy Payments Community relations Infrastructure Community satisfaction and suggestions 79 4 Conclusions and recommendations Summary of findings Recommendations 86 References 88 Oxford Policy Management ix

12 Annex A Training plan 89 A.1 Training plan: Hargeisa Stage I 90 A.2 Training plan: Nairobi Stage II 91 Annex B NVivo coding 95 Annex C Fieldwork schedule 97 C.1 Phase I fieldwork 97 C.2 Phase II fieldwork 97 Annex D Participatory tools and KII guides 98 D.1 Social mapping 98 D.2 Community wellbeing analysis 102 D.3 Livelihood matrix scoring 106 D.4 Institutional mapping (Venn diagramming) 110 Oxford Policy Management x

13 List of figures, tables and boxes Figure 1 Social mapping exercise with community elders (Gawan, Hobyo) 13 Figure 2 Distribution of beneficiaries within Qooryale village, Burco District 21 Figure 3 Livelihood matrix example 107 Table 1 Livelihood zones for sampled districts 9 Table 2 Sample size 10 Table 3 Perceptions of wellbeing, Dagelema, Afmadow 17 Table 4 Perceptions of wellbeing, Cadow Yuurura, Burco 18 Table 5 Targeting of the CFW Programme in research areas 24 Table 6 Wellbeing analysis, Female beneficiaries, Harada, Burco 32 Table 7 Livelihood mapping with male beneficiaries in Xin Barwaqo, Hobyo 42 Table 8 Comparison of daily wage rates 51 Table 9 Summary of infrastructure and impact 70 Box 1 Case story: Income and expenditure for a beneficiary household 37 Box 2 Illustration: the impact of delay in payments on the community 55 Box 3 Example of a CFW Programme payment process 58 Box 4 Assigning tasks to beneficiaries 68 Oxford Policy Management xi

14 List of abbreviations CFW DC FAO FGD FSNAU HH IDP IDI IP IPC KII MCH MV NGO OPM SWALIM VRC Cash for Work District Commissioner Food and Agriculture Organization Focus Group Discussion Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit Household Internally Displaced Person In-Depth Interview Implementing Partner Integrated Food Security Phase Classification Key Informant Interview Maternal and Child Health Clinic Money Vendor Non-Governmental Organisation Oxford Policy Management Somalia Water and Land Information Management Village Relief Committee Oxford Policy Management xii

15 1 Introduction 1.1 Objective of the assessment OPM was contracted to undertake the study Review of FAO Cash For Work (CFW) Programme in Somalia on behalf of FAO. The overall objective of this study was to assess programme impact in terms of cash use, targeting, community level impact and an evaluation of the effectiveness of programme mechanisms 1. The three main components of this study were: I. Impact assessment of the cash transfers, which looks at uses of transfers and their impact on food security, risk-coping behaviour and the wider community; II. III. Process and operations review, which assesses the internal functioning of the programme including targeting, registration, payment delivery systems, etc. and whether they can be improved; and Cost analysis, which assesses financial costs, to examine whether the cash transfer programme offered value for money in terms of the cost to transfer one US$ of benefit. This report (Volume I) presents the findings from the first component of the programme, the impact assessment of Phase IIB. Findings from the process review and costing analysis are presented separately in Volume II and Volume III. 1.2 The CFW Programme CFW projects have been undertaken by FAO in Somalia since 2007 as a part of the wider portfolio of agriculture-related interventions aimed at strengthening livelihoods and improving incomes in rural areas. The initial scale and scope of these programmes was, however, limited to mostly canal rehabilitation in mainly riverine areas. This focus shifted over time to include a wider range of infrastructure, including water catchments and feeder roads in agro-pastoral and pastoral zones. This shift was accelerated in the aftermath of the 2011 famine, when the CFW Programme was used as an emergency response to tackle the ensuing humanitarian crisis. The programme was designed and implemented with the specific aims of: 1) providing cash income to eligible households to guarantee the minimum food basket; 2) rehabilitating and constructing community-level productive infrastructure (canals, water catchments and feeder roads); and 3) providing an alternative source of employment at the community level to mitigate the impact of crisis and ongoing seasonal shortages. While food security through social assistance was the main priority of the programme in the immediate aftermath of the famine, the focus has shifted more toward improving the productive capacity of households and the wider community. The various phases of the CFW Programme can be classified into the following categories: 1 FAO contract. Oxford Policy Management 1

