Humanitarian Aid

Civil Protection

CommuniCation from the Commission to the CounCil and the european parliament

and

Commission staff working doCumenton

Humanitarian Food Assistance

Photo credit: (Cover) ECHO/Mathias Eick, 2009

With more than one billion people on this planet struggling to feed themselves, the challenge of tackling global under-nutrition and hunger is a serious, complex and humbling one. This is especially the case in emergency contexts, where food insecurity leads to vulnerabilities that are seriously exacerbated by the effects of natural or man-made disasters. Food insecure populations caught up in crises are the most exposed to risk, and their lives, wellbeing and dignity are most threatened. They have the greatest need for our solidarity and assistance to prepare for, mitigate and recover from the disasters they face.

As the humanitarian community has made significant progress in understanding better the drivers of hunger in emergencies, we have adopted a new EC Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance, with an accompanying Staff Working Document. These policy papers look at responding to hunger beyond the provision of food. Crisis victims may instead be assisted to feed themselves by boosting their immediate food production or food purchasing capacities. And the impact of the response can be radically improved if we recognise the importance of nutrition in food assistance operations, and adapt them accordingly.

There are therefore specific considerations in the policy papers for whether people might be better helped by receiving cash, in order to purchase the food of their choice from local markets, which simultaneously helps local farmers. Or whether they should preferably receive livelihood support, for instance agricultural inputs like seeds or veterinary care for their livestock. Between 2007 and 2009, the percentage of EC humanitarian food assistance funding going to alternative interventions other than in-kind food aid has increased from 31%% to 46%. This clearly demonstrates our growing readiness to invest in new approaches as they prove themselves.

We also know now that interventions aiming to treat acute malnutrition must be based as far as possible at community-level, and not in centralised health facilities, so that mothers can balance the care of one sick child with the need to feed the rest of her family. And we now know that the problem of acute malnutrition needs to be analysed and confronted from various different perspectives, recognising, for instance, that the public health environment can be just as important as the availability of food in determining a population’s nutritional status. To that end, we have recruited nutrition specialists, both in the field and at headquarters, to ensure that nutrition is now built in to our food assistance policies and practice.

With this greater operational experience behind us, we now have a substantial body of evidence to inform our work. It is therefore a timely moment to capture this evidence and use it to establish a new policy framework which in turn should help us and our partners consistently design better, more appropriate intervention strategies.

In adopting these papers, I am confident that the European Commission is positioning itself firmly as a reference for best humanitarian practice. In so doing, we are giving ourselves the best chance of contributing effectively, efficiently, appropriately and coherently to the global challenge of reducing hunger, and meeting the needs of those populations who suffer most in times of crisis.

Kristalina Georgieva,Commissioner for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response

Table of ConTenTs

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the european parliament on humanitarian food assistance

1. Introduction 9

2. Background 9

3. DefinitionsandObjectives 10

4. Principles 11

5. Scope of Humanitarian Food Assistance Actions 13

5.1. The operational scope of the Commission’s Humanitarian Food Assistance 13

5.2. Meeting Basic Food and Nutrition Needs of Crisis Affected Populations 14

5.3. Supportive Actions 15

Commission staff working document, accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the european parliament on humanitarian food assistance

1. Introduction 18

2. TheEuropeanCommission’sResponsetoGlobalFoodInsecurity 18

2.1. The Comparative Advantage of the EU’s Humanitarian Food Assistance Instrument 18

3. Programming 19

3.1. Prioritisation 19

3.2. Needs Assessments 19

3.3. EntryandExitCriteria 20

3.4. Partnerships 22

3.5. Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting 23

4. TheCommission’sHumanitarianFoodAssistanceToolbox 24

4.1. SupportingFoodAvailability,FoodAccess,FoodUtilizationandNutritioninCrises 24

4.2. Resource Transfer Modalities 29

4.3. Targeting 30

4.4. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 32

4.5. CapacityBuilding 34

5. CoordinationandAdvocacy 35

5.1. Coordination,CoherenceandComplementarity 35

5.2. Advocacy 37

ANNEXES 39

AnnexA:Glossary 40

AnnexB:Acronyms 43

AnnexC:TheEU’snon-humanitarianinstrumentsandprogrammesforaddressingdevelopmental foodassistanceandfoodsecurityneeds. 45

AnnexD:Typologyoffoodassistanceresponses 47

AnnexE:CouncilRegulation(EC)No1257/96of20June1996concerninghumanitarianaid 51

AnnexF:References 52

Humanitarian Aid

Civil Protection

CommuniCation from the Commission to the CounCil and the european parliament

on

Humanitarian Food Assistance

{seC (2010)374}

Photos credits: (Cover) VSF, 2009(1) ECHO/Claire Barrault, 2009(2) ECHO/Mathias Eick, 2010(3) ECHO/Daniel Dickinson, 2009(4) ECHO/Martin Karimi, 2009(5) ECHO/Daniel Dickinson, 2009(6)CARE/StuartDunn,2009

9

1. InTroduCTIon

In accordance with the orientation of the Humanitarian Aid Consensus1,andmoregenerallytopromotebestpracticeintheprovisionofhumanitarian foodassistanceby theEUand itsMemberStates,theprincipalaimsofthisCommunicationareto:

(1) maximisetheeffectivenessandefficiencyofEUfoodassistance, in accordance with the Commission’s humanitarian mandate defined by the humanitarianlegal framework, and in accordance with the Financial Regulation2;

(2) improve policy coherence, coordination, andcomplementaritybetweentheCommission,MemberStates and other donors, in the provision of food assistance;

(3) inform partners and stakeholders of the Commission’s objectives,prioritiesandstandardsinthedeliveryofhumanitarian food assistance.

ThisCommunicationthereforesetsoutthepolicyframeworkforEUhumanitarianfoodassistance.Itexplainstheissuesandtrendstobetakenintoaccount;theconcepts,definitionsandobjectivesthatshoulddrivehumanitarianfoodassistance;theprinciples that should underscore this work; and the scope of activities undertaken.

TheaccompanyingStaffWorkingDocumentexplains,fromamore detailed operational perspective, how the Commission programmes, implements and coordinates its humanitarian food assistance.

ThisCommunicationshouldbe read inconjunctionwith theCommission’s Communication on food security (“An EUpolicyframeworktoassistdevelopingcountriesinaddressingfood security challenges”). Two separate Communicationsontheseinterrelatedtopicsaredeemednecessaryinordertorespect the distinction between their policy focus i.e. foodassistance linked to humanitarian objectives for populationsaffected by crises in emergency contexts and food securitylinkedtodevelopmentobjectives.Thetwopolicyframeworkshavebeendesignedinsuchawayastoensurecoherenceandsafeguard against uncoordinated overlap.

1 InDecember 2007, theCouncil of theEuropeanUnion adoptedthe Humanitarian Aid Consensus (European Consensus on HumanitarianAid: 2008/C 25/01). In the accompanyingActionPlan, adopted as a Staff Working Paper in 2008 (EuropeanConsensus on Humanitarian Aid – Action Plan: SEC(2008)1991), the European Commission implicitly acknowledges the fast-evolvingfield of best practice in the food sector, and articulatesaspecificcommitmenttoelaboratediversifiedapproachestofoodassistanceandadjustpolicyaccordingly.

2 COUNCIL REGULATION (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25June 2002 on theFinancialRegulation applicable to the generalbudgetoftheEuropeanCommunities(OJL248,16.9.2002,p.1)

2. baCkground

There is an increasing incidence of natural disasters, often exacerbatedbythe impactofclimatechange,affectingmorepeople than in the past. Conflict and repression continueto undermine people’s ability to pursue their day-to-daylivelihoods, and often generate large numbers of refugeesand internally displaced persons. Rapid population growthincreases existing pressures on natural resources. In manypartsof thedevelopingworld, these factors forcevulnerablepopulations to further compete for natural resources and potentiallyleadtoincreasingincidencesofconflict.

The impact of these trends deepens the vulnerability of theworld’s poorest, most notably their food and nutritionalvulnerability.Chronicfoodinsecurity,whereinsufficientfoodproductionoraninabilitytopurchaseenoughnutritiousfoodleadstosustainedandpersistentinadequaciesinthequantityorqualityoffoodconsumed,isadriverofchronicmalnutrition.This in turnhas irreversibleanddamagingconsequences forchilddevelopmentand long-termproductivity,which furtherexacerbatespovertyandvulnerability.Thepoorest,withleastresilience,alsocarrythegreatestexposuretotheconsequencesofdisasters.Thesecanpromptmore temporarybutdramaticinterruptionsinfoodconsumption(transientfoodinsecurity),leadingtoacutemalnutritionandheightenedrisksofmorbidityandmortality.3

Indeed,thenumberofundernourishedpeopleaffectedbybothchronic and transient food insecurity has increased by 172million, from 848million in 2006 to 1.02 billion in 20094. 95% of those undernourished live in developing countries andagrowingproportionoftheseliveinurbansettings,thusespeciallyexposedtotheimpactofvolatilefoodpricesandtheeconomic/financialcrises.Theprevalenceofacutemalnutritionhasrisen,affecting8%oftheworld’sunder-fivechildrenintheperiod1995-2003,increasingto11%intheperiod2000-20065.

Approximately10%ofthosewhoareundernourishedarefoodinsecureasaconsequenceofadisasteroremergencysituation,and it is anticipated that related humanitarian and development food needs will continue to increase. It is therefore essential thattheavailablehumanitarianresourcesareusedinthemostefficientandeffectiveway,adaptingtothismorecomplexandpressured environment, and that decisions are informed byfast-evolvingbest-practice.

3 SeeGlossaryinAnnexAofaccompanyingStaffWorkingDocument

4 The U.N.’s Food andAgricultural Organisation (FAO), 19 June2009.

5 The United Nations Childrens’ Fund (UNICEF) “State of theWorld’sChildren”Statistics2005and2008.

10

Food Utilisation including Care and Feeding Practices

- Child care - Infant and child feeding - Eating habits - Food preparation - Intra-household food distribution - Capacity to care for dependent individuals.

Food Access and Availability

- Safe access to adequate and safe food throughout the year, through:- Food production - Purchase / barter - Gifts, other sources. - Food safety and quality.

Public Health- Water quality and quantity. - Hygiene and sanitation.- Access to and use of health services.

Food Consumption- Energy Intake - Nutrient Intake

Disease StatusAffects how food is used by the body

MALNUTRITIONCOMPROMISED LIVELIHOODS /

DETRIMENTAL COPING STRATEGIES- Migration. – Sale of assets. – Debt. - Livelihood erosion.

Socio-economic and political environmentDemography, education, macro-economy, policy environment, natural resources, climate, market conditions,

livelihood systems, social institutions, cultural attitudes, security.

Adapted from UNICEF Conceptual Framework for Malnutrition 1997

3. defInITIons and objeCTIves

Humanitarian food assistance aims to ensure the consumption of sufficient, safe and nutritious food in anticipation of,during, and in the aftermath of a humanitarian crisis, when food consumption would otherwise be insufficient orinadequate to avert excessivemortality6, emergency rates ofacute malnutrition7, or detrimental coping mechanisms. This includesensuringfoodavailability,accesstonutritiousfood,proper nutrition awareness, and appropriate feeding practices. Foodassistancemayinvolvethedirectprovisionoffood,butmay utilize awider range of tools, including the transfer orprovision of relevant services, inputs or commodities, cash or vouchers, skills or knowledge.

Humanitarianfoodassistancecanalsobeusedtoprotectandstrengthen the livelihoods of a crisis-affected population, toprevent or reverse negative coping mechanisms (such as the sale of productive assets, or the accumulation of debts) thatcould engender either short-term or longer-term harmfulconsequences for their livelihood base, their food-securitystatus or their nutritional status.

6 “Excessive”isconsideredtocombineabsolutemeasuresinrelationto established emergency thresholds (as defined by the Spherehandbook,UNICEFandtheUNStandingCommitteeonNutrition(SCN)), and relative measures in relation to context-specificbaselines.

7 AsdefinedbytheUNStandingCommitteeonNutrition(SCN)andtheWorldHealthOrganisation(WHO)

Adequatefoodconsumptionmaynotin itself ensure adequate nutrition.Poorhealthmayinhibitthedigestionandutilisationofnutrientsleadingtomalnutrition.Therefore,complementaryinterventions, including those that ensure safe food preparation (e.g. provision of cooking fuel), or access to potablewater,hygieneandhealthservices,mayalsoberequired,alongsidedirect food assistance, to prevent or treat malnutrition.

Attheconceptualleveltherehasbeenanimportantshiftoverthe last 15 years from the use of in-kind commodity foodaid as a default response to emergency food needs, towardsconsiderationofabroadersetofhumanitarianfoodassistancetoolstailoredtotacklingthediversecausesandsymptomsoftransientfoodinsecurity.

The following conceptual framework captures the various root causes, exacerbators, symptoms and consequences offood insecurity,which in turnunderscore thedefinitionsandobjectives for humanitarian food assistance adopted by theCommission:

11

Adequatefoodconsumptionmaynotin itself ensure adequate nutrition.Poorhealthmayinhibitthedigestionandutilisationofnutrientsleadingtomalnutrition.Therefore,complementaryinterventions, including those that ensure safe food preparation (e.g. provision of cooking fuel), or access to potablewater,hygieneandhealthservices,mayalsoberequired,alongsidedirect food assistance, to prevent or treat malnutrition.

Attheconceptualleveltherehasbeenanimportantshiftoverthe last 15 years from the use of in-kind commodity foodaid as a default response to emergency food needs, towardsconsiderationofabroadersetofhumanitarianfoodassistancetoolstailoredtotacklingthediversecausesandsymptomsoftransientfoodinsecurity.

The following conceptual framework captures the various root causes, exacerbators, symptoms and consequences offood insecurity,which in turnunderscore thedefinitionsandobjectives for humanitarian food assistance adopted by theCommission:

In linewith themain objectives of EU humanitarian aid aslaidout inCouncilRegulation (EC)No1257/96of20 June1996concerningHumanitarianAid,theprincipalobjectiveofhumanitarian food assistance is to save and preserve life, to protect livelihoods, and to increase resilience, for populations facingon-goingorfirmlyforecasted8 food crises, or recovering from them.

This is to be achieved through the specific objectives ofhumanitarian food assistance, as follows;

(1) to safeguard the availability of, access to, andconsumption of adequate, safe and nutritious food for populations affected by ongoing, firmly forecasted,orrecenthumanitariancrisessoastoavoidexcessivemortality9,acutemalnutrition,orotherlife-threateningeffects and consequences;

(2) toprotectlivelihoodsthreatenedbyrecent,ongoing,orimminent crises, minimise damage to food production and marketing systems, and establish conditionsto promote the rehabilitation and restoration of selfreliance; and

(3) to strengthen the capacities of the international humanitarian aid system, to enhance efficiency andeffectivenessinthedeliveryoffoodassistance.

4. PrInCIPles

Inpursuitoftheseobjectives,thefollowingprinciplesshouldunderscore the delivery of humanitarian food assistance.These are consistent with the general principles governing the deliveryofEUhumanitarianaid,aslaiddownintheEuropeanConsensus on Humanitarian Aid:

The modalities of food assistance must respect the fundamental humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. Decisions on the allocation of humanitarian foodassistancewillbestrictlyneedsbased.Fundingwillbeallocatedinanobjectivemanner,accordingtotheseprinciples,to improve the food consumption of those in greatest need, withoutbiasorprejudice.

Tothisend,theEUanditsMemberStateswillensurethattheirHumanitarianFoodAssistanceresponsesareprecededby,andbasedon,detailedneedsassessmentsandcausalanalysesthatareasaccurateanduptodateaspossible.

Financing of humanitarian food assistance interventions will

8 Such“forecasting” shouldbebasedonearlywarning indicators,and should show a critical inadequacy or deterioration in foodconsumption which, unless prompting an early response, willbecome life-threatening within a timeframe consistent with theEC’s humanitarian remit.

9 SeeFootnotes6and7

beprioritisedaccordingto(i)theseverityofthecrisisandthescale of the unmet needs (ii)theimmediacyofthecrisis,and(iii)theexpectedimpactoftheresponse.However,theEUisalsocommittedtodemonstratingsolidarityonaglobalbasis,tosharingtheburdenofurgentunmethumanitarianfoodneedsand to responding to forgotten crises.

TheEUanditsMemberStateswillsupporthumanitarianfoodassistanceoperationswithflexible resources soas todeliverthe most appropriate and effective response in a specificcontext.Thedesignofanyresponseshouldcomparealternativeactivitiesandtoolsonthebasisoftheircost-effectivenessformeetingthedefinedneeds.

When food aid is deemed to be the most appropriate tool,localpurchase (i.e.purchase in thecountryofoperation)or,secondarily, regional food purchases (i.e. procuring fromneighbouring countries) are favoured, so as to maximiseacceptabilityoffoodproducts,protectorsupportlocalmarkets,andreducetransportationcostsanddeliverytimeframes.

EU humanitarian food assistance should be results-based,measuring outcomes and impact across its operations (as wellasfromthepracticeofotherplayers,andfromrelevantresearch) and using it to inform the design of subsequenthumanitarian food assistance interventions.

1

12

The EU and itsMember States will therefore endeavour toensure that all humanitarian food assistance operations that are financedcanbemonitored,withouthindrance.

TheEUand itsMemberStateswill strive todonoharm inthe process of providing humanitarian food assistance. For instance,theywillensurethat,asfaraspossible,humanitarianfoodneedsaremetinwaysthatdonotcreateunduedependencyonthereliefsystem,nordisruptthefunctioningofmarkets,norexposebeneficiariestoundueriskinreceivingassistance,whileminimising negative environmental impacts and ensuring that conflictsovernaturalresourcesarenotignitedorantagonised.The EU and its Member States will ensure that, especiallyinconflicts,protection risksandprotectionopportunities areproperly evaluated in considering the consequences of bothinterventionandnon-intervention10.

10 See DG ECHO’s Funding Guidelines for Humanitarian Protection; 21 April 2009

The EU and its Member States will incorporate nutritionalperspectives into all food assistance needs assessments and responses, and will pay particular attention to the specificnutritional needs of defined vulnerable groups (includingchildrenunder-twoandpregnantandlactatingwomen).

TheEUanditsMemberStateswillensurethathumandignityis respected in the provision of humanitarian food assistance. Theywillseektheinvolvementofbeneficiarycommunitiesinidentifyingneeds,anddesigningandimplementingresponses.Theywillensure that thespecialneedsofvulnerablegroupswithin their beneficiary caseloads (e.g. disabled, elderly,chronically ill) be factored into the design of humanitarianfood assistance responses.

Recognising the different needs, capacities and roles of women,girls,boysandmen, theEUand itsMemberStateswillsystematicallyseektomainstreamgenderconsiderationswithinhumanitarianfood-needsassessments,inthedesignofhumanitarianfoodassistanceresponses,andinanalysingtheirimpact.

Humanitarian food assistance operations and food securitydevelopmentinterventionsshouldbedesignedandimplementedinsuchawaythattogethertheyensureanoptimalcoverageofemergencyanddevelopmentneeds,whethertheysucceedeachother in a continuumor coexist in a contiguum, as inmanyfragile states. They should be coordinated and eventuallydovetailedwitheachothersoastomaximiseopportunitiesforsustainableanddurableimpact,pursuingtheultimateobjectiveofself-relianceforvictimsoffoodcrises.

EU humanitarian food assistance will therefore uphold Linking Relief Rehabilitation and Development (LRRD) principlesandfacilitateLRRDobjectives, inaccordancewiththe2001Commission Communication on LRRD11, with the 2007 EU Humanitarian Aid Consensus12, and within the stipulations of the Framework Partnership Agreement13.

11 EC Communication on LRRD, 2001: Conclusions.12 EU Humanitarian Consensus, 2007: Section 2.4, Article 22;

Section3.4,Article53;Section5;Annex.13 DG ECHO Framework Partnership Agreement 2008: Article 8.

13

5. sCoPe of HumanITarIan food assIsTanCe aCTIons

In order to achieve the objectives outlined above, the coreroleofhumanitarianfoodassistanceworkisdefinedassavinglives,throughdeliveringassistancetomeetbasichumanitarianfood and nutrition needs. However, it also aims to fulfilsupportive functions, specifically contributing to reducingrisk and vulnerability, and improving the appropriatenessand effectiveness of humanitarian food assistance through capacity-strengtheningandadvocacy.

5.1. The operational scope of the Commission’s Humanitarian Food Assistance

The Commission can trigger a humanitarian food assistance response where:

(1) due to inadequate food consumption, emergency14 rates of mortality or acute malnutrition have beenreachedorexceeded,orareanticipated,onthebasisoffirmforecasts15; or

(2) compromisedlivelihoodsorextremecopingstrategies(including sale of productive assets, stress migration, resorting to unsafe or insecure survival practices) pose,orarefirmlyanticipatedtopose,aseverethreattolife,orariskofextremesuffering,whetherarisingfrom, or leading to, inadequate food consumption.

Recognising thata foodcrisissometimesbegins,andshouldbe reacted to, before nutritional status deteriorates, theCommissionwillnotnecessarilywaitforrisingratesofacutemalnutrition before providing humanitarian food assistance,butwillalso respond towelldefinedhumanitarian risks thatpose a threat to life. Nor does the Commission require a formal disaster declaration in order to respond.

In considering whether and how to respond to a given food crisis, the Commission will pay close attention to thecomparative advantages and disadvantages of its humanitarian instruments.Thiswillbefoundedonacarefulanalysisoftheneeds and causes; on consideration of the type of responsethatwillbesttacklethoseneedsinthemostappropriatewaywithout doing harm; and on a close review of the alternative fundingsourcesavailable.

The Commission recognises that its humanitarian instruments do not have a comparative advantage in addressing chronic

14 TheECdefinesanemergencybasedonacombinationofabsolutethresholds(egSphere,WHOetc)andrelativeindicatorssetagainstacontextualnorm.

15 Such“anticipation” shouldbebasedonearlywarning indicatorsthat show a critical inadequacy or deterioration in foodconsumption which, unless prompting an early response, willbecome life-threatening within a timeframe consistent with theEC’s humanitarian remit.

foodinsecurity.Inprinciple,itwillnotusehumanitarianfoodassistance to address chronic food insecurity, except: wherenon-interventionposes immediateor imminenthumanitarianrisk16 of significant scale and severity; where other moreappropriate actors, including its own development instruments, areeitherunableorunwillingtoact,andcannotbepersuadedto act; and where, in spite of its comparative disadvantages, positive impact can be expected within the time limitationsof its intervention. In such cases, theCommissionwill onlyengagehumanitarianfoodassistanceonthebasisofdialogue,coordinationandadvocacywithpotentialdevelopmentplayers,where they exist, andwith a clear and realistic exit-strategydefined, ensuring coordinated transition and thus avoidinguncoordinated overlap.

The Commission will consider phasing out its humanitarian food assistance interventions when indicators of acute malnutrition, mortality and extreme coping (linked toinadequate food consumption or poor food utilisation), are stablebelowemergency levels17, or are expected to stabilisebelow such levels independently of the Commission’shumanitarian support. This should result from the majorityof the crisis-affected population achieving, for a sustainedperiod and for the foreseeable future, improvements infood consumption and food utilisation, without resorting to detrimental coping strategies.

The Commission will also consider phasing out its humanitarian support where non-humanitarian players (e.g.stateordevelopmentactors)areabletocoverthepopulation’sfood gap or where the humanitarian needs of the population are fullycoveredbyotherhumanitariandonorsandactors.

16 See Glossary in Annex A of accompanying Commission StaffWorkingDocument

17 See footnote 14

14

TheCommissionwillatalltimesevaluateitshumanitarianexitstrategiesonthebasisofitscomparativeadvantagesrelativetootheravailableactors,andwillavoidcreatingdisincentivestothe engagement of other more appropriate actors arising from itsowndelayedexit. Itwill advocate for theengagementofthe most appropriate actors across the relief and development spectrum,accordingtothecontextandneeds.

TheCommissionwillalsoconsiderexitingfromhumanitarianfood assistance operations where the core principles of humanitarian food assistance cannot be respected, andparticularly when the risk of doing harm outweighs thepotentialbenefitsofremainingengaged.

5.2. Meeting Basic Food and Nutrition Needs of Crisis Affected Populations

The EU and itsMember States will respond to the diversesymptomsandunderlyingcausesoftransientfoodinsecurityandacutemalnutritionwithavarietyofactivitiesandtoolstodirectlyaddressproblemsoffoodavailability,foodaccessandfood use. Theywill facilitate complementary,multi-sectoraland integrated programming to ensure that humanitarian food needsareaddressedholisticallyandeffectively.

The choice of the most appropriate intervention and transfer instrument (e.g. cash-based or in-kind) must be context-specificandevidence-based, andbe regularly reviewed.Therelevance and comparative advantage of the proposed option –orthecombinationoftoolstobeused–mustbedemonstrated,based on needs assessments and causal analyses that are asaccurateanduptodateaspossible.

Humanitarian foodassistancewillpayparticularattention toproviding beneficiaries with timely access to safe and wellbalancedfood,ofsufficientquantityandquality18 to meet their dietaryrequirements.Wherepossible,foodassistanceshouldalsoconformtolocaldietarypreferencesandbeacceptabletobeneficiaries.

The reinforcement or protection of agricultural and non-agricultural livelihoods (e.g. providing veterinary servicesforvulnerablelivestockherds,orimprovingagriculturalcropstorage) is a legitimate and appropriate emergency responsein somehumanitariancontexts, so longas it ispromptedbyemergencyneedsandmeetshumanitarianobjectiveswithinanappropriateandfinitetimeframe.

Alongsidefoodassistancemeasuresthatdirectlyaddressfoodconsumption requirements, complementary measures (e.g.public health measures) are considered vital, even thoughthey do not impact directly on food availability, access oruse.Theyhaveacriticalinfluenceonhowthehumanbodyisable to utilize food and thus influence nutritional outcomes.The EU and its Member States recognise the special foodand nutritional needs of specific groupswithin their overall

18 Quantity, as measured in energy composition, and quality, asmeasuredinfoodsafetyanditsprotein,macro-nutrientandmicro-nutrientcomposition.SPHERE/WHOstandardforfoodquantity/ energy requirement is 2100Kcal per person per day, averagedacross all age groups. WHO/UNICEF/World Food Programme(WFP)/UnitedNationsHighCommissionforRefugees(UNHCR)haveagreedstandardsforfoodquality/micronutrientcomposition(see Food and Nutrition Needs in Emergencies, Nov 2002) although thesearecurrentlyunderreview.

15

beneficiary caseloads (e.g. young children, particularlychildren under two19,pregnant/lactatingwomen,theelderly,people living with HIV/AIDS20). Where these groups areincluded in humanitarian food assistance operations on the basisoftheirfoodornutritionneeds,theresponseshouldtakeintoconsideration theirparticular requirementsbyprovidingsufficientlynutritiousandadaptedfoods.

5.3. Supportive Actions

EU humanitarian food assistance interventions must consider opportunities for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction (DRR), preparedness, mitigation and prevention, within the limits of the humanitarian mandates, regulations and food-assistanceobjectives. The Commission’s humanitarian food assistancestrategyshouldbeinformedbythestrategycontainedwithintheCommissionCommunicationonanEUStrategyforDRRin developing countries21.

The Commission recognises that Disaster Risk Reduction initiatives(suchasEarlyWarningSystemsandStrategicFoodStocks)oftendemandlong-termsupport,nationalorregionalownership, and careful consideration of economic and political perspectives. Therefore routine support for them is deemed to be beyond the comparative advantage of humanitarianactors.However theCommission’shumanitarian actionmaypursue simultaneous risk reduction outcomes whilst delivering food assistance, and may also participate in short-termreinforcement,pilotingandscaling-upofDRRinitiatives, incollaborationwithdevelopmentactors.Respectingthe“donoharm”principle,actionsshouldavoidincreasingbeneficiaries’vulnerabilityandrisk-exposuretoothercrises.

The limited experience and skill-set of humanitarian actorsoften constrains the use of the most appropriate food assistance interventions. Therefore the EU and its Member Statesrecognise the need to invest in strengthening the capacityof thehumanitariansystem todelivermorevariedandmoreappropriate forms of food assistance.

Increasing levels of chronic food insecurity equate to anincreasing number of people vulnerable to future crises.If unchecked, this will multiply the demands on limitedhumanitarian resources. Coordination and advocacy aretherefore needed to influence the public-policy debates andthe resource-allocation decisions of national governmentsand development actors towards meeting food-securityobjectives.Advocacymustbedirectedatstateactorstofulfiltheir fundamental responsibility in safe-guarding the food-security of their people.Advocacymust also be directed atdevelopment actors (including governments) in relation to the

19 Childrenunder-2being those that aremost at riskof illnessandmalnutrition, and for whom a window of opportunity exists toensure long-termhealth and cognitive benefits through adequatenutrient intake.

20 PleaseseeDGECHO’sHIVGuidelines,adoptedOctober2008.21 See COM(2009)84

developmentalneedsofpopulationsincrisiscontexts.

Effective integration of humanitarian and development assistancemustbepromotedthroughLRRD,ensuringthattheinternationalaidsystemoperatesconsistently,coherentlyandtransparently to address hunger and vulnerability.Advocacyshould ensure that collective efforts span emergency,transitional and developmental needs simultaneously, andpromote enabling conditions linked to goodgovernance andconducive national and international policies (e.g. for trade and migration).

TheEUand itsMemberStatessupport the ideaof inclusivecoordination of Humanitarian Food Assistance under strong and capacitated governance and leadership. This includes close coordination with relevant and viable national humanitarianactors.WithintheframeworkofUNandHumanitarianReform,the Commission endorses the cluster approach to coordination, andsupportsalleffortstomakeitworkeffectivelyforthefoodandnutritionsectors,ensuringthatitalsolinkswiththeglobalarchitecture forgovernanceof agriculture, food security andnutrition.

Photo credit: (Cover) ECHO/Mathias Eick, 2010

Commission staff working doCumentaCComPanyIng doCumenT To THe

CommunICaTIon from THe CommIssIon To THe CounCIl and THe euroPean ParlIamenT

on

Humanitarian Food Assistance

Humanitarian Aid

Civil Protection{Com (2010)126}

18

1. InTroduCTIon

ThisStaffWorkingDocumentaccompanies theCommissionCommunication on Humanitarian Food Assistance and elaborates how the Commission programmes, implementsand coordinates humanitarian food assistance in pursuit of the objectivesandprinciplesdefinedintheCommunication.