16 Early phase ( ): pre-famine, mostly riverine areas; Phase IA (Jan 2011 Sep 2011): pre-famine, smaller budget; Phase IB (Oct 2011 Mar 2012) : post-famine response, increased budget; Phase IIA (Nov 2012 May 2013): recovery, increased budget, fewer Implementing Partners (IPs); and Phase IIB (Jun 2013 Jan 2014): resilience, decreased budget, fewer IPs. The primary objective of CFW activities in Phase IIB has shifted from increasing short-term food access and reducing displacement to rehabilitating infrastructure with a view to improving the resilience of vulnerable households in rural areas to future shocks, albeit in a stressed environment. This is in line with FAO Somalia s overall shift toward resilience programming but should also be viewed in the context of a fragile state experiencing conflict and cyclical environmental stress. The intervention consisted of provision of labour opportunities to poor and vulnerable households for a period of 54 days to rehabilitate selected community infrastructure. The daily rate of US$ 4 US$ 6 was provided to beneficiaries depending on location and role of the worker. All beneficiaries also received allowances for transport and some received vouchers for the purchase of tools or actual tools procured by FAO. The programme was implemented through NGOs, which were responsible for the selection and identification of infrastructure sites and beneficiaries, as well as for ensuring the rehabilitation of the infrastructure. The payments were made by an independent local money vendor. 1.3 Somali context Somalia is the most enduring case of state collapse in recent times, during which internal conflict has prevailed across most of southern and central Somalia, associated with a rise in jihadist insurgency, currently spearheaded by Al-Shabaab. Some of the most violent conflict in Somalia s history took place between 2006 and 2010, which together with slow onset of drought and two consecutive rain failures directly contributing to the famine in Regional and global political agendas have had considerable influence in Somalia in the past eight years; the international community has attempted to play a key role in state-building and stabilisation. There have been high levels of political instability during the period that this evaluation covers. The appointment of a new government in September/October 2012 was met with greater optimism than has been felt for many years, although the situation remains volatile. Somaliland and Puntland have followed a different political trajectory: Somaliland declared independence in 1991, whereas Puntland was established as a semi-autonomous region in With more established government and administrative structures, both have enjoyed greater stability but have been in political limbo as their future status remains unresolved. The majority of Somalia s population depend upon pastoralism and agro-pastoralism for their livelihood, but the lack of effective governance, law and order have taken their toll, especially in southern and central Somalia. It is now one of the poorest and most food-insecure countries in the world. High levels of displacement have fuelled urbanisation, but a deeper understanding of how livelihoods and settlement patterns have changed in Somalia is hampered by a lack of trend data and analysis. Somalia has experienced humanitarian crises over two decades, mainly triggered by conflict and a lack of effective governance but compounded by recurrent droughts, floods and, in recent years, rising global food prices. The most acute periods of humanitarian crisis have attracted the greatest Oxford Policy Management 2

17 international attention, including the 2011 famine, although food security and other indicators frequently hit emergency levels in the periods between 2. The latest famine was declared in southern Somalia (in the lower Shabeele and Bakool regions) on 20 July 2011 after long periods of warning. The failure of rains during the deyr season in late 2010 and subsequently the gu rains in April to June 2011 led to dramatic reductions in crop production and increased livestock mortality, thus reducing both local food availability and a key source of income. While drought was a major causal factor in the onset of famine, it was not the only determinant. Other factors influencing the famine included rapid increase in food prices and protracted conflict that were compounded by the policies of local authorities and donors, and the related absence/withdrawal from Somalia of the World Food Programme and other humanitarian agencies. The famine particularly affected agriculturists, agro-pastoralists, labourers (due to rapid decline in the real value of wages in relation to basic food commodities) and internally displaced persons (IDPs). 3 The situation in Somalia has significantly improved since the famine. These improvements are attributed to good harvests, increased livestock herd sizes and prices, improved milk availability, low prices of both local and imported staple foods, and higher purchasing power from labour and livestock sales combined with humanitarian interventions. 4 While conditions have improved markedly there remains a significant proportion of the population that are food-insecure, with IDPs representing three-quarters of this group. 1.4 Report structure The remainder of the report is structured as follows: Section 2 describes the approach and methodology of this study; Section 3 presents the findings from the research, including the context of the research sites, beneficiary selection, use of transfer, livelihoods, local economy, payments, infrastructure, community relations and preferences and recommendations of the interviewees; and Section 4 concludes with a set of recommendations. The annexes provide supplementary information on the data-collection process and training. 2 FAO (2013). Evaluation of FAO s Cooperation in Somalia 2007 to 2012 Final Report. Office of Evaluation, FAO, Rome, Italy. 3 D. Maxwell and M. Fitzpatrick (2012), The 2011 Somalia famine: Context, causes, and complications, Global Food Security. 4 FSNAU (2013), Key Findings from the 2013 Post Gu Season Food Security and Nutrition Assessment in Somalia, September. Oxford Policy Management 3