This operationally-focused paper will be subject to regularreview,andpotentialrevision,astheCommission’sexperienceand lesson-learning in the sector evolves, and as theories ofbest-practiceadvance.

2. THe euroPean CommIssIon’s resPonse To global food InseCurITy

The European Commission is responding to the globalchallengesoffoodinsecurityandmalnutrition.Ithasarangeofbudgetaryinstrumentsatitsdisposaltotacklethesymptomsand causes of both transient and chronic food insecurity.WithintheCommissionservices,humanitarianfoodassistanceneedsarenowdealtwithbyDGECHO,usingitshumanitarianinstruments (thehumanitarianand food-aidbudget lines). Inadditiontousingitsownhumanitarianbudgets,DGECHOcandrawondedicatedcontingencyfundsundercountryallocationsof the European Development Fund (EDF) to respond to food andnon-foodneedsinhumanitariancrises.

Inimmediatepost-crisissituations,otherEUinstrumentscancontribute to restoring national food security, including theInstrumentforStability(IfS).Longertermfood-securitysupportcanbeimplementedaspartofabroaderstrategyforpovertyalleviation,andisfinancedbytheDevelopmentCooperationInstrument (DCI) and the European Neighbourhood PolicyInstrument(ENPI),drawnfromtheEUbudget,aswellasbytheEuropeanDevelopmentFund(EDF)forAfrican,CaribbeanandPacific(ACP)countries.Anysuchfoodsecuritystrategiesmust be framed within five-year Country Strategy Papers(CSPs),andthree-yearrollingNationalIndicativeProgrammes(NIPs)andRegionalIndicativeProgrammes(RIPs),mutuallyagreedwithbeneficiarycountries.

Inaddition,notably infragilecontextsor incountrieswherethese geographically-oriented instruments cannot be used,certain food security objectives can be pursued through theFood Security Thematic Programme (FSTP). Additionaltemporaryadhocfinancialinstrumentscanalsobeestablished,suchas theWaterFacility (2004-2007),whichcansupportwater interventions in favour of agriculture and livelihoods, and the Food Facility, designed to address both causes andconsequencesofhighfoodprices,intheshort-to-mediumterm,from 2009 to 2011. For more information on these instruments, seeAnnexC.

All these instruments for promoting food security indevelopment will henceforth be oriented under the policy

framework set out in the Commission’s Communication on foodsecurity(“AnEUpolicyframeworktoassistdevelopingcountries addressing food security challenges”). ThatCommunication has been developed in close coordinationwith the Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance, recognising the distinct objectives of the humanitarian anddevelopment agendas, but also the considerable overlappinginterestbetweenthem,particularlyonsubjectssuchasLinkingReliefwithRehabilitationandDevelopment(LRRD),disastermanagement, livelihoods and nutrition.

2.1. The Comparative Advantage1 of the EU’s Humanitarian Food Assistance Instrument

The scope of work covered by the EU’s humanitarian foodassistance instruments is determined by the humanitarianmandate and Regulation. However, within this legal framework the comparative advantages and disadvantages of humanitarian assistanceinrespondingeffectivelytoanygivencontextmustalsobeconsidered.

TheEU‘shumanitarianinstrumentsareparticularlyeffectivein dealingwith short-term, rapidly evolving, large-scale andfiniteneeds.Itsmandate,regulation,instruments,partner-base,orientation,versatility,flexibility,skill-setandtime-horizonallrenderitbestequippedtohandlesuchsituations.However,theprotracted nature of many crises also requires humanitarianactorstoengageinlonger-termhumanitarianfoodassistance.

Conversely, chronic food insecurity and its structural causesare best tackled through predictable social safety-nets,social transfers, social-protection or sustainable livelihooddevelopmentprogrammes,whichinturnarebestimplementedover a long-term horizon, with strong national and localownership. Such interventions are clearly best suited todevelopment actorsworkingwithmulti-annual budgets, andnot to humanitarian actorswith short planninghorizons andlimitedabilitytoengagewithgovernments.

As stated in the Humanitarian Food Assistance Communication2, “theCommissionwillnotusehumanitarianfoodassistancetoaddresschronicfoodinsecurity,except:wherenon-interventionposes immediate or imminent humanitarian risk3ofsignificantscale and severity; where othermore appropriate actors areeither unable or unwilling to act, and cannot be persuadedto act; and where, in spite of its comparative disadvantages, positive impact can be expected within the time limitationsof its intervention. In such cases, theCommissionwill onlyengagehumanitarianfoodassistanceonthebasisofdialogue,coordinationandadvocacywithpotentialdevelopmentplayers,where they exist, andwith a clear and realistic exit-strategydefined”.

1 SeeGlossaryinAnnexA2 See the Commission’s Communication on Humanitarian Food

Assistance, section 5.1, para 4.3 SeeGlossary,AnnexA

19

3. ProgrammIng

3.1. Prioritisation

With limited resourcesandabroadpotential scopeofwork,the Commission prioritises EU humanitarian food assistance activities and responses first and foremost to immediate lifesaving during emergencies and their aftermaths.

As stated in the Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance4,CommissionfinancingofEUhumanitarianfoodassistance interventions (immediate life-saving and beyond)will be prioritised according to (i) the severity of the crisisand the scale of the unmet needs (ii) the immediacy of thecrisis,and(iii)theexpectedimpactconsidering,interalia,thecomparative advantage5 of the EU’s humanitarian instruments for responding, the risk of doing harm, and the comparative cost-effectivenessoftheresponsecomparedtootherresponseoptions.

However, resourceallocationmustalsobe influencedby theexpectation that the EU demonstrate solidarity on a globalbasis,sharetheburdenofurgentunmethumanitarianneedsinmostcrises,andparticularlyrespondtoforgottencrises.

4 See the Commission’s Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance, section 4, para 4

5 SeeGlossaryinAnnexA

3.2. Needs Assessments

Except in themost exceptional circumstances (iewhen theyresult in severe operational delays that would cost lives)the Commission expects all humanitarian food assistanceinterventionstobeprecededbyadetailedneedsassessment/causalanalysis,anddesignedaccordingly.

Needsassessmentsshouldfocuson(a)thesituationalcontext,including socio-political and operational dimensions thatbothaffect the levelofneedanddetermine thefeasibilityofresponse6; (b) routine information on food security derivedfrom systematic monitoring and early-warning systems, setagainst established baselines7; and (c) ad hoc perspectives on the immediate emergency situation based on specifichumanitarian food and nutrition data collected through, emergency needs assessments and, by way of follow-up,through project monitoring and reporting.A framework fora humanitarian information system that covers these maincomponentsispresentedbelow:

6 Assessments should particularly consider factors influencinghumanitarian access and humanitarian space, as well as technical / absorptioncapacityofavailablepartners(localandinternational).

7 TheCommissionacknowledgesthatinmanyemergencycontexts,baselines on demography or livelihood profiles can be elusive,andthatpaucityofbaselineinformationmustbefactoredinwhenappraisingtherelevance,designandvalidityofneedsassessments.

20

Internally, the Commission’s decisions on the allocation ofhumanitarianfundswilltakefullaccountofinternalanalyses(includingfieldassessmentscarriedoutbyitsownstaff,andtheDGECHOGlobalNeedsAssessment)andassessmentscarriedoutbypartnersandotherrelevantresponseagencies.AnannualFood-InsecurityNeedsAssessmentexercisewillbeconductedby the Commission in all priority countries suffering, or atriskof,significantfoodcrises,andwillcontributetostrategicplanning, programming and resource allocation.

The Commission and its partners will specifically prioritisethe integration of nutritional perspectives, and livelihoods perspectives, into their emergency food needs analyses andinto the design of their humanitarian food assistance responses.

3.3. Entry and Exit Criteria

As articulated in its Humanitarian Food Assistance Communication,theCommission“cantriggerahumanitarianfood assistance response when:

- due to inadequate food consumption, emergency8 rates of mortalityoracutemalnutritionhavebeenreachedorexceeded,orareanticipated,onthebasisoffirmforecasts9; or

- compromised livelihoods or extreme coping strategies(including sale of productive assets, stress migration, resorting to unsafe or insecure survival practices) pose, or are firmlyanticipatedtopose,aseverethreattolife,orariskofextremesuffering, whether arising from, or leading to, inadequate food consumption.”10

The decision to fund interventionswill be based on criteriathat include:

-therelativeseverityandscale11 of the crisis, and the unmet foodneedswithinit,basedonindicatorsoffoodconsumption,availabilityofandaccesstonutritiousfood,copingstrategies,and malnutrition rates;

- the trend and anticipated future severity, based on similarindicators within a timeframe appropriate to the Commission’s humanitarian’s remit ;

- the presence of other donors and/or partners and theirrespective comparative advantages;

8 TheCommissiondefinesanemergencybasedonacombinationofabsolutethresholds(egSphere,WHOetc)andrelativeindicatorssetagainstacontextualnorm.

9 Such“anticipation” shouldbebasedonearlywarning indicatorsthat show a critical inadequacy or deterioration in foodconsumption which, unless prompting an early response, willbecome life-threatening within a timeframe consistent with theEC’s humanitarian remit.

10 See the Commission’s Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance, section 5.1, para 1.

11 Scale is measured, in absolute terms, as the number of peopleaffected.Severityismeasuredasafactorofbothabsolutemeasures(inrelationtoestablishedindicatorthresholdsthatgloballydefinealertandemergencysituations)andrelativemeasures(inrelationtolocalcontextualnormsandbaselines).

- thecommitmentandresponsecapacityof localauthorities;and

-theextenttowhichthecoreprinciplesofhumanitarianfoodassistance are respected, including humanitarian access, and theabilitytomonitorthedeliveryoffoodassistance.

Theextensiveinformationrequiredtoappraiseaninterventionshould derive from detailed and reliable needs assessmentand situation analysis. Any decision to launch such needsassessments can obviously be made on the basis of lessexhaustiveinformation,andbasedontheCommission’sowninformedjudgementandknowledgeofthecontext.

21

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 1: “resPondIng early and effeCTIvely on THe basIs of evIdenCe”

east nusa tenggara in indonesia,isonethemostvulnerableprovinceswhereahighriskofacutefoodandlivelihoodcrisesaggravateschronicfoodinsecurity,resultinginhighlevelsofacutemalnutritioninchildrenundertheageof5,andtheirmothers.EvidenceofbaselinevulnerabilityiscapturedinanationalFoodInsecurityAtlas,whoseinformationtheCommissionhassoughttoverifyandupdatethroughthepromotionofad-hocmultiagencyassessmentsintheregion.Anthropometricsurveysrecentlyidentifiedpocketsofcriticalnutritional,foodandlivelihood-insecurityresultingfromintertwined acute and chronic factors (drought, locust infestations, high food and fuel prices), and the resultant detrimental copingmechanisms(saleofassetsandaccumulationofdebt)adoptedbythemostvulnerable.Theprognosispredictedadeterioratingtrendofmalnutritionrisingabovetheseasonalnorm.

Evidencefurthershowedthatthiscriticalsituationwouldnotbesufficientlymitigatedbyongoingorplannedinterventions(including thegovernment’s rice-based“raskin”social transfermechanism).TheCommission includedthisevidence,withaviewtosupportinganalysisanddecision-making,withinit’sFoodInsecurityNeedsAssessmentTemplate(FINAT),which iscompletedforeverycountryundergoing,orat riskofahumanitarianfoodcrisis.Theneedforagap-fillinginterventionwasidentifiedinordertoprotectlivelihoodsandpreventfurtherdeteriorationofthenutritionalstatusofthosemostvulnerable.€2millionwasthenmobilisedtosupport5one-yearprojectsthataimedatreinforcinglivelihoodassets(short-termsupporttoirrigationandwater-supplysystems,landrehabilitation,training,provisionofagriculturalinputs)to increase immediate food and water access, promoting good nutrition, and strengthening resilience to future stresses (throughcommunitypreparedness).

Oneof theprojects (implementedby theFoodandAgricultureOrganisation (FAO), and reinforcedby funding fromthe“ResponseAnalysisFramework”projectfinancedfromtheCommission’scapacity-buildingbudget)simultaneouslyundertook a comprehensive provincial food and nutritional assessment, providing further evidence upon which district food securityactionplansweredeveloped.Thesemulti-stakeholderinitiativesservedasthebasisonwhichthedevelopmentalneedsofthepopulationsincrisiswerearticulated,andcontributedtoincreasedallocationstofoodsecuritywithinthe2010districtbudgets.

The Commission recognises that, in protracted crises, its humanitarian entry criteria may legitimise a sustainedhumanitarian engagement over several years. In suchcircumstances,thelimitationsoftheCommission’snecessarilyshort-cyclehumanitarianplanningandprogrammingcycles12 areacknowledged,andshouldbefactoredintoanyanalysisofitscomparativeadvantage,forthecontext,comparedtootherinstruments or sources of funding. Even where its instruments prohibit theprovisionofmulti-annual fundingpredictability,

12 Necessarytoallowflexibilityandcapacityforad-hocemergencyresponseandshort-termreprioritisationonaglobalbasis.

Cambodia, Distribution of agricultural inputs, Stung Treng project – UNICEF, Photo credit: ECHO/Alain Robyns, 2002

the Commission will encourage and accommodate partners’ multi-annual strategies and planning horizons in protractedcrises.

22

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 2: “oPeraTIng In ProTraCTed CrIses”

Approximately 140,000Burmese refugees live in nine camps in thailand along the border withMyanmar. Since1995, theCommission has been supporting humanitarian organisations in the provision of food and cooking fuel totheserefugees.After25yearsthereisstillnoobviousendinsighttothissituation,and,undertheThaigovernment’s“containment”policy,refugeesarerestrictedintheirabilitytoestablishlivelihoodsoutsidethecamps,remainingfullydependent on humanitarian aid.

Withaviewtoidentifyingdurablesolutionsforthiscaseload,donorssetupaworkinggroupin2007toexplorelonger-termoptions,andadvocatingforthemwiththegovernment.Bytheendof2009,implementingNGOsandUNHCRhadpreparedachallengingnewfiveyear strategy, shiftingaway fromshort-term“careandmaintenance”andpromotingincreasedrefugeeself-reliance.

Inthiscontext,andtofacilitate thisstrategy, theCommissionlaunchedaLivelihoodsVulnerabilityAnalysisstudytogainabetterunderstandingofthedifferentlivelihoodstrategiesadoptedbytherefugees,theactuallevelsofself-reliancethattheyhave,andtheoptionstoreinforcethisself-reliancefromwithinthehumanitarianoperation.Thisisexpectedtoleadtomoreevidence-basedandneeds-basedprogramming,overamoregradualtimeframe,particularlyinpursuitofalternativefoodassistancestrategiestothecurrentdistributionofgeneralfoodaidrations.Optionstobeexploredincludethe scaling up of livelihood support within and around the camps, stimulating agricultural production and increasing labourmarketopportunities.

It is strongly advisable for theCommission and its partnerstohaveadefinedandrealisticexit-strategyinplacewhereverpossible,beforedeliveringhumanitarianfoodassistance.