18 2 Approach and methodology 2.1 Conceptual framework To analyse the impact of the CFW Programme on households food security and productive assets it is important to establish a conceptual framework for understanding the potential mechanisms through which households access food. This research draws on the entitlements and livelihoods framework for doing this. The main objective of the CFW Programme is to increase food availability and food access for drought-affected communities by: a) Enabling vulnerable households to meet their minimum food requirements; 5 and b) Increasing livelihood resilience through rehabilitation of productive infrastructure, particularly water catchments, canal rehabilitation and feeder roads. Households can obtain food from four main legal sources (entitlements) 6 : production-based (growing food), trade-based (buying food), own-labour (working for food) and inheritance and transfer (food given by others). 7 A household s ability to obtain food from these different sources can be analysed through a dynamic livelihoods framework that is centred on different livelihood assets, which are influenced by the wider context within which the framework operates. This includes structures and processes (including government and private structures, law, policies, culture and institutions) and is affected by shocks, trends and the seasonality of opportunities. The livelihood assets include 8 : Human capital this is the skills, knowledge, ability to labour and good health that together enable people to pursue different livelihood strategies and achieve livelihood objectives. This contributes to production- and own-labour-based entitlements and through earned income to trade-based entitlements. Social capital this is the social resources upon which people draw in pursuit of their livelihoods objectives and is developed through networks and connectedness, membership of more formalised groups and relationships of trust, reciprocity and exchange. These contribute directly to the inheritance and transfer entitlements but also the other entitlements through power and relations. Physical capital this is the basic infrastructure and producers goods needed to support livelihoods, which contributes to own-labour and trade-based entitlements. Financial capital the financial resources used by people to achieve livelihood objectives including available stock (savings) and regular inflow of money (earned income, pensions and remittances). This can contribute to trade-based entitlements and potentially production-based entitlements. 5 Minimum food requirements entail sufficient calorific and nutritional intake for each member of a household. 6 Sen, A. (1981), Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 7 This section is drawn from OPM (2010), Evaluation of Zimbabwe s Emergency Cash Transfer (ZECT) programme, July. 8 DFID (1999), Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets, April. Oxford Policy Management 4

19 Natural capital this is the natural resource stocks from which resources flow and from which the services useful for livelihoods are derived. These livelihood assets, which can also be viewed as liabilities in certain contexts and environments, play an important role in households ability to obtain food. A household s ability to obtain food from its own production will depend on a variety of factors, including access to and availability of agriculture assets (land, equipment, animals), inputs (seeds, fertilisers, etc.), weather conditions (sufficient rain, soil quality, etc.) and physical labour and skills. All these conditions need to come together at the appropriate time to enable the success of production. The availability of food from trade-based entitlements will depend on the income level of the household and the supply and availability of food in the market place. Food prices will also affect a household s purchasing power. The potential to obtain food from the household s own labour will depend on the availability of labour opportunities, as well as the labour supply within the households and the trade-off and interaction with other livelihood opportunities. The terms of trade between labour activities and food will determine the level of food obtained from this source. Finally, obtaining food from inheritance and social transfers will depend on the social capital of the households and on the availability of social transfers to the community. Households that are engaged in formalised community structures, informal reciprocity-based relationships with family, friends and neighbours and those with family members working elsewhere are more likely to benefit from this entitlement. Marginalised groups or those from less powerful clans and sub-clans may be more likely to be negatively affected by their social capital. That will have spill-over effects on their entitlements from other sources too. Even within households, access to different forms of capital is likely to vary by gender and age. The distribution of material and other benefits may also differ within a household. The CFW Programme is expected to support households ability to obtain food by increasing their food intake through trade-based entitlements and from own production in the longer term as a result of the rehabilitation of productive assets. The CFW Programme may also affect the social capital available to a household through its impact on sharing, borrowing and assistance. The qualitative research will investigate the interaction between the programme and the main sources of food by investigating a number of theory-driven hypotheses and underlying assumptions. The likely impact of the programme will also be affected by the way in which the programme operates, including how communities were chosen, the infrastructure projects selected, the beneficiary households identified, and when and how they were paid. These issues are explored in this assessment. 2.2 Key research hypotheses and underlying assumptions This assessment aims to test the following key research hypotheses: Hypothesis I. Targeting under the CFW Programme is improved due to self-selection of beneficiaries This depends on the intended target group. The mechanisms for beneficiary selection and the wage rate of the CFW Programme compared to other labour opportunities in the community will also determine the success of the poor and vulnerable households self-selecting into the Oxford Policy Management 5

20 programme. Most public works programmes in humanitarian settings use some form of community-based targeting, but ensuring that it is done effectively remains a challenge (especially given the short time scale in this case). Hypothesis II. The CFW Programme results in improved household food consumption through enhanced market-based entitlements This will depend on whether food requirements are currently being met from households own livelihoods or not. It will also depend on whether this money is an additional source of income or a substitution for other livelihood opportunities. In addition, the availability and prices of food in the market will influence households ability to obtain food. Current evidence on public works programmes in humanitarian settings shows that beneficiary households are likely to use their transfer income on purchasing more and sometimes varied quantities of food, clearing of debt, and reduced sale of household asset (particularly livestock). In addition to the total amount of transfer, what the beneficiaries use the transfer on will depend on the period in the seasonal calendar during which the CFW money is provided. This will determine the general availability of food, labour market opportunities and priorities of the households. Transfers provided during the harvest season are likely to be used for non-food requirements, especially during a good harvest season and particularly for those relying on their own production for their food entitlements. Hypothesis III. The CFW Programme results in wider local economy impacts through increased trade, agriculture production and economic activity This will depend on the nature and responsiveness of the market. Where markets are supply inelastic, for example due to fragmented markets and poor infrastructure, prices may increase in response to increased demand. Improvements in household and community economic activities may derive from increased farm and livestock production or from increased trade. The impact of the CFW Programme on the labour market will depend on the job opportunities available, that are in turn linked to the seasonal calendar. The programme may have unintended impacts on the labour markets and households livelihood strategies if implemented during a season where livelihood opportunities are more abundant or important seasonal activities are being undertaking for example, land preparation, planting and weeding or harvesting. An evaluation of an emergency cash-based intervention in the Lower Juba and Gedo regions of South Somalia suggested households reduced reliance on typical coping strategies such as daily labour, bush product collection and sales. 9 Similarly, in Afghanistan an evaluation of a CFW programme suggested a negative impact on the availability of labour supply, with beneficiaries preferring the easier CFW programme work to traditional agricultural labour. 10 Hypothesis IV. The CFW Programme reduces beneficiary households risk-coping behaviour and improves their access to credit Evidence on CFW and cash transfer programmes suggests improved access to credit for beneficiary households, although to some extent this will depend on the willingness of 9 Majid, N., Hussein, I., Shuria, H. (2007). Evaluation of the cash consortium in southern Somalia. Oxfam GB; Horn Relief. 10 Jones, B. (2004). Evaluation of Oxfam GB s ECHO funded Cash for Work Project in Hazarajat. Oxfam. Oxford Policy Management 6

21 beneficiaries to borrow and credit lenders to provide credit. Evidence also suggests improvements in households ability to clear previous debt and reduce their need for negative depletion of productive assets, especially livestock. Hypothesis V. The CFW Programme increases community tension and jealousy between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries Community tension and jealousy may affect the existing social support networks and social relations within the community. 2.3 Methods used The research used two principal qualitative methods: FGDs and KIIs. For the FGDs the research utilised a number of participatory tools, including social mapping, wellbeing analysis, livelihoods scoring and institutional mapping. Although each tool was used to explore questions under all research themes, they were particularly designed to explore certain topics in more detail: Social mapping and wellbeing analysis were used individually or in combination to explore the community poverty profile, with the following objectives: (i) to understand the important infrastructure and social assets within the community; (ii) to understand the characteristics of wellbeing in the community and perceptions of differences in wellbeing among the population; (iii) to elicit estimates of the distribution of wellbeing; (iv) to understand perceptions of the characteristics of the most vulnerable, and CFW Programme beneficiaries, in the community; (v) to understand perceptions of the targeting effectiveness of the programme; (vi) to explore the impact of the CFW Programme on different categories of the population; and (vii) to prompt broader discussion on all other research questions. Livelihood scoring and calendar was used to elicit: (i) the range and value of different livelihoods within the community; (ii) understand the seasonal dimension of these livelihoods; (iii) and to understand the effects of the CFW Programme on the local economy (including changes in markets, prices and employment). Institutional mapping (Venn diagramming) was used with the following objectives: (i) to understand the importance and value attached by CFW beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries to key institutions in their community; (ii) to understand the nature and significance of social connectedness/exclusion among beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries in their communities; and (iii) to understand the impact of the CFW Programme on beneficiaries perceptions of access and connectedness to these institutions. FGDs were conducted with both male and female beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The study also conducted a number of case studies (in the form of in-depth interviews) to better understand the sources of income and expenditure of beneficiaries in more detail and understand how the CFW Programme interacts with this. The KIIs were conducted with village elders, religious leaders, relief committee members, foremen, beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries, shopkeepers and businessmen, and explored the operations of the programme and its perceived impact on the communities involved. 2.4 Sampling The research applied a three-stage sampling process that is described below: Sampling districts Oxford Policy Management 7

22 The districts for the research were selected during the inception mission based on the following considerations: Geographical representation the research aimed to selected districts across Somaliland, Puntland and South and Central Somalia. Security the team in collaboration with FAO and local research partners first reduced the number of districts with Phase IIB to those that were deemed feasible and safe to conduct research by our local partner firm. Livelihoods and food security of the remaining districts, the team purposively selected districts with different levels of food security and livelihoods. Implementation progress the selection of the districts was also influenced by the current and expected progress made in the districts under Phase IIB. Based on the above considerations, the following districts were selected for the purpose of this research: 1) Somaliland Laasqoray/Badhan, Burco 2) Puntland Mudug (Hobyo) 3) South and Central Afmadow, Belet Xaawo and Luuq Table 1 presents the livelihood zones for our sampled districts. These are broadly pastoral or agropastoral districts. Oxford Policy Management 8