As stated within its Humanitarian Food Assistance Communication, the Commission will consider exiting orphasing out its humanitarian food assistance interventions “whenindicatorsofacutemalnutrition,mortalityandextremecoping (linked to inadequate food consumption or poor food utilisation),arestablebelowemergencylevels,orareexpectedto stabilise below such levels. This should result from themajority of the crisis-affected population achieving, for asustainedperiodandfortheforeseeablefuture,improvementsin food consumption and food utilisation, without resorting to detrimental coping strategies”, and independent of anyCommission humanitarian support. This could imply thatpersistingneedsaremeteitherbyotherhumanitariandonors,

Thailand, Cooking and bakery Training Center, Photo credit: ECHO/Stacey Winston, 2008

orbydevelopmentorstateactors.13

Forsituationsdeemedtobefragilewithpersistenthumanitarianrisk, the Commission will ensure that it can monitor the humanitariansituationafteritsexit,andwillkeepalloptionsopenforre-engagementasnecessary.

3.4. Partnerships

The Commission will maintain and work with a diversityof partners in the delivery of humanitarian food assistance,according to their various competences and comparative advantagesinthegivencontext.ThisincludesNonGovernmentalOrganisations(NGOs)onthebasisofFrameworkPartnershipAgreements (FPA), and International Organisations (the United Nations and its agencies, and the International Committee of

13 See the Commission’s Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance,section5.1,paras5and6.

23

the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and national Red CrossandRedCrescentSocieties)based,respectively,ontheFinancial and Administrative Framework Agreement (FAFA) for UN agencies, and on a separate FPA for other international organisations.

While theexistingHumanitarianRegulationdoesnotpermitdirectfinancialengagementwithstateactorsornationalcivilsocietyorganisations,suchentitiescanbesupportedindirectlyon the basis of sub-contracted arrangements. Where suchentities have credible and viable capacities as humanitarianactors, and where humanitarian principles would not becompromised, the Commission encourages its direct partners tosupportandstrengthentheminthedeliveryofhumanitarianassistance.

3.5. Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting

In pursuit of transparency, accountability and effectiveness,the Commission will strive to ensure that all humanitarian food assistance actions that the EU finances are designed aroundtargets andoutcome indicators that are specific,measurable,achievable,relevantandtime-bound14.Suchindicatorswillberoutinelymonitoredandshould form thebasisof systematicreporting by the partner, aswell as any internal or externalevaluation of the operation.

14 SMART indicators

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 3: “IndICaTors To measure resulTs”

The Commission is committed to a results based approach, requiring themeasurementofprojectoutcomesand impact. Inpractice thisdemands thatthetraditionalemphasisonmonitoringprojectactivitiesiscomplementedbymeasuringtheattainmentofresultsorobjectives.

Forexample,atypicalfoodassistanceprojectmayinvolvethedeliveryoffoodaid.Activitylevelmonitoringusuallymeasuresandreportsonthenumberofmetric tonnes (MT)of fooddistributed,ornumberofbeneficiariesassisted.However,theexpectedresultistypicallytoensureadequatefoodconsumptionatthehouseholdlevel.Quantitiesoffooddistributedmaybepoorlycorrelatedwithlevelsofactualconsumption,ifforexamplefoodissoldtomeetotherpressing needs or shared with other households.

Inthepastfewyearstherehavebeenimportantdevelopmentsindevelopingand testing indicators of food consumption.Asdirectmeasurementisclearlyimpractical,simpleandeasytocollectproxymeasuresareavailable.Rigoroustesting has demonstrated a strong correlation with actual food consumption levels. Such techniques include:

-HouseholdDietaryDiversityScore(thesimplecountonthenumberoffoodgroups that a household has consumed over the reference period)

-Food Consumption Score(Compositescorebasedondietarydiversity,foodfrequencyandrelativenutritionalimportanceofdifferentfoodgroups)

-CopingStrategiesIndex (A sum of the frequencies of the coping strategies adopted to ensure individual food consumption, weighted according to their severity)

Anthropometric indicators (e.g. rates of acute malnutrition) can also provide important evidence on impact. However, malnutrition data may not reflectfoodassistanceoutcomesalone.Insomecasesaprojectmaymeetitspurposeinimprovingfoodconsumption,butmalnutritionmaypersistasaconsequenceofdisease.Wellselectedindicators,atvariouslevels,canhelpclarifycasualrelationshipsandimproveimplementationandfutureprojectdesign.

Thailand, Northern Rakhine, Anthropometric screening, ACF nutritional programme, Photo credit: ECHO

24

Where available, nutritional information and data should bemonitored and reviewed within all food assistance operations. Where operations specifically seek to address malnutrition,nutritionaloutcome-indicatorswillbefullyincorporatedintotheprojectcycleandlog-frame.

Result-orientedmonitoring,evaluationandreportingexerciseswillbeanalysedbytheCommissionanditspartners,alongsidemore qualitative narrative reporting15,notonlytoappraisetheperformanceandoutcomeofagivenintervention,butalsotolearnlessonswhichwillbefedintothedesign,programmingdecisions and implementation of future operations.

4. THe CommIssIon’s HumanITarIan food assIsTanCe Toolbox

4.1. Supporting Food Availability, Food Access, Food Utilization and Nutrition in Crises

In line with the Commission’s humanitarian mandate and the Humanitarian Regulation, this StaffWorking Documentconsiders theuseof foodassistance incrisiscontextswherefoodconsumptionisinsufficientorinadequatetoavertextremenegativemanifestationsoftransientfood-insecurityincluding;excessive16mortality,emergencyrates17 of acute malnutrition, detrimental coping mechanisms (e.g. stress displacement or livelihood erosion). This assistance is provided for the time needed to meet the humanitarian requirements, including in supportofoperationsthatprepareforidentifiedhumanitarianrisks,thatpreventormitigatedisasters,orthatfacilitateshort-termrecoverypost-emergency.

TheCommissionwill respond to the diverse symptoms andunderlying causes of transient food insecurity and acutemalnutrition with a variety of activities and tools. Whilstproblems of food availability, access and utilisation areconsidered distinctly for simplicity’s sake, they are in factoften interrelated and overlaid, hence the responses suggested mayoftenneedtobeinterchangedorcombined,accordingtothecontextandtheneeds.

Where the core problem to be addressed is a lack of food availability, for instance linked to disrupted agricultural production, response options include:

15 Particularly in contexts where capacity constraints, accessproblems, or data deficiencies render quantitative reportingincompleteorunreliable.

16 “Excessive” is considered to combine absolute measures inrelation to established emergency thresholds (as defined by theSpherehandbook,UNICEFand theUNStandingCommitteeonNutrition (SCN)), and relative measures in relation to context-specific baselines. Nb established emergency thresholds for theprevalenceofmoderateandsevereacutemalnutritioninunder-5swillbesubjecttoadjustmentinlightoftherevisedWHOgrowthstandards from 2009.

17 AsdefinedbytheUNStandingCommitteeonNutrition(SCN)andWHO

-thedistributionoffreefoodcommoditiesonablanket18basis(generalfooddistributions);

- the distributionof free foodon a targeted19 basis (targetedfooddistributions);

- thedistributionof foodona targetedand/or self-targeted20 basis,inexchangeforabeneficiary’stimeorlabour(e.g.foodfor work, food for training, food for assets)21;

- the provision of livelihood support to ensure that self-production capacities affected by crises are protected orboosted (e.g. distribution of agricultural inputs, training,income-generation, veterinary care, water and fodder forlivestock,emergencydestockingorrestocking).

Wherethecoreproblemtobeaddressedisalackofaccess to food,forinstancewhenavailablefoodonthelocalmarketsisnotaffordableduetoeitherhighpricesorinterruptedincomes,response options include:

-theprovisionoffreecashorvouchers(commodity-basedorvalue-based), targeted or distributed on a blanket basis (e.g.unconditional cash or voucher transfers)22;

-theprovisionofcashorvouchers,onablanket,targetedorself-targeted23 basis, in exchange for a beneficiary’s time orlabour24 (e.g. cash for work);

- the provision of livelihood support to ensure that incomesaffected by crises are protected or boosted (e.g. distributionofagriculturalinputs,training,income-generation,veterinarycare,waterandfodderforlivestock,emergencydestockingorrestocking);

- projects to improve access to, and functioning of,marketsin crisis affected areas fordisaster-affectedpopulations (e.g.emergency road / bridge rehabilitation, market-informationsupport).

18 Distributiontoeveryone,ortoallindividualsfulfillinganeasily-definedcriteria,suchasaspecificage-group(see section 4.3 of this document)

19 Distributionofspecificcommoditiestospecificindividualsorsub-groups of a population group, differentiated according to need (see section 4.3 of this document)

20 Whenonlythosewithinaneedytargetbeneficiarygroupchoose,voluntarily, to participate in assistance scheme, usually becausethereisadisincentiveintheformoftheopportunitycostoflabourexchangeforlessneedy,non-targetgroupstogetinvolved.

21 Such activities should be planned on the basis of a goodunderstanding of the availability, or lack of availability, of timeand labour amongst specific vulnerable groups (eg child-headedhouseholds, elderly etc). Furthermore, work tasks undertakenshould,wherever possible, be seasonally appropriate and shouldcontributetothebenefitofvulnerablecommunities,fulfillingeitherresponse,recoveryorresilience-buildingobjectives.

22 PleaseseeDGECHO’sFundingGuidelinesfor“TheUseofCashandVouchersinHumanitarianCrises”,adoptedApril2009

23 As per footnote 20. 24 Such activities should be planned on the basis of a good

understanding of the availability, or lack of availability, of timeand labour amongst specific vulnerable groups (eg child-headedhouseholds, elderly etc). Furthermore, work tasks undertakenshould,whereverpossible,beseasonallyappropriate,andshouldcontributetothebenefitofvulnerablecommunities,fulfillingeitherresponse,recoveryorresilience-buildingobjectives.

25

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 4: “alTernaTIves and ComPlemenTs To food aId”

Cash and voucher transfers are becoming increasingly recognised as an appropriate response to address food accessproblemswheremarkets are functional, foodavailability isgoodandvulnerablehouseholdshaveaccess tomarkets.However,voucherscanalsobeusedasacomplementary transferwhen foodavailability isnotassured.Anexamplecomes from milling voucher initiatives in darfurinternallydisplacedpersons(IDP)camps,sudan, where the vouchers areincreasinglybeingusedasacomplementtoGeneralFoodDistributions.

Beforevouchersweredistributed,itwasfoundthatIDPsweretradingaproportionoftheirfoodrationtopayformillingofthewholegrainsdistributed,orpayingformillingfromotherscarceincomeresources.FromtheIDPpointofview,thisimpactsbothonthenetamountoffoodavailableinthehouseholdduetothesaleofpartoftheration,andlessavailableincome for use on other essential services. From the programme efficiency perspective, low local retail food pricescomparedtohigherinternationalpricesandhighcostsfortransportationanddistribution,meansthatthecosttodonorsismuchmorethanthevalueofcashthatendsupinthebeneficiary’spocket.InDarfur,itwascalculatedthatwhereveronwardsellingofrationswashappening,thelossofvaluewasextremelyhigh(estimatedvaluelossof92%foroiland60%forcereals,factoringallcoststofinaldistribution).Millingvoucherswerethusconceived,toprotectthevalueofthefoodassistancedistributedandtosafeguardbeneficiaries’adequatefoodconsumption,whilstensuringthatanecessaryservice was maintained.

Millingvouchersaregiventobeneficiariesalongwithin-kindfoodrations,andcanbeusedforthatdistributiononly.Experienceinpilotssuggeststhatvouchersthatspecifythequantityofgraintobemilledarelesstradablethanthosethathaveamonetaryvalue.Theimmediateimpactonbeneficiarieshasbeenanincreaseintheavailabilityofgraininthehousehold,andreducedpressureonincomesourcesthatcanbeusedforbasicservices(health,educationetc).

Challengesincludeensuringsufficientavailabilityofparticipatinggrainmillers;thepotentialforvoucherstobecomeasecondary‘currency’andbetraded;andtheriskofforgeriesdemandingfairlysophisticated,andexpensive,printingofvouchers.

Food assistance should also aim to protect and reinforce livelihoods, since these are the primary means by whichhouseholds secure their food consumption. In order to feed themselves, food insecure households often resort to negative copingmechanisms(e.g.selltheirproductiveassets,abandonlivelihood pursuits in favour of migration, or undertake transactionalsex),allofwhichcanfurthercompromisetheirhealthandlonger-termfood-security.Ahousehold’sadequatefoodconsumptionintheshort-termshould,wherepossible,beachieved without it having to resort to negative, detrimental coping mechanisms that compromise its longer-term foodsecurity.

Therefore, as stated in the Communication on Humanitarian FoodAssistance (section 5.2, para 4) “the reinforcement orprotection of agricultural and non-agricultural livelihoods(eg providing veterinary services for vulnerable livestockherds, or improving agricultural crop storage) is a legitimate and appropriate emergency response in some humanitariancontexts”, toboostfoodaccessorfoodavailability,“so longasitispromptedbyemergencyneedsandmeetshumanitarianobjectiveswithinanappropriateandfinitetimeframe”.

Sudan, North Darfur State, Kassab camp, Millers on voucher programme, Photo credit: ECHO/Calum McLean, 2010

Sudan, South Darfur, Otash IDP camp, Milling vouchers, Photo credit: ECHO/Calum McLean, 2009

26

Food assistance can be used to protect and strengthenthe livelihoods of a crisis-affected population in order toprevent or reverse negative coping mechanisms (such as the sale of productive assets, or the accumulation of debts) thatcould engender either short-term or longer-term harmfulconsequences for their livelihood base, their food-securitystatus and/or their nutritional status.

Given the seasonal nature and duration of agricultural and livestock production cycles, the Commission will pay close

attention to the duration and sequencing of its emergencylivelihoodwork.While the objectives and targets must stillbe achievable within limited and finite timeframes whichare compatible with its regulation and instruments, theCommissionwillensurethat(a)emergencylivelihood-supportand livelihood-recovery interventions are afforded sufficientandrealistictimescales,and(b)thattheyarestartedingood-time,asanintegralpartofahumanitarianresponseandnotjustatitsfinalphase.

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 5: “resTorIng dIsasTer-affeCTed lIvelIHoods, and buIldIng baCk beTTer”

On15November2007Cyclone sidranditsaccompanyingtidalsurge,hitcoastalcommunitiesinsouthern Bangladesh hard.Inadditiontoadeathtollestimatedtobeashighas10,000,tensofthousandsmorepeoplelosthomes,livestockandproperty-andwithitpreciouslivelihoods.Onesuchgroupwerefishingcommunitieswhosemeansoflivelihood-fishingcraftandnets-werelosttothestorm.

Followingonfromimmediatefoodassistance, itwasclear thatrestoringfishinglivelihoodswasanimportantsteptorestoring food security.However,while fishing had an important role to play, itwas apparent that the structures ofownershipforfishingcraft,wereessentiallyexploitative.Sinceassetsandprofitshadpreviouslyremainedinthehandsofthelocaleliteandmoneylenders,themajorityofthoseaffectedhadbeenlivinginastateofchronicpovertyandfoodinsecurityevenbeforeCycloneSIDRstruck.