23 Table 1 Livelihood zones for sampled districts Central Administratio n Somaliland District Laasqoray/ Badhan Main livelihood system Pastoral Somaliland Burco Agro-pastoral Puntland South Central South Central and and Mudug (Hobyo) Afmadow Belet Hawa Luuq Pastoral Agro-pastoral Agro-pastoral Agro-pastoral, Riverine Livelihood zones Sool-Sanag Plateau Pastoral: Camel, sheep and goats East Golis Pastoral: Frankincense Kakaar-Dharor Pastoral: Sheep, goats, camel Nugal Valley Pastoral: Sheep and camel Hawd Pastoral: Camel, sheep and goats Togdheer Agro-Pastoral: Sheep, goats and vegetables West Golis Pastoral: Goats, camel, and sheep Addun Pastoral: Mixed sheep and goats, camel Central regions Agro-Pastoral: Cowpea, sheep and goats, camel, cattle Coastal Deeh: Sheep Southern Inland Pastoral: Camel, Sheep and Goats South-East Pastoral: Cattle, sheep and goats Lower Juba Agro-Pastoral: Maize and cattle Southern Agro-Pastoral: Camel, cattle, sorghum Southern Juba riverine: Maize, sesame, fruits and vegetables Dawo Pastoral: Shoats, cattle, camel Southern Agro-Pastoral: Camel, cattle, sorghum Dawo Pastoral: Shoats, cattle, camel Southern Agro-Pastoral: Camel, cattle, sorghum Juba pump irrigation: Tobacco, onions, maize Sampling villages The team conducted research in a total of 16 villages, holding 72 FGDs, 70 KIIs and 27 in-depth interviews (see Table 2). The villages in Burco and Laasqoray were based on lists provided by FAO that were first stratified to include Phase IIA and IIB infrastructure and then randomly selected from this list. For the remaining villages we first stratified by type of infrastructure and then randomly selected to ensure that all infrastructure types were included in the assessment. Stratification and sampling within communities Within each community the team conducted between three and four FGDs. These included a social mapping/wellbeing analysis with community leaders, one to two FGDs with beneficiaries, and one with non-beneficiaries. Focus groups were divided by gender. The selection of beneficiaries for the FGD was based on random sampling from a list of beneficiaries provided by FAO. We first stratified the list by gender and only selected those who had not provided a phone number that was meant to be used by the call centre for verification and authenticity. The non-beneficiaries were selected based on the wellbeing analysis results, using snowball sampling through referral from FGDs and KIIs with the aim of identifying groups from particular social strata or livelihood groups. Oxford Policy Management 9

24 In addition to the FGDs a number of purposive in-depth interviews were conducted with community representatives and wider stakeholders involved in the programme. Table 2 Sample size Phase 1 research within each village (6 villages) District District-level KIIs Villages FGD Village-level KIIs IDIs District Authority NGO staff Burco Qoryaale Cadaw Yurura Harada J. Caynaanshe Total Laas Qoray Hylaan Habaasha Baragaha Qol Total Total for Phase Phase 2 research - within each village (10 villages) District District-level KIIs Villages FGD Village-level KIIs IDIs Hobyo District Authority NGO staff Wisil Gawaan Xin Barwaqo Total Belet Hawa Libaan Raage Oda Tuula Libaan Total Luuq Bule Maagdoore Total Afmadow Diif Dagelema Total Total for Phase Grand Total 12 KIIs 72 FGD 70 KIIs 27 IDIs 2.5 Training and piloting The training was conducted in two stages. Stage I was conducted in November 2013 in the districts of Burco and Laasqoray in Somaliland. Stage II of the research was conducted in January and February of 2014 in the four districts of Hobyo, Afmadwo, Belet Xaawa and Luuq. The training Oxford Policy Management 10