AspartoftherecoveryprocesssupportedbyEUhumanitarianassistance,partnerssuchasConcerncommissionedtheconstructionoffishingcraftand,throughdialoguewithcommunities,establishedfishingcooperativeswhichguaranteedjointownershipofboatsandequipmentbyfisher-folkthemselves.

Toensuresustainability,cooperativeswereformedfromgroupsoflocalwomen,andtrainedtoholdregularmeetingstodiscuss operational issues, resolve disputes and to plan on how to acquire further assets. In order to meet the challenge ofambitiousobjectiveswiththerestrictedtimeframeofemergencyresponse,emphasiswasplacedonsecuringeffectivelinkageswithlong-termdevelopmentprogrammesinthearea.

Theimpactoftheoperationhasthereforenotonlybeentorestore,asahumanitarianobjective,animportantlivelihoodactivity–ithassimultaneouslyestablishedapowerfulworkingexampleofalternativestructuresofownershipwherebygreatercontrolofassetsandprofitsisplacedinthehandsofpoorpeople,therebysimultaneouslyaddressinganunderlyingcauseofchronicfood-insecurity.

Occupied Palestinian Territory, Gaza, Livelihood support to fishermen, Photo credit: ECHO/Hervé Caiveau, 2010

27

Where the core problem to be addressed is poor food utilisation, response options include:

-theprovisionoffoodpreparationandfoodstoragematerials(e.g.safe-water,cookingsets,fuel);

- training and awareness building on nutrition and feedingpractices.

EUhumanitarianfoodassistanceinterventionsimplementedbythe Commission will seek opportunities to uphold and promote favourable infant and child-feeding practices. Specifically,EU-funded humanitarian food assistance interventions willavoiddiscouragingordisruptingthebreastfeedingofinfants.

Where the problem to be addressed is a high prevalence ofacute malnutrition or micro-nutrient deficiencies, response options include:

- facility-based therapeutic feeding for severely acutelymalnourished individuals (e.g. Therapeutic Feeding Centres (TFCs)andStabilisationCentres);

- community-based therapeutic feeding for severely acutelymalnourished individuals without medical complications (e.g. CommunityManagementofAcuteMalnutrition–CMAM);

- supplementary or complementary feeding, either targetedtomoderately acutelymalnourished individuals, or providedon a blanket basis to all at-risk individuals (e.g. BlanketSupplementaryFeedingProgrammes–BSFPs-forallunder-5s);

-provisionofmicronutrientsupplementation(e.g.distributionof VitaminA or folic acid, or micronutrient fortification ofgeneral foods);

-promotionofnutritionalawarenessanddietarydiversity.

On operations that seek to address acute malnutrition, the Commissionwill promote existing nutritional best practices(e.g.CommunityManagementofAcuteMalnutrition).Wheresafe, appropriate and feasible, the Commissionwill supportinnovative approaches and/or the use of new nutritional commodities25 inorder tostrengthen theevidencebase forabroader range of effective interventions. In most cases, theCommissionwillonly support theuseof specificnutritionalproducts as part of an integrated strategy for the preventionand management of acute malnutrition that simultaneouslyaddresses other causal and exacerbating factors. Rarely aresuchproductsjustifiedasastand-alonesolution.

As stated within the Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance (section 5.2, para 1), the Commission will facilitate complementary and integrated programming to ensure that

25 SuchasReady-to-UsetherapeuticFood(RUF)forthetreatmentofModerate Acute Malnutrition (MAM)

humanitarianneedsareaddressedholisticallyandeffectively26. Alongsidefoodassistancemeasuresthatdirectlyaddressfoodconsumption requirements, complementary or supportingmeasures (e.g.PublicHealthmeasures) areconsideredvital,eventhoughtheydonotimpactdirectlyonfoodavailability,accessoruse.Theyhaveacriticalinfluenceontheoutcomeoffoodintake,particularlyaffectinghowthehumanbodyisabletoutilizefoodtodeterminenutritionaloutcomes.

Complementary response options include:

-directprovision,topopulationsaffectedbyfoodornutritioncrises,ofhealthservices,safewater,sanitationandotherpublichealth measures, to reduce the burden of diseases stronglylinked to acute malnutrition (e.g. diarrhoeal diseases, malaria, and measles).

-provisionofcashtransferstoensurethatahousehold’sdiversemulti-sectoralneedsarecovered(egforhealthcare,householditems, sanitation, education) so as to prevent displacement of householdfoodexpenditure.

- support to “responsive” and “remedial” humanitarianprotection actions27, where protection concerns may trigger,or arise from, acute food insecurity (for instance, ensuringsafe passage to agricultural fields outside refugee camps, orsafeguarding against abuse and exploitation at distributionpoints).

26 NbconceptualframeworkintheCommission’sCommunicationonHumanitarian Food Assistance, section 3, para 5

27 See DG ECHO’s Funding Guidelines for Humanitarian Protection; 21 April 2009

28

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 6: “InTegraTed ProgrammIng”

In mandera district of kenya, the Commission supported a programme that concentrated on direct nutrition and food securitysupporttovulnerablepopulations,whilstaddressingatthesametimesomeofthepublic-healthdimensionsofmalnutrition.

This integratednutrition,health, food security and livelihoodsprogrammewasbasedona rangeof assessments thatinformed the design of the various activities and components. Focused assessments and investigations included milk marketsurveys;ahouseholdeconomyassessment;acausalanalysisofmalnutrition;amarketassessment;aneconomicevaluationofrestocking;nutritionalanthropometricandmortalitysurveys;andanutritionandhealthservicesassessment.Themalnutritioncausalanalysisassessmentshowedthatmalnutritionintheareawasattributedtopoorhouseholdfoodsecurity,poorsocialandcarepractices,apoorpublichealthenvironmentandmarginalisationofthemostvulnerable.Hence,thefollowingprogrammecomponentsweresupported,aimedataddressingaccess,availabilityandutilisationoffood, and the other indirect factors aggravating malnutrition:

-NutritionalsupportwasprovidedtotheacutelymalnourishedthroughSupplementaryFeedingProgrammesandOutreachTherapeuticProgrammes,whilesimultaneouslyimprovingaccesstohealthservicesthroughsupportingtheMinistryofHealthtoprovideextendedhealthoutreach.

-Communitiesweresupportedtodetect,prevent,treatandrefersickandmalnourishedchildrenandpregnantwomenat risk, in the most remote rural communities. Health and nutrition education was also provided on good feeding and caringpracticesaimedatimprovingdietarypracticesofyoungchildrenandmothers.Communitycase-managementofdiarrhoea in communities was also promoted.

-Accesstofoodwasimprovedthroughdistributionoffoodvoucherstovulnerablehouseholdstoobtainmilk,meatandbeans.

-Targetedhouseholdsweresupportedtorestore,protectandimprovetheirlivelihoodsthroughbetterlivestockproduction.Thisincluded(i)trainingonbesthusbandrypractices,fodderproductionathouseholdlevelandmilkqualitymanagement(ii)distributionoffoddertoperi-urbandestitutehouseholdsduringthedryspell,(iii)supportandcapacitybuildingforhouseholdsinvolvedinthetradeofsafemilkand(iv)animalhealthservicedeliverycarriedoutbyexistingCommunityAnimalHealthWorkers.

WhiletheabovementionedprogrammecomponentswerefundedbyEUhumanitarianassistance,anotherdonorfinancedacomplementaryprogrammetosupporttheMinistryofHealthintheprovisionofbasicpreventativeandcurativehealthcareservices,throughexistinghealthfacilitiesandthroughthecommunity

Somalia, Emergency animal health programme, Photo credit: ECHO/Daniel Dickinson, 2010

29

For a full overview of humanitarian food assistance response options for contexts and populations that fulfil the “entrycriteria” for humanitarian food assistance as elaborated insection3.3inthisdocument),seeAnnexDbelow.

Allhumanitarianfoodassistanceandcomplementaryactivitiesmustbelinkedtoafood-intakeinterventionlogic28, and should strive to demonstrate a cost-effective impact on the foodconsumptionand/ornutritionalstatusoftargetedbeneficiaries.

4.2. Resource Transfer Modalities

TheCommissionwill strive to provide flexible resources tosupporttheuseofthemostappropriateandefficient

28 Intervention logic = the core rationale for responding.

combination of emergency response tools, including cash,vouchers,in-kindfoodaid,andothercommoditiesorservices.

As explained in the Communication on Humanitarian FoodAssistance, “the choice of themost appropriate interventionand transfer instrument (e.g. cash based or in-kind) mustbe a context-specific and evidence-based choice which is regularlyreviewed.Therelevanceandcomparativeadvantageoftheproposedresponseoption–andthecombinationoftoolstobeused–mustbedemonstratedfor thespecificsituation,based on needs assessments and causal analyses that are asaccurateanduptodateaspossible”,accordingtotheurgencyandcomplexityofthesituationontheground.

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 7: “ConTexT-sPeCIfIC needs-based InTervenTIons”

In food aid operations, a large proportion of the caloric intake comes from cereals,abasiccommodityinthedietofcrisis-affectedpopulations.Inmanycontexts,cerealsareoftenusedforbreadmaking–elsewhereitiscookedasastaplemeal.Howevercareisoftennottakentoascertainwhetherbeneficiarieshabituallybake theirbreadandwhether theyhaveproper cooking facilitiesfor baking.Whenmarkets are functioning and beneficiaries can buy bread,particularly inurbanareas, lackofsuchfacilitiescan leadveryoften to theresaleoftheflour,oftenatpoortermsoftrade.

On the 8th of August 2008, war erupted in georgiabetweenGeorgianandRussianmilitary forces, as well as SouthOssetianmilitias. By 18August,agencies estimated that the conflict had displaced 30,000 ethnic Ossetiansfrom their homes, almost all to Russia’s North Ossetia republic.A further128,850 ethnic Georgians were displaced from their villages and found refuge insurroundingtowns.Humanitarianfoodassistanceagenciesmovedquicklytorespondtothecrisis,usingfoodstocksfromanexistingoperation.On9thofAugust,theyprovidedastandardrationintendedtocover10daysandconsistingofwheatflour,vegetableoil,beansandsugar.BytheendofAugust,theyhadreachedmorethan138,000people.However,followingarapidfoodsecurityassessmentinearlySeptember,itwasrealisedthatbeneficiariesdidnothavethepossibilitytousethewheatflourdistributed,sinceGeorgianstraditionallyconsumed bread, and had nomeans to prepare it as such.Therefore, fromSeptember, agencies insteaddistributedflour to the few remainingbakeriesthatwereworking,andtheydeliveredbreaddirectlytothecollectivecentreswhereIDPshadbeenaccommodated.

Georgia, Bread being unloaded at one of the distribution points, Photo credit: ECHO/Daniela Cavini, 2008

When cash, or value-based vouchers, are considered asa response tool to improve populations’ access to food, importantpre-conditionsmustbefulfilled,including:thoroughmarket analyses to ensure that sufficient food is availableonthemarketatareasonableprice,or thatmarketsfunctionadequatelytorespondtoincreaseddemandwithoutinflationaryconsequences;assessmentstoconsiderthesecurity,protectionand corruption implications of transporting, handling and

distributinglargequantitiesofcash;andadequateskillswithinimplementingagenciestoutilisethisrelativelynovelresponseoption29.Equally, risks (thatmayaffectmarkets, security,orprotection) associated with alternative response options like thedistributionofin-kindcommodities,mustalsobecarefullyappraised and considered.

29 PleaseseeDGECHO’sFundingGuidelinesfor“TheUseofCashandVouchersinHumanitarianCrises”,adoptedApril2009

30

For in-kind food aid, as stated in the Communication onHumanitarian Food Assistance (section 4, para 6), theCommission is a leading advocate for local procurement, basedontheneedtoreducecosts,limittransportationdelaysand prevent market distortions30; and to provide economic opportunities for small farmers in countries where purchases are made. However, the operational challenges (e.g. the urgency and speed with which bulk purchases need to bemade)andrisks(e.g.of raising theexpectationof long-termdemand on the back of a short-term operation) need to becarefullymanagedtoavoidinflationaryimpactsanddisruptingthedevelopmentofefficientlocalmarkets.

Regarding GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), andin supportof the“donoharm”principle,humanitarian foodassistance partners are expected to safeguard the interestsof their beneficiaries in the selection of food commoditiesand agricultural inputs (concerning safety, appropriatenessand effectiveness), whilst also conforming with the relevant nationalpoliciesandlegislationinthecountryofoperation.

4.3. Targeting

Whereneedsareuniformandspreadacrossthemajorityofapopulationgroup,assistancecanbedeliveredmosteffectivelyandmost efficiently, on a blanket basis (i.e. to everyone, ortoall individuals fulfillinganeasily-definedcriteria, suchasage). However, more often than not, crises affect different people in different ways, resulting in variations, within apopulation group, in the nature and depth of need. In these circumstances, careful targeting of assistance is critical to ensure that resources are used with maximum effectivenessand efficiency. Limited resources require that humanitarianfoodassistanceiswelltargetedsothatitisusedonlywhereitismosturgentlyrequired,bythosethatmostneedit.Conversely,poor targeting to those that do not need it is associated with excessivedisincentiveeffectssuchasunderminingproductionand distorting markets.

At the project level, targeting can be done according to avariety of methodologies, which vary in practicality andeffectiveness, according to the context. A balance needsto be struck between speed, ease and practicality on oneside, and effectiveness in reducing inclusion and exclusionerrors on the other,with targeting criteria that are optimallysensitive,specific,andfeasible31. Furthermore, the likelihood and, insomecontexts,acceptablepracticeofassistance laterbeing shared or redistributed, post-distribution, according tohousehold or social norms, needs to be acknowledged and

30 Importationof excessivequantitiesof in-kind foodaid canhaveadeflationaryeffectonlocalfoodprices,tothedetrimentoflocalproducers.

31 Sensitive (ensuring that thoseeligiblearenotexcluded), specific(ensuringthatthosenoteligibleareexcluded)andfeasible(ensuringthat there is away to recognise thenecessarycharacteristic, andthatitsuseispolitically,socially,andculturallyacceptable,aswellas practicallymanageable, in the given context):Maxwell et al,“Emergency Food Security Interventions”,December,2008

considered.Thisshouldinfluencethedesignoftheoperation,thesettingofthelevelsofassistancetobeprovided,andtherigorofpre-distributiontargetingexpected.TheCommissionacceptsthathumanitarianfoodassistanceisusuallytargetedonageographicalbasis,andthenexpectsittobedirectedonthebasisofsocio-economic,physical,oranthropometricmeasuresoffoodinsecurityornutritionalvulnerability32, depending on thecontextandthemeansbywhichneedshavebeenidentifiedandanalysed.

32 Caution needs to be exercised in the use of proxy indicators ofvulnerability for targeting. For instance, old-age,women-headedhouseholds,disability,andchronic illness (includingHIV/AIDS)donotnecessarilycorrelatewithhighlevelsoffoodinsecurityornutritionalvulnerability

31

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 8: “TargeTIng In emergenCIes”

Accurate targeting should ensure that peoplemost in need of the assistance offered are not excluded.DGECHO’smonitoringofEU-funded food assistanceprojects inhaiti in 2009 revealed exclusion errors linked to inappropriatetargetingcriteria.Agriculturalinputswerebeingtargetedexclusivelytohouseholdswithmalnourishedchildrenattendingnutritional programmes. However, since malnutrition was often more directly linked to ill health, this resulted inhouseholds thatwere not necessarily food insecure receiving food security support,whilst food insecure householdswithoutmalnourishedchildrenwereexcluded.Thisfindingpromptedareviewandrefinementofthecriteriaused.