25 sessions lasted for five days and included: an introduction to the CFW Programme; a detailed explanation of the research areas; and intensive training on using the tools. This was complemented by role play exercises and numerous sessions where respondents explored research areas in detail and translated key English words into the local dialects of Somalia. Researchers were also trained in analysing and recording data in pre-designed templates. Half a day of training covered the ethics of research and best practice in field research. Team leaders for each team were chosen at the end of the training based on the trainers observations of their leadership and analytical skill. Care was taken to assign the roles of moderators and note-takers based on observations made during the training. Details of training sessions and training schedules for both stages of research are presented in Annex A. All of our tools were piloted in the field during both stages of research. In Stage I (November 2013), piloting was conducted in Beer 1, 35 km away from the capital district. The day began with a courtesy call to the district governor. This process was facilitated by World Vision staff based in the district. In Beer, the team met with the village chief and other elders who were notified of our presence by World Vision. The team mobilised a group of male beneficiaries and female nonbeneficiaries, among whom a wellbeing analysis and institutional mapping were respectively conducted. In addition to this, KIIs were conducted with the village chief, religious leader, and a number of business people, while the rehabilitation sites were also visited. The pilot was very successful in highlighting the appropriateness of the research questions and tools but also the challenges in getting credible responses. The main observations and lessons learned were discussed and incorporated into the final approach to the research. In Stage II (January 2014), both teams in Hobyo and Belet Hawa piloted the research tools in a village (Xin Barwaqo and Uunsi Weyn respectively) in each of the two districts. Remote debriefing sessions was conducted with the team from Oxford to ensure that initial findings could inform the design of tools and provide areas for special research focus. 2.6 Data collection, debriefings, coding and analysis As noted above, this research was implemented in two stages. This was designed in order to mitigate the potential risk associated with remote research in a very difficult environment. During the first stage the international lead researcher travelled to Somaliland to conduct the training in person and to supervise one of the two teams. In this phase the research team spent two to three days in each village. Two teams were working in parallel in the two districts of Burco and Laasqoray. After each day of research, each of the teams would organise a daily debrief to discuss the main findings and to identify areas needing further exploration and clarification. Moreover, the teams would copy information collected from the participatory research tools into templates provided and store these along with photographs and recorded transcripts on to the computer and later in DropBox. The international team leader also communicated on a regular basis with the other team leader and received regular updates on progress and summary of findings to date. Lessons from Stage I of the research were incorporated into the design of Stage II. Research under this stage was more challenging in that no international staff were present in Somalia during the period of research. Based on lessons learned, the study introduced a number of measures to ensure the quality of the data collected in the field: Remote monitoring through regular calls to both research teams; Compulsory receipt of daily debriefing notes and templates for the three participatory tools; Oxford Policy Management 11

26 Piloting tools at the beginning of data collection in each district; The compulsory submission of photographs of site visits, tools, and voice recordings via DropBox; Compulsory transcription of data in the field before starting data collection for the next village; and Random selection of beneficiaries for FGDs based on the sample frame provided by FAO. The sampling excluded beneficiaries who had mobile phone numbers registered with FAO. Data from interviews and FGDs were collected in the form of pre-specified templates, as well as transcripts, photos and voice recordings. The transcripts were then coded in NVivo for detailed analysis. The coding structure is presented in Annex B. 2.7 Study limitations Given the restrictions around travel of international consultants to Somalia, the collection of the vast majority of the data relied on local teams. While every effort has been made to corroborate information and triangulate findings both during and after data collection, it has been challenging to manage teams remotely and gather detailed information on certain issues, especially those relating to operations and programme implementation on the ground. However, we do believe that information on the location and actual existence of infrastructure is accurate, and our overall findings do reflect other research that has been done in recent times in Somalia. Adding to this, there were difficulties faced in regular communication with field teams in the second phase of the research because of poor phone networks and internet access in many sampled villages. Furthermore, data collection was delayed due to both team leaders suffering from severe illness during the research process. There was also a significant security challenge for teams operating in Hobyo and Luuq. This meant that, for some villages, transcription could not be finished in field and had to be carried out once the teams reached Kenya. The use of all the various quality control steps, including a staged approach to data collection, gives us more confidence in the quality of data collected. Beyond this, it is important to note that this study was not a formal quantitative impact evaluation of the CFW Programme on outcomes but rather a qualitative assessment with the aim of understanding the current operations of the programme and its likely impact. The study captures the views and perceptions of community members in 16 villages across six districts in Somaliland, Puntland and South and Central Somalia. While the information gained from the fieldwork has been triangulated, including through a review of programme documentation and KIIs with staff at the district level as well as interviews in Nairobi, it is not statistically representative of the entire CFW Programme. These findings provide: (i) detailed and internally valid cause effect insights into how the CFW Programme has operated in these sampled research communities; and (ii) provide some indications as to the more general impact of the programme at the community and household level. Finally, it is important to note that part of this research was conducted in the midst of the implementation of the programme. For these sites more information was captured on the implementation process and intension to use, rather than on the impact of the programme that was yet to unfold. Oxford Policy Management 12

27 3 Research findings 3.1 Characteristics of villages visited Main findings There was variation in the state of infrastructure development and access to basic health and education services in the sampled villages. In Burco, Laasqoray and Hobyo, some villages were assessed to be extremely poor with little infrastructure whereas others were fairly well developed. In Belet Hawa and Luuq, all villages were perceived to be underdeveloped with little infrastructure and poor access to markets. When asked about the different categories of wellbeing in their communities, respondents mentioned two to four categories ranging from very poor to rich. There were clear divisions between the rich (those who have) and the poor (those who don t have) in terms of ownership of livestock and housing, access to remittances and reliance on social support. There was no obvious physical segregation of households belonging to different clans or wealth categories Overview This section summarises the characteristics of the villages we visited during this research. Information about the general characteristics of villages was collected through social mapping exercises with elders, wellbeing analysis with beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries, other information gathered through KIIs, and observations in the field. Figure 1 Social mapping exercise with community elders (Gawan, Hobyo) Oxford Policy Management 13