Often,self-targetingmechanismscanbeusedtopreventtheinclusionofbeneficiariesthatdonotactuallyneedassistance.Since the 2003 war, iraqhasfacedadiresecuritysituationcharacterisedbysectarianviolenceandongoingwarfare.It resulted insignificant internaldisplacements,whilehundredsof thousandsof refugeeshaveflown toneighbouringcountries. In syria,humanitarianfoodassistanceagencieshavebeenassistingIraqirefugeessince2006.Mostofthemresideinurbanareas,particularlyinthecapitalDamascus.Forthesegroups,self-targetinghasbeendeemedeffective,sincedistributioncentresarelocatedintheoutskirtsofthecity,andwhilstagencieshavemadeallnecessaryarrangementstofacilitateaccessandtopreservethedignityofrefugees,thewholeprocesstakeshalfadayandiscumbersome.Peoplewaitseatedinalargehangarthatisheatedinthewinter,allthelogisticshasbeenarrangedfortherefugeestoreturnhomewiththeirrationandnon-fooditems,andspecialarrangementshavebeenmadeforhandicappedandoldpersons.Howeverduetotimeconstraints,andtheopportunitycostofattendingdistributions,wealthierrefugeesdonotbotherspendingtheirmorningatthedistributionpoint.A25%no-showratetothedistributionwasconfirmedin2009,andmorethan25,000refugeesdidnotcometotwodistributionsinarow.Theseno-showshavebeenassessedtobethelessneedyrefugees.

Considerationsofhowtotargetalsoneedtobebalancedbyconsiderationsofwhentotarget.InEthiopia,anidentifiedweakness in thenationalTargetedSupplementaryFeedingprogrammewas thatanthropometric targetingwasusuallydone in advance of the hunger gap, so that childrenwhobecamemalnourished as the lean season progressed couldnotaccessassistance.Thiswasaddressedbyincreasingthefrequencyofthescreeningandtargetingexerciseinhighlyvulnerableareas.

Kenya, Turkana, Beneficiary registration, Photo credit: VSF B

In addition to determining “who” should receive assistance,and“where”,dueconsiderationshouldbegiventothetimingof humanitarian food assistance actions (“when” and “forhow long”) to ensure that they are implementedwhen theyaremost needed, andwhen they can havemost impact anddo least harm. Needs-based programme design should thenensureoptimalappropriatenessof“what”and“howmuch”33 isprovided,intermsofboththenatureofthetransferitself(eg

33 Maxwell et al, “Emergency Food Security Interventions”,December,2008

the ration composition, the amount of cash required34, or the cash-in-kindratio),andthequantity(egtherationsize,orthecash value).

The Commission’s partners should involve beneficiarycommunities in identifying the criteria by which food-assistancecanbemosteffectivelytargeted,whereverpossible.

34 In turn requiringclose assessmentof commoditypriceson localmarkets.

32

4.4. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)

In accordance with policy lines laid down in theCommunication on Humanitarian Food Assistance (section 5.3,para2)wheretheeffectivenessandimpactofemergencyassistance is not compromised, humanitarian food assistance shouldconsidersimultaneousopportunitiestoreinforcecrisis-affected communities’ resilience to future disasters, and to protect or strengthen their existing capacities to meet theirownfoodneeds,aswellasthecapacitiesofnationalsystemsto sustainably promote and maintain food-security. Morefundamentally,EU’shumanitarianfoodassistancewillseektoavoidunderminingcommunityresilienceandcopingcapacity.

In this regard, the EU’s humanitarian food assistance should aim for:

(a) incorporation of disaster-risk analysis in all foodassistance assessments (for example, assessing theriskoffloodingonlandtobecultivatedusingseedsand tools provided as humanitarian food assistance);

(b) short-term reinforcement of early-warning systems,particularly to incorporate an appropriate range ofindicators related to emergency food-insecurityand acute malnutrition, and linking these systemsto rapid preparedness and mitigation (for instance, looking beyond agricultural production figures forfood availability, and analysing food price trends,or changes in thewage-labourmarkets, as possibleindicators of the poorest populations’ diminishing access to food);

(c) systematic respect of the “do no harm” principleso as to make sure that a response to one crisis does not increase beneficiaries’ risk-exposure andvulnerability to other crises (for instance ensuringthat food distributions do not lead to overcrowdedsettlementarounddistributionpoints,promotingHIVawareness campaigns for food aid transporters) ;

(d) disaster-proofing emergency response interventionstominimize future risks (for instance ensuring thatemergencyfoodstoragefacilitiesarestrongenoughtowithstandextremeclimaticconditions);

(e) developingcapacitiesforpreparednessandbuildingresilience during the response and recovery stages(forinstancebypromotingdisasterorHIVawarenesswhencommunitiesareassembledatfooddistributionpoints, or “building back better”, for instance byensuring improved flood protection for previouslyfloodedagriculturalland).

33

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 9: “rIsk reduCTIon In food assIsTanCe”

Duringtheevolvingdroughtbetweenend-2008andmid-2009inkenya, EU humanitarian assistance supported three roundsoflivestockde-stockinginTurkana,toreducetheriskoffurtherdeteriorationintheshort-termandmid-termfoodsecuritysituation.

Drought leads to less water, less pasture and heightened risk of disease in animals, which in turn has a severe negative impactonthebodyconditionoflivestock.Thisdeteriorationthenimpactsnegativelyonthefoodsecurityofherders.Thediminishedconditionoftheiranimals(lessweight,lowerqualityofmeat)andthehighernumberofanimalsonthemarket(asherderstrytosellthembeforetheydeterioratefurther)leadstoadramaticfallinanimalprices,whilst,atthesametime,scarcityhikesthepriceofstaplefoods(egcereals,rice)andwater.Suchpoortermsoftradeforpastoralistsforcesthemtosellmoreandmoreoftheirlivestockassetsjusttosurvive.Shouldthedroughtcontinue,livestockdeathsdepletetheherders’assetbasewithnoshort-ormid-termreturn.Short-termfoodconsumptionisseriouslycompromised,andmid-termlivelihoodcapacitycanbeseverelydepleted,heighteningherders’vulnerabilitytofuturecrises.

Byfacilitatingpre-emptivedestocking,andcreatingademandforanimalswhentheyarestillinaconditiontocommandareasonableprice,theimpactofdroughtonshort-termfood-securityandlonger-termlivelihoodscanbemitigated.De-stocking in Turkana aimed at:

-providingsomeimmediatecashfortheaffectedpastoralists,inordertocoverbasichouseholdfoodrequirements,butalsotopayforwater,fodderandveterinaryservicestomaintaintheirremaininglivestockholdings;

-increasingthepossibilityforherderstorecoverfromtheirlossesbythemselves,usingcashfromde-stockingforre-stocking once the drought is over;

-reducingthesizeofherdsandthusthepressureonnaturalresourcessoastoprolongtheavailabilityofremainingwaterand pasture.

Furthermore,meatfromslaughteredanimalsgatheredduringtheemergencydestockingcanbetargetedandredistributedto nutritionally vulnerable children, as a short-term, small but high-protein complement to rations and commoditiesreceived through other nutritional or general feeding programmes.

Kenya, Turkana, Emergency destocking of animals, Photo credit: ECHO/Martin Karimi, 2009

The Commission will advocate for routine support to DRR initiatives to be integrated into the risk-reduction agenda ofdevelopmentactors,butwillalsoensurethatitsowndisaster-

mitigationwork,andanyshort-term,emergencyreinforcement,pilotingorscaling-upofDRRinitiativesthatitundertakes,arecoordinatedcarefullywiththem.

34

4.5. Capacity Building

Identifying challenging capacity gaps in the humanitariansystem35,theCommissionwillcontributetostrengtheningthecapacity of its’ humanitarian partners to design, deliver andcoordinate more varied, effective and appropriate forms of food assistance. In this regard, the Commission’s humanitarian food assistance should support:

(a) the development of methodologies to assess and select themost appropriate responseoptions in anygivencontext;

(b) capacitating managerial staff tasked with implementing varied forms of food assistance (such as cash and vouchers);

35 See Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance, section 5.3, para 3

(c) supporting sectoral coordination efforts in the food sector;

(d) strengthening monitoring and evaluation capacities (including identification of outcome indicators andestablishing baselines) to ensure that actors workcollectively to measure, document and disseminatebest practice, and integrate lessons learnt intohumanitarian operations;

(e) developing the capacities for nutritional surveillance, nutritional surveys, and cross-sectoral causalitystudies and assessments, and formulating assistance ofanappropriatenutritionalqualitythatisadaptedtotheneedsofspecificgroups.

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 10: “CaPaCITy buIldIng for ImProved IdenTIfICaTIon and assessmenT of need”

EU humanitarian funding has been used to supportthe development and roll-out of the Integrated FoodSecurity Phase Classification (ipC) system. Toeffectively address food insecurity in humanitariancrises,itiscrucialtoclearlyassesseachfoodinsecuritysituation,determineitslevelofseverity,identifycausesandprovidetoolsfordecision-makers.Therearemanyinformation systems and analysis tools that try to dothis.ButtheIPCisparticularlyinnovative.Originallydeveloped in 2004 for use in Somalia, the IPC is a tool forclassifyingtheseverityoffoodsecuritysituations,using a common classification scale. It summarises agreat deal of information, and triangulates it to determine theFoodSecurityPhase.Thisassistsdecisionmakingbymakingitpossibletocompareacrosscountriesandperiods,andmakesanalystsaccountableforconclusionsand recommendations through a transparent analysis.TheIPCisevolvingasitisappliedindifferentcontexts.WhiletheIPCissofarprimarilyananalyticaltoolanda help for decision makers, it also has the potential to becomeaprogrammingtoolbyhighlightingthe“red”areaswheretransitoryfoodinsecurityisthemostsevere.However, one risk associatedwith the IPC is that bygeneralizingthefoodsecuritystatusinageographicalarea, it may lead to the exclusion of food insecuregroups within general food secure areas.

"/

!.

!. !.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

¹#¹#

#̧

#̧#̧

¹#

¹#

#̧#̧

¹##̧

¹##̧

¹#

¹#

¹#¹#

¹#

¹# ¹#

¹#

¹#

KEN

YA

MOGADISHU

BARI

BAY

MUDUG

SANAG

GEDO

SOOL

L. JUBA

HIIRAN

GALGADUD

NUGAL

BAKOOL

TOGDHEER

M. JUBA

W. GALBEED

AWDAL

L. SHABELLE

M. SHABELLE

BANADIR

Hobyo

Eyl

Afmadow

Burco

Qardho

Ceerigaabo

Talex

Galkacyo

Luuq

Iskushuban

Ceel Bur

Bur Hakaba

Hargeysa

Dinsor

Bulo Barde

Xudun

Jariiban

Baardheere

Berbera

Baydhaba

Jilib

Burtinle

Sakow

Ceel Afweyne

Beled Weyne

Garowe

Kismayo

Zeylac

Caynabo

Qandala

Xudur

Dhusa Mareeb

Ceel Dheere

Cadale

Ceel Waq

Sablale

Laas Caanood

Bossaaso

Baki

Bu'aale

Calula

Cadaado

Garbaharey

Ceel Barde

Jowhar

Balcad

Wajid

Jalalaqsi

Badhadhe

Bandar BeylaOwdweyne

Taye

glow

Las Qoray/Badhan

Buuhoodle

Gebiley

Brava

Afgoye

Cabudwaaq

Sheikh

Wanle Weyne

Harardheere

Borama

Lughaye

Aden Yabal

Qoryoley

Bele

d Ha

wa

Dolo

Rab-Dhuure

Jamaame

Qansax Dheere

Goldogob

MarkaKurtun Warrey

HUDUR

BURAO

BAIDOA

JOWHAR

GAROWE

BORAMA

BU'AALE

GALKAYO

BOSSASO

ERIGABO

KISMAAYO

LAS ANOD

HARGEYSA

DUSAMAREB

GARBAHAREY

BELET WEYNE

±0 30 60 90 120 15015

Kilometers

SOMALIA INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY PHASE CLASSIFICATIONRural, Urban and IDP Populations: January - July 2010

Livelihood systemWealth groupGender

iiiiii

Confidence Level of Analysis

Criteria for Social Targeting

Post State ConflictEnvironmental DegradationSocial Marginalization

Key Underlying CausesABC

Population in Phase (Includes High Risk)

Defining Attributes of CrisisAreas in Phase 3, 4 or 5

Recurrence of Crisis in Past 10 yrs

Low(1-2yrs), Moderate(3-4), High (>= 5)

Mag

nitu

deDe

pth

Who

Why

Freq

uenc

y

DroughtFloodsTsunamiCivil InsecurityMarket DisruptionsDisease OutbreaksPopulation InfluxInflationWater Shortages

Key Immediate Causesabcdefghi

Conf

iden

ce

Percent of Total population in respective phase

0-100,000 >500,000101,000-500,000-100%

-0%

-0%

-100%

-0%

-100%

-0%

-100%

-0%

-100%

-0% -100%a, d, e, h, iA, B, C

i, ii, iii

High/ Low* * *

i, ii, iiia, d, e, g, h, i

-100%

-0%

A, B, CHigh/ Low

* * *

i, ii, iiia, d, e, f, g, h, i

A, B, CLow* * *

Urban:

Urban:

Urban:

* Low * * ** * HighMedium

-100%

-0%

i, ii, iiia, e, g, h, i

A, B, CLow* * *

IDP:

i, ii, iiia, d, e, f, g, h, i

A, B, CMod/High

* * *

Rural:

i, ii, iiia, d, e, g, h, i

A, BHigh/ Low

Urban:

67,000

130,000

-100%

-0%

i, ii, iiia, d, e, f, g, h, i

A, B,CHigh/ Low

* *

Rural:

Rural: 185,000

Rural:

i, ii, iiia, d, g, h, i

A, BLow

* * *

Rural: 40,000Urban: 130,000

Rural:

Urban:

Rural:

Urban:105,000

60,00030,000

100,00050,000

170,00030,000

410,00065,000

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

l

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

l

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

l

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

l

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

l

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

lU

rban

Rur

alTo

tal

Urb

anR

ural

Tota

l

Rural: 260,000

IDP: 34,000

IDP: 219,000

IDP: 880,000

0Urban:15,000IDP: 33,000

IDP: 66,000

IDP: 46,000

IDP: 51,000

P.O. Box 1230 Village Market, Nairobi, Kenya Email: fsauinfo@fsnau.org tel: 254-20-4000000 fax:254-20-4000555FSNAU is managed by FAO

The boundaries and names on these maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.The regional & District boundaries reflect those endorsed by the Government of the Republic of Somalia in 1986.

Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit - Somalia http://www.fsnau.org

NOTES:1. Estimated populations do not include IDP, and are rounded to the nearest 5,0002. For category explanations see http://www.fsausomali.org

Current or Imminent Phase

Projected TrendImproving Situation

No Change

Worsening Situation

Mixed Situation

Urban Populations in Humanitarian Emergency and Acute Food and Livelihood Crisis##

* * *

1B Generally Food Secure

5 Famine/Humanitarian Catastrophe

4 Humanitarian Emergency

3 Acute Food and Livelihood Crisis

2 Borderline Food Insecure

1A Generally Food Secure

Undefined Livelihoods Requiring Further Analysis

..Watch

Moderate Risk

High Risk

Risk of Worsening Phase

Coloured diagonal lines indicate magnitude only

Black lines indicate worsening shift in Phase

Example of IPC Food Security Classification map, Credit: FSNAU, 2010

35

5. CoordInaTIon and advoCaCy

5.1. Coordination, Coherence and Complementarity

With a broader range of concerns, and with responsesthat are more inter-related with the development agenda,the Commission’s shift to a humanitarian food assistance orientation from a food aid orientation implies an even greater responsibility to coordinate its work carefully with others.To promote coordination, coherence36 and complementarity,the Commission will ensure, as far as possible, that short-termandlonger-termfoodsecurityneedsareaddressedinanintegratedandarticulatedway topreventgaps in assistance,topreventduplication,toensurecontinuity,andtomaximisesustainability.Todothis,closecoordinationwillbepromotedwith other international donors, and national actors, delivering foodassistanceandsupportforfoodsecurity(inlinewiththeParis Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action).

Itisincreasinglyunderstoodthatchronicfoodinsecurityandemergencyfoodornutritionneedsarisingfromtransientfoodinsecurity areoften interlinkedandover-layered.This raisessignificantchallengestodefiningentry-andexit-points,andtoestablishingboundaries,aswellassynergies,betweenvariousresponse agencies and actors with different mandates. It is thereforeessentialtoconsiderthemeansbywhichthevariousinstitutions working in the food assistance sector can work together most effectively, whilst respecting their mandatesand avoiding either duplicating or undermining each other, or leaving unmet gaps.

As stated in the Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance (section 5.3, para 5), “effective integration ofhumanitarian and development assistance will be promotedthroughLinkingReliefwithRehabilitationandDevelopment(LRRD), ensuring that the international aid system operatesconsistently, coherently and transparently to address hungerandvulnerability”.Thisshould“spanemergency,transitionaland developmental needs simultaneously, and shouldpromote enabling conditions linked to goodgovernance andconducive national and international policies (e.g. for trade andmigration)”.

LRRDshouldbepursuedtotheendofensuringoptimalimpactforsharedbeneficiaries,andnotsolelytoprovidehumanitarianactors with a handover- / exit-strategy.Accordingly, LRRDshouldbeundertaken througheffective cooperationbetweenthe Commission and all development actors, including national authoritiesandotherdonors, andnot just internallybetweenCommission services.

36 However,itshouldberecognisedthatDGECHOneedstodeliverassistance in a manner that is neutral, impartial and independent , andso full coherencewithpoliciesofotheractors isnotalwayspossible.

The various EU instruments for addressing humanitarian food assistance needs and developmental food security needs inprotracted crises, post crisis situations and situations of chronic foodinsecurity37willthereforebemanagedinacoherentandcoordinatedmanner.Specifically,humanitarianfoodassistanceinterventionsshouldalwaysbedesignedandimplementedinclosecoordinationwiththeCommission’scountryandregionalsupport strategies,asdefined in theCountryStrategyPapers(CSPs), National Indicative Programmes (NIPs) and Regional Indicative Programmes (RIPs). The Commission will promote jointworkingbetweenhumanitariananddevelopmentactorsthroughtheentireprojectcycle,especiallythroughjointneedsassessments,andjointprogrammingexercises.

37 SeeAnnexC

36

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 11: “lrrd In aCTIon”

Lessons learned from the 2005 niger food crisis and in particular the need to articulate humanitarian food assistance with developmentfoodsecuritypoliciesleadtotheCommissionadoptingastrategybasedontheLRRDframeworktofightunder-nutritionacrossthesahel regionin2007.Under-nutritionintheSahelkills300,000childrenunder-5yearsofageeveryyear(UNICEF).Increasinglyerraticrains,persistentlyhighfoodpricesandpoliticalandsecurityinstabilityhavecombinedwithverylowlevelsofeconomicandsocialdevelopmentandpoorgovernancetocreatea“perfectstorm”ofconjuncturesdrivinghighlevelsofacuteunder-nutritionandconsequentextremelyhighlevelsofinfantandmaternalmortality.

The responsestrategy isbasedupon3pillars:1)expanding theknowledgebaseand improvingunderstandingof themulti-sectoralcausesofunder-nutrition,2)supportinginnovativeandreplicablepilotactionstorespondtounder-nutritionand3)undertakingconstantadvocacytoraiseawarenessaboutthedamagedonebyunder-nutrition,andsoencouragegovernmentsanddevelopmentpartnerstoplaceitonthedevelopmentagenda.TherewasclosecoordinationbetweenCommissionhumanitariananddevelopmentservicesinthedesignofthestrategy.

Over€100millionhasalreadybeencommittedbytheCommissiontoimplementthisstrategysince2007.Initially5Sahelstates(BurkinaFaso,Chad,Mali,MauritaniaandNiger)wereprioritised.AllhadGlobalAcuteMalnutritionratesabovethe alert threshold.

Working through itsNGO,UNandRedCrosspartners, theCommissionhas fundedawide rangeof activities frommethodstoimproveandcarryoutmoreaccuratenutritionalsurveystotheexpandeduseanddevelopmentofappropriatefoodstotreatunder-nutrition,tothepromotionofsubsidisedaccesstobasichealthservicesforthemostvulnerableandtoadvocacytoplacenutritionalsecurityasastrategicobjectiveinsectorprioritiesonthedevelopmentagenda.

Progresshasbeenmade.MostSahelgovernmentshaveupgradedthestatusofthenutritiondepartmentsintheMinistriesofHealthandhavestartedtocommitconsiderablenationalresourcestothefightagainstunder-nutrition,andtoincreaseaccess to basic health services.Amajor effort to engage development agencies in a dialogue on nutrition issues isshowing results.TheCommission has promoted a joint-working orientation between humanitarian and developmentactors,undertakingneedsassessmentstogether,andinvolvingeachotherinprogrammingprocesses.Under-nutrition,anditslong-termimpact,isincreasinglymentionedindevelopmentstrategies(theCommission’sCountryStrategyPapersfor mali and Burkina fasonowhave“nutritionsecurity”asastrategicobjective).ConsiderableadditionalfinancialcommitmentshavesincebeenprovidedthroughtheEUFoodFacilityandtheEuropeanDevelopmentFund,aswellasfromtheWorldBankthroughbudgetsupportoperationswithSahelgovernments.Thesehavealltakenforwardinitiativesstarted under EU humanitarian funding.

Niger, Promotion of nutritional awareness, Nutritional centre, Photo credit: ECHO/Gilles Collard, 2006

37

At policy-level, the Commission will strive to ensure fullcoherence and complementarity between its humanitarianfood assistance policy, other EU humanitarian policies andguidelines, and related development policy frameworks,particularly those focusingon food-security,nutrition, socialtransfers,socialprotection,anddisaster-riskreduction.

The Commission will continue to coordinate with EU MemberStatesonhumanitarianfoodassistanceissuesintheCouncilWorkingGrouponHumanitarianAidandFoodAid(COHAFA).

Coordination and cooperation with EU Member States andothermajorhumanitariandonorswillalsobemaximisedatalllevels toensure thatfinancingdecisionscanbemadeon thebasisofactual,unmetneeds,factoringinallanticipatedfundingand expected assistance strategies provided by other donorsand actors. In pursuit ofwell-coordinated strategies, aswellin the spirit of good humanitarian donorship, the Commission willparticipateactivelywithinjointdonorfora,initiativesandexercises(includingneeds-assessmentsandevaluations).

The Commission encourages the full participation of its humanitarian food assistance partners in “inclusive, sector-specific, operational coordination forums at field level.Thisincludesclosecoordinationwithrelevantandviablenationalandlocalhumanitarianactors”.AsstatedintheCommunicationon Humanitarian FoodAssistance (section 5.3, para 6), theCommission “supports the idea of inclusive coordinationunderstrongandcapacitatedleadership.Withintheframeworkof UN and Humanitarian Reform, the Commission endorses the cluster approach to coordination, and supports all efforts tomakeitworkeffectivelyforthefoodandnutritionsectors.”

5.2. Advocacy

Globally,themajorityofpeoplefacingfood-insecurityarenotaffectedbyhumanitariancrises,nordotheyresideincontextswhere the EU’s humanitarian instruments have a comparative advantage for direct intervention. For the majority, food-insecurity, and related under-nutrition, are a consequence ofstructuralcauses,includingpoverty,lowincomes,inadequatehealth and sanitation conditions, poor infrastructure, lack of education and the lack of empowerment of women. In these situations the solutions are primarily developmental38.Those whoarealready food insecurearemorevulnerable to futurecrisesandmorelikelytorequirefuturehumanitarianassistance.Increasinglevelsofchronicfoodinsecurity,ifunchecked,willmultiplythedemandsonlimitedhumanitarianresources.

Given limited progress in reducing global levels of foodinsecurity,theCommissionhasanobligationandanoperationalrequirementtoadvocateonbehalfofthechronicallypoorandfood insecure.

38 See section 5.1 of the Commission’s Communication on Humanitarian Food Assistance

In the first instance, as iterated in the Humanitarian FoodAssistance Communication (section 5.3, para 4) “advocacywill be directed to state actors to fulfil their fundamentalresponsibility in safe-guarding the food-security of theirpeople. Advocacy will also be directed at developmentactors (includinggovernments) specifically in relation to thedevelopmental needs of populations in crisis contexts”.TheCommunicationalsostatesthat“advocacyshouldfurtherarguefor an effective integration of humanitarian and development assistance through LRRD, ensuring that the international aid systemoperatesconsistently, coherentlyand transparently toaddresshungerandvulnerability.Thisshouldspanemergency,transitional and developmental needs simultaneously, andshouldpromoteenablingconditionslinkedtogoodgovernanceand conducive national and international policies (e.g. for trade andmigration)”.

TheCommissionwillalsocontributetotheEUframingaglobalagenda,andadvocatingforactionagainsthungerandunder-nutrition in collaboration with other international partners. This includesadvocating for themostefficientandeffectiveuse of resources, including the use of varied food assistance responseoptions,accordingtotheneeds.Sincetiedfood-aidis often deemed to compromise efficiency, appropriatenessand effectiveness39, this, in turn, implies advocacy to securethecompleteuntyingoffoodaid,inlinewiththeEUpositionwithintheDoharoundoftheWorldTradeOrganisation(WTO)trade talks. It also includes advocating for chronic needs in stable contexts to be met with predictable, multi-annualresources (and not, by implication, humanitarian resources)delivered preferably through national government-led socialprotectionandsafetynetprogrammes,throughexpandedruraldevelopmentandpovertyreductionactions,or throughotherlong-termactionsaimedatreducingchronicmalnutrition.

WhiletheEUallocatesitshumanitarianresourcesonthebasisofneed,andnotonthebasisofpredeterminedcommitments,some of the humanitarian food assistance resources that it provides contribute to, and are reported against, theCommission’s portion of the EU commitment under the Food Aid Convention (FAC). The Commission will advocate for the FAC to promote the most effective and appropriate use of resourcesdisbursedfromwithinFACcommitments,accordingtotheneedsofthemostvulnerable,inlinewithhumanitarianprinciplesandbesthumanitarianfoodassistancepractice,andinawaythatiscoherentwithitsownpolicyframework.Inthisregard, review and possible renegotiation and reform of theFACfromitscurrentform(whichisanextensionofthe1999Convention)isbeingundertakenbytheCommission.

39 Forinstancebydeliveringfoodcommoditiesthatareincompatiblewith local dietary preferences, or by incurring excessively longlead-timesforinternationalprocessing,transportationanddelivery.

38

oPeraTIonal Case-sTudy 12: “WorkIng WITH sTaTes”

Acrosshillyregionsofs asia,thebi-centennialfloweringofbamboocanleadtoamassiveandsuddenincreaseintherodent population with devastating impact as rats consume crops and food stocks. In 2007, in India’s northeastern state of Mizoram,aroundamillionpeoplewereaffectedbyacutefoodshortagesasratsateuptheentirepaddycrop,andfarmersvirtuallystoppedagriculturalactivityintheknowledgethatallproductionwouldsimplybelost.

Recognising the scaleof emergency, the stategovernment. declaredMizorama ‘disaster area’ and respondedwith amulti-sectoralresponseprogrammeaswellasrequestingthescalingupofexistingcentrallysponsoredschemessuchaspublicdistributionofsubsidisedrice(PDS),andemploymentcreationthroughlabourintensivepublicworks(NREGS).However,assessmentsbyDGECHO’spartnersconfirmedthatduetovariousfactorsincludingweakgovernanceandthechallengesinvolvedwithimplementationinverypoorandremoteareas,manyhouseholdsweresurvivingsolelyonavailablewildfoods,whilehavingnochoicebuttoselloffproductiveassetsandaccumulateheavydebts.

In response to the prevailing crisis, with EU humanitarian support, three agencies targeted the hardest hit districts of the Statewithbasicfoodassistanceintheformofcash,grain,seedsandlivestock,toensurethatlivesweresavedandthemosturgenthumanitarianneedsmet.Inrecognitionoftheextenttowhichneedsweredeterminedbygapsinthegovernmentresponse capacity, as the response unfolded partners increasingly strove to coordinate around a basic awareness andadvocacystrategysothatthegovernment’sresponsecouldbemademoreeffective.

Buildingoncommunityleveldataregardingtherelevanceandeffectivenessofpublicassistancereceived,theaimwasbothtoensurethatcommunitiesbetterunderstoodtheirentitlements,whilegovernmentstakeholdersasvariouslevelswereinabetterpositiontolearnfromexperienceandstrengthentheirresponsivenessandaccountability.Activitiesincludedcommunitylevelawarenesssessions,capacitybuildingandtrainingworkshopsforgovernmentstaffandgovernment/interagency/civilsocietyinteractionatstateleveltofacilitatepolicydialogue.

Thissmallbutneverthelesssignificantcomponentoftheoverallemergencyresponsehighlightedthevaluableopportunitiesforawareness-buildingandadvocacywithstateactorsthatexistinmanyemergencycontexts.

Bangladesh, Pathuakali district, Beneficiaries of Government food distribution, Photo credit: ECHO/Olivier Brouant, 2007

39

anneXes

40

annex a: glossary

humanitarian crisis A humanitarian crisis is an event or series of events which representsacriticalthreattothehealth,safety,securityorwellbeingofacommunityorotherlargegroupofpeople,usuallyoverawidearea. A humanitarian crisis can have natural or manmade causes, can have a rapid or slow onset and can be of short or protractedduration.

food crisis A humanitarian crisis arising from inadequate food consumption, poor food utilisation or high prevalence of acute malnutrition.

food assistance Any interventiondesigned to tackle food insecurity, its immediatecauses,anditsvariousnegativeconsequences.Foodassistancemayinvolve thedirectprovisionof food,butmayutilizeawider rangeof tools, including the transfer or provision of relevant services, inputs or commodities, cash or vouchers, skills or knowledge.

humanitarian food assistance

Food Assistance provided to assist victims of humanitarian crises.

food aid Assistance in the form of food commodities, or in the form of financing that supports the centralisedprocurementanddistributionoffoodtobeneficiaries.

food security Whenallpeople,atalltimes,havephysicalandeconomicaccesstosufficient, safe and nutritious food thatmeetstheirdietaryneedsandfood preferences for an active and healthy life. (World FoodSummit,1996)

food access Theextent towhich resourcescanbeused toobtainadequate andappropriate foods for a nutritious diet.Dependsonincomeavailableto the household, on the distribution of income within thehousehold, and on the price of food.

food availability The extent to which sufficient quantities of adequate andappropriate food canbe secured from household production, other domestic output, commercial imports or food aid.

food consumption The act of transferring food commodities, and the nutrients within them,tothebody.