28 3.1.2 State of infrastructure and amenities Sampled villages were largely pastoral or agro-pastoral (with the exception of some of the villages in Belet Hawa and Luuq), but with some variation in the state of infrastructure development, population size and access to markets. In Belet Hawa, all three of the villages visited (Oda, Liiban Raage, Tuulo Liiban) were assessed to be relatively poor. There was little infrastructure in terms of formally constructed houses, no hospitals, community centres or schools and only a few shops. In Oda, for example, villagers reported that they had recently built one room for themselves as a school but still had no teachers. A similar level of infrastructure development was witnessed in Luuq, where both Mag Doore and Boyle had no schools or health facilities. On the other hand, two out of the four sampled villages in Burco (Harada and Qooryale) had a relatively good level of infrastructure development, with bustling markets, schools and health facilities. The villages in Afmadow were located at key trading routes and, in Hobyo, the villages of Wisil and Gawan had significant infrastructure assets as compared to other poorer villages. In Afmadow, Diif was marginally better-off than Dagelema. Although both villages were located on key trading routes, Diif had a private pharmacy and a Maternal and Child Health Clinic (MCH) under construction, in addition to three dugsis (religious schools), a local school and a community hall. It also had an estimated individually owned water catchments and three communal water catchments. Dagelema had one school on the Kenyan side and two dugsis but no public transport and no permanent water source. The village has a small market with an estimated four to five shops that sell both food and non-food items. In Hobyo, Wisil had a main hospital, an MCH, a school, telecommunication posts (Hormud, Nation and Olympic), three boreholes, a large number of cement pools (10 main ones plus more than 100 small ones), farms, water catchments, feeder roads and a money transfer company, Dahabshiil, where beneficiaries collected their payments. This was indicative of the financial resources flowing to and from the village. In addition to all this, many NGOs had a significant presence in this village. Gawan in the same district also had a high level of infrastructure development. On the other hand, Xin Barwaqo was a small coastal village with no social amenities such as schools, permanent water sources or health centres (the nearest health centre in Harardheere was 120 km away). It only had two dugsis, two mosques and a small market. In Laasqoray, Habasha had no health centres, no functional schools. There was one mosque with iron sheet roofing and a small market with two shops and a few tea joints. This was a complete contrast to Baragaha Qol, which had a telecommunication centre, hospital, MCH facility and two primary schools. It also had a functioning market with constant supply of goods from Bossaso town. Residents across the village also had access to electricity through private generators. It addition to this, the village had around 67 berkads and a (saline) borehole. The third village sampled in Laasqoray was Hylaan, which lay somewhere in the middle in terms of infrastructure development. The village did not have a health centre, but it did have one school (with three classrooms) as well as two dugsis and an Islamic Centre. There was also one mudwalled mosque with iron sheet roofing. Hylaan was inhabited largely by people who subscribe to the Sufi sect of Islam commonly known as Dariiqa. The village thus had one warehouse called Baitul-mal where the Sufis collect donations from people and stored supplies, which are later shared with the rest of the people in the village. Hylaan also had three berkads for water storage that were constructed by Adeso after the drought of 2011, and these were all located at an equidistance between the different sub-villages. Oxford Policy Management 14

29 3.1.3 Wealth distribution and perceptions of wellbeing When asked about the different categories of wellbeing, respondents mentioned two to four categories ranging from very poor to rich. In some villages, especially in Belet Hawa, respondents were hesitant to classify people into wellbeing groups as they felt that everyone was poor and that it was thus difficult to differentiate between people, but also possibly because they perceived researchers to be NGO members bringing in benefits or perhaps because of hesitance in revealing the actual targeting process. In general, community members spoke of some clear divisions between the rich (those who have) and the poor (those who don t have): the rich or better-off owned camels in addition to a large number of cattle and shoats (usually in excess of 50), ate three meals a day and lived in block houses. In some villages, those receiving remittances were seen to be better-off as well. Pastoralists were also seen as those who were rich and those who provided assistance to the poorest. The poor lived in plastic sheet houses, had very few or no shoats, no camels and survived on one or two meals a day they were seen as those who live hand to mouth. Also, they relied on casual labour in construction and farming, engaged in charcoal burning and firewood selling, and also received assistance from the better-off and NGOs. A common distinction within the poor was those who were just poor and those who were very poor or marginalised. The latter were typically widows, the disabled, mentally ill, orphans, IDPs and pastoral drop-outs. Naturally, the specific characteristics of each group varied according to how well-off the village was in absolute terms. Also, in some instances the characteristics ascribed to the poor in one village (for example, tea shop owners or casual labourers) corresponded with those ascribed to the middle class in another village (see Table 3 and Table 4). As shown in these tables, in the village of Dagelema in Afmadow the informants identified four categories of people (the better-off group, the middle, the poor and the very poor) whereas the beneficiaries in Cadow Yuurura suggested their communities consisted of either the middle class or the lower class. Interestingly, in the latter village those in the lower class included those with goats, shopkeepers and casual workers, suggesting perhaps a relatively well-off village. Similarly, in Harada around 70% of household beneficiaries were identified as belonging to the very rich, upper-middle and lower-middle-class groups (Table 6). Those in the lower-middle income group were classified as having between 10 and 20 goats, the unskilled labourers, grocers and female tea shop owners. The very poor included those with no livestock, orphans and those reliant on the rest of the community. 11 Nevertheless, all respondents noted that the poor formed a larger share of the village population compared to the rich, 12 even in the villages perceived to have been better-off: Those with nothing are many and the rest are few. 13 In Wisil we have a huge population who have no reliable source of income and rely on the community and there are also those who have something small that can t cover their needs while the remaining ones are traders who are better-off FGD, Female beneficiaries, Harada, Burco. 12 Our researchers suggested that respondents estimations of the proportion of poor or very poor may have been exaggerated in some instances. 13 FGD, Female non-beneficiaries, Hylaan, Laasqoray. 14 FGD, Male non-beneficiaries, Wisil, Hobyo. Oxford Policy Management 15