41

food utilisation The physical use of food by an individual prior to consumption(including storage, and processing), andthebody’sbiologicaluseoffood, its energy and its micronutrients, after consumption.Determinants of food utilisation are as diverse as access to water and adequate sanitation, access to cooking utensils, health status and diseaseburden,aswellasknowledgewithinthehouseholdoffoodstorage,basicprinciplesofnutrition,andproperchildcareandchildfeeding practices.

hunger Anuncomfortableorpainful sensationcausedby insufficient foodintake, specifically to insufficient food energy consumption.Scientifically,hungerisreferred to as food deprivation.

Vulnerability Vulnerabilitycomprisesthecharacteristics of population groups that makethemmoreorlesssusceptibletoexperiencing,stress,harmordamagewhenexposedtoparticularhazards.

Thereforethosewhoarevulnerableto food insecuritymaycurrentlybe able to maintain an acceptable food intake, but are at risk ofbecomingfoodinsecureinthefutureifexposedtoashock.

Chronic food insecurity

Apersistentinabilitytoaccessadequate food and nutritional intake, eitheronaconstantbasisoronaperiodicseasonalbasis.(Maxwell,D. et al. 2008, see References). Chronic hunger and malnutrition are associated with, amongst other factors, structural poverty, lowincomes, inadequate health and sanitation conditions, lack of education and the lack of empowerment of women.

transient food insecurity

Periodsofintensifiedpressurecausedbyaspecificshockincluding;natural disasters, economic collapse, governance failures or conflict. It implies a precipitous decline in access and consumption against baselineconditions. (Maxwell,D. et al. 2008).Suchadeclinecanbe sudden (e.g. following a natural disaster) or gradual (e.g. in protracted crises).

malnutrition Malnutrition results from deficiencies, excesses or imbalances ofenergy,proteinandothernutrients.

The vast majority of malnourished individuals in the developingworldexperienceunder-nutrition (adeficiencyofenergy,proteins,or vitamins and minerals) as opposed to over-nutrition(anexcessofcertain food components such as saturated fats and added sugars in combinationwithlowlevelsofphysicalactivity,normallyresultinginobesity).

42

acute malnutrition Acute malnutrition, with its main characteristic of wasting, occurs as a result of rapid weight loss or a failure to gain weight within a relativelyshortperiodoftime.Recoveryfromwastingisrelativelyquick once optimal feeding, health and care are restored.Wastingresults from short-term but usually critical deficiencies inmacronutrients (fat, carbohydrate and protein) and micronutrients(vitamins and minerals), and is often linked to disease. Usuallydivided into moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) and severe acute malnutrition (SAM), which combine as global acute malnutrition(GAM).40

Chronic malnutrition Chronic malnutrition, with its main characteristic of stunting, is a slow, cumulative process, resulting from sustained, but sometimessubtlenutrientandmicro-nutrientdeficiencies.Stuntingisafailureto grow in stature, and occurs as a result of inadequate nutrition over a longer time period, which is why it is also referred to aschronic malnutrition. Stunting is not a good indicator of growth failure in emergencies as it does not reflect recent changes and requiresalong-termresponse.41

adequate food consumption

An ultimate determinant of 'food-security', adequate foodconsumption is defined, for humanitarian purposes, as the bodilyintakeofsufficientfood(intermsofquantityandquality)toavoidexcessive (in absolute and relative terms) mortality, acutemalnutrition,orotherlife-threateningeffectsandconsequences(e.g.stress migration).

humanitarian risk The probability of a life-threatening humanitarian crisisdeveloping. The specific risk of transient food-insecurity,malnutrition or compromised livelihoods may be assessed andmeasured by indicators reflecting food access, availability andutilisation (e.g. food prices, food consumption patterns, meal frequencies, expenditure patterns, climate forecasts, copingbehavioursetc.)andrelatedtrendanalysis.

Comparative advantage

Forthecontextofthispaper,thisreferstotherelativeabilityofoneactor toefficientlyandeffectivelymeetadefined setofneeds,onthebasisoftheirmandateandoperationalparameters,comparedtoanother actor.

relief-development continuum

A situation where there is a linear consecutive transition from emergencyneedstorecoveryneedstodevelopmentneeds.

relief-development contiguum

Asituationwhereemergency,recoveryanddevelopmentneedsco-existsimultaneously.

40 HelenYoung,SusanneJaspers: "The Meaning and Measurement of Acute Malnutrition in Emergencies – A Primer forDecision-Makers":November,2006

41 Idem

43

annex B: acronyms

ACP African,CaribbeanandPacificStates

BSFP BlanketSupplementaryFeedingProgramme

CFW CashForWork

CMAM Community-BasedManagementofAcuteMalnutrition

COHAFA CouncilWorkingGrouponHumanitarianAidandFoodAid

CSP CountryStrategyPaper

DCI Development Cooperation Instrument

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

DG ECHO Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid

EDF European Development Fund

ENPI EuropeanNeighbourhoodandPartnershipInstrument

EU European Union

FAC Food Aid Convention

FAFA Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement

FAO FoodandAgricultureOrganization

FPA Framework Partnership Agreement

FSTP FoodSecurityThematicProgramme

GAM GlobalAcuteMalnutrition

GFD GeneralFoodDistribution

GMO GeneticallyModifiedOrganism

HIV/AIDS HumanImmunodeficiencyVirus/AcquiredImmuneDeficiencySyndrome

ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross

IDPs InternallyDisplacedPersons

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IfS InstrumentforStability

LRRD Linking Relief, RehabilitationandDevelopment

MAM Moderate Acute Malnutrition

44

MCH Maternal and Child Health

MDG Millennium Development Goals

NGO Non Governmental Organisation

NIP National Indicative Programme

OCT Overseas Countries and Territories

OTP Outpatient Therapeutic Programme

RIP Regional Indicative Programme

RUF ReadytoUsetherapeuticFood

SAM Severe Acute Malnutrition

SC StabilizationCentre

TFC Therapeutic Feeding Centre

UNHCR United Nations High Commission for Refugees

UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund

WASH Water,SanitationandHygiene

WFP WorldFoodProgramme

WHO WorldHealthOrganization

WTO WorldTradeOrganization

45

annex C: the eu’s non-humanitarian instruments and programmes for addressing developmental food assistance and food security needs.

instrument for stability (ifs):

Regulation(EC)No1717/2006of15November2006establishedtheIfS, implementedthroughDGRELEX. The purpose is to deliver an effective, immediate, and integrated response to crises and instability through a single financing instrument, until programming under one of the general instruments for cooperation and assistance can resume. The instrument is thus seen as a transitorymeasurebeforenormalcooperationcanresumethrough one of the geographic instruments. Through its emergency response component, the IfS is a rapid and flexible tool at the disposal of theCommission to prevent conflict, support post-conflict political stabilisation and to ensure earlyrecoveryafteranaturaldisaster.WhilsttheIfSdoesnotdirectlyprovidehumanitarianfoodassistancein emergency situations, EU-funded humanitarian food assistance strategies should be coherentlyalignedwithactivitiesfundedundertheemergencyresponsephaseoftheIfS.

development Cooperation instrument (dCi)

TheDCI(2007-2013)isthemainEUbudgetfinancinginstrumentfordevelopmentcooperation,andimproves the previous development cooperation frameworkbymergingthedifferentgeographicandthematic instruments into a single instrument. Itsmainobjectives arepoverty reduction, sustainableeconomic and social development and the smooth and gradual integration of developing countries into the world economy, in line with the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) and the EuropeanConsensus on Development.

The DCI is implemented through geographic programmes, which cover Latin America, Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East and South Africa, and through thematic programmes also covering these regions.Inaddition,African,CaribbeanandPacific(ACP),eligibleforgeographicsupportundertheEuropeanDevelopmentFund(EDF),arealsosupportedbytheDCI'sthematicprogrammes.

For the geographic programmes, the Commission draws up a Country Strategy Paper (CSP) and amultiannual indicative programme, and adopts an annualactionprogrammeforeachpartnercountryor region.For thematicprogrammes, it drawsup thematic strategypapers and adopts annual actionprogrammes, which focus on the 5 following areas: investment in human resources; the environment and the sustainable management of natural resources; non-state actors and local authorities;cooperation in theareaofmigrationandasylum;and the improvementof foodsecurity through theFoodSecurityThematicProgramme(FSTP).

food security thematic programme (fstp):

TheFSTPwasestablishedunderthelegalbasisofthe Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) in 2007.TheFSTP'smandate is to address food security in exceptional situationsof transition, and in fragileandfailedstates,whereotherEUfoodsecurityinstrumentsmaynotbeadequateorappropriate.A transition from humanitarian assistance to this type of thematic programme is warranted in thefollowing circumstances:

whereitisdifficulttoagreeonfoodsecuritymeasures with partner governments due to food insecurity being concentrated either in areas not under state control, or among internallydisplaced persons;

46

ifcooperationhasbeensuspendedorno cooperation framework is in place;

"forgotten crises" or "fragile states" in which cooperation with nationalgovernmentsmaybedifficulttoestablishthroughgeographicalinstruments.

The main programmatic pillars of the FSTP are as follows:

Promotingresearchandtechnology

Strengtheninginformationsystemstoimprovefood-securitydecision-making

Supporting continental and regional programmes and approaches

SupportingLRRDfortransitionalcontexts

Promotinginnovativeapproachestocombatfood-insecurity

Advocacyfortheadvancementofthefood-securityagenda

Promoting harmonisation and alignment.

european development fund (edf)

The European Development Fund (EDF) is the main instrument for providing Community aid fordevelopment cooperation in the African,CaribbeanandPacificStates (ACP) and Overseas Countries and Territories (OCT). The tenth EDF, under the (revised) Cotonou Agreement covers the period from 2008to2013andprovidesanoverallbudgetof€22682million.

CountryAllocationsunder theCotonouAgreement contain twocomponents:programmable supportundertheso-calledA-envelope,whichareresourcesprogrammedintheframeworkofacountry'sCSPand NIP, and additional support under the B-envelope, which is an allocation to cover unforeseen needs such as emergency assistance where such support cannot be financed from the EU budget.Under the 10th EDF (2008-2013), ECHO can draw down up to 25%, or more in exceptionalcircumstances, of the envelope to respond to humanitariancrises,whichamountsto€150million.

european neighbourhood policy instrument (enpi):

Since1January2007,EUassistancetothecountriescoveredbytheEuropeanNeighbourhoodPolicy(and the Strategic Partnership with Russia) is provided under the European Neighbourhood andPartnership Instrument (ENPI). This is a much more flexible, policy-driven instrument designed totargetsustainabledevelopmentandapproximation to EU policies and standards.

Under the ENPI, as well as the ENP Governance FacilityandtheNeighbourhoodInvestmentFacility,EU assistance priorities are identified, together with the countries concerned and other relevant actors, ingeneralCountryStrategyPapers(CSPs)covering7yearperiods, National and Regional Indicative Programmes (NIPsandRIPs) covering3years anddetailed annual programmes, which can include foodsecurityresponses.

other instruments:

The EU has also developed time-bound, ad hoc instruments to deal with specific food-relatedproblems. Most notable at the time of drafting is the EU Food Facility, designed to address bothcausesandconsequencesofhighfoodpricesfrom2009to2011,byimprovingagriculturalproduction(for example through distribution of agricultural inputs) and mitigating the impacts of high and volatilepricesthroughsocial-protectionmeasuresandsafety-nets.

AnotherinstrumentwithpossiblerelevancetothefoodsectorincludesthePeaceFacilityestablishedin2003tosupportAfrican-ledpeace-keepingoperations in cooperation with the African Union.

47

annex d: typology of food assistance responses and their appropriateness to different contexts

problem response option Conditions under which response may be appropriate

inadequatefood access and/oravailability

Unconditional Food Transfers (where a basket of foodcommodities constituting a specific calorific value is distributedforfreetohouseholds,eitheronablanketbasis(GeneralFood Distributions GFD), ortargeted according to specific criteria / locations.

Whenasignificantproportionofhouseholdslackaccessto food, and

there is a lack of food availableinlocalmarkets,&

many target households are not able to participate in alabour-basedprojects,eitherduetotheirsocio-economiccharacteristics(eg.elderly)ortheyarefullyemployedintheir usual livelihood activities.

Unconditional ( or “unlinked”)cash transfers42 - as above, butusing cash as an alternative to food commodities.

Wherefoodisavailableinlocalmarketsbuthouseholdslack means to purchase without depleting essential assets, and

the costs of procuring and transporting food to affected area are high, and

mobilisingfoodaidwouldtakealongtime,and

riskofinflationduetoaninjectionofcashislow.

Conditional (or “linked”) foodtransfers (eg. Food For Work(FFW), Food forTraining (FFT),FoodforAssets(FFA)):-whereacertain basket of foodcommoditiesisgiveninexchangeforabeneficiary's timeor labour,often used towards the creation of productive skills or communityassets, either on a blanket basis,ortargeted,orself-targeted.

Households lack access to food, and

foodavailabilityintheareaislimitedinquantityand/orvariety,and;

there is surplus labour and available time in targethouseholds, and

thenecessarynon-foodinputs(materials,equipmentandtechnicalsupervision)canbeassured,and

assets createdwill be properlymaintained after projectcompletion, or following a disaster when there is need forclean-upopsandthepopulationhascapacitytoworkwithout technical supervision.

Conditional (or “linked”) cashtransfers43 (eg Cash for Work(CFW)):-asabove,butusingcashas an alternative to food commodities.

AsforFFWbut;

foodisavailableinthearea,and

theriskofinflationarypressureislow.

42 Please see the DG ECHO guidance note on the use of cash and vouchers for further details on the conditionsthatapply.

43 Please see the DG ECHO guidance note on the use of cash and vouchers for further details on the conditionsthatapply.

48

Unconditional / conditional vouchers (commodity-based orvalue-based):-asabove,butusingvouchers redeemable against aspecific set of commodities or services.

In a situation similar to cash transfer programmes butwhere;

it is important to restrict the use of the resource transfer, and

local retailers are willing to cooperate in the scheme and receivevouchersagainstsubsequentreimbursement.

Emergency livelihood support:-where agricultural/pastoral inputs such as seeds, fertiliser, and tools, or agricultural services such as training or irrigation, or other income-generating activities, orpastoral services such as veterinary care , provision offodder and water , or emergencydestocking or restocking, are provided to boost or protect theshort-term production, orproductive asset base, of crisis-affected populations.

Where targeted households have access to natural resourcesandproductivecapacity