30 There was no obvious physical segregation of households belonging to different clans or wealth categories. Respondents in one FGD noted that marginalised clans were not a separate category, but this view was not consistent across villages: They fall in each of the three categories and they are aligned with (the main) subclans. 15 Actually we don t have specific groups in a particular category but are spread across the different categories. 16 Moderator: Are the particular social groups in a specific category? For instance where do marginalised and minority clans belong? Respondent: They belong to the poor category or Dhegataag Humanitarian and development aid Given the protracted conflict in Somalia and repeated rounds of slow-onset disasters, humanitarian support (or development support more recently) has played an important role at the community level. International donors response to emergencies such as the 2006 and 2011 droughts have resulted in substantial inflow of funds in communities. Villages often have specific VRCs set up to decide the allocation of resources within the community, including of donor funds. They are the first point of call for NGOs and are the main decision-makers in relation to the selection of beneficiaries (see Section 3.2). Humanitarian support was also noted as a livelihood option by many respondents (see Section 3.4.2), especially in the lean seasons, which suggests the regular presence and engagement of NGOs in these communities: This is how we lived for all the years, especially from the time we got used to this humanitarian aid. 18 The need for the NGOs in the community (especially after the drought) was also acknowledged: We never used to mind about humanitarian aid before the drought since we had good livestock holdings that were enough to sustain us but currently it is like if there is no aid there is no life. 19 Even then, this role is shaped by the security constraints across Somalia. For instance, NGO and donor activity is concentrated in villages that may not be the most vulnerable to risks or home to the poorest but those that were relatively more secure or accessible. 15 FGD, Male non-beneficiaries, Gawan, Hobyo. 16 FGD, Male non-beneficiaries, Wisil, Hobyo 17 FGD, Male non-beneficiaries, Dagelema, Afmadow. 18 FGD, Female beneficiaries, Dagelema, Afmadow. 19 KII, Clan leader, Dagelema, Afmadow. Oxford Policy Management 16

31 Table 3 Perceptions of wellbeing, Dagelema, Afmadow Categories of wellbeing Characteristics Better-off Owns all the three types of livestock (camel, cattle and shoats) Owns camels on average Owns cattle on average Owns shoats on average Access to three meals per day VRCs Clan leader Middle level Owns 10 camels Owns 20 shoats Owns donkey carts Small shop owners Security personnel Poor Casual labourers Construction workers Collection of stones (quarry workers) Sale of building materials (sticks) Miraa dealers Tea shops or kiosks? Firewood collectors Charcoal burning Owns three camel on average Owns shoats Most of the minority clans Very poor No income Returnees from Kenyan refugee camps Integrated IDPs Elderly Majority of the female-headed households Pastoral drop-outs Oxford Policy Management 17

32 Table 4 Perceptions of wellbeing, Cadow Yuurura, Burco Categories of wellbeing Characteristics Middle class Has goats camels Teachers Access to education Access to health Pay contributions Pay compositions Lower class goats 1 5 camels Shopkeepers Restaurants Casual labours Conflict and migration Conflicts bring displacement and that is what has destroyed the country called Somalia for two decades. 20 The drought of 2011 and ongoing conflict in Somalia has resulted in substantial migration within the country 21. Displacement and migration is an ongoing phenomenon due to conflict between Al- Shabaab and Ethiopian (AMISOM) forces, as well as inter-clan conflict. In Boyle, for instance, there was large-scale recent displacement due to the ongoing conflict between Al-Shabaab and AMISOM our researchers found only four households residing in the village at the time of the visit. In addition to conflict, the rise in piracy in coastal areas has added to the poor security and law and order situation in Somalia. In Gawan (Hobyo), piracy was highlighted as a major concern by respondents and there were reports of women being raped by those engaged in piracy. 20 FGD, Male non-beneficiaries, Diif, Afmadow 21 Lindley, A. (2014). Questioning drought displacement : environment, politics and migration in Somalia. Forced Migration Review 45, Oxford Policy Management 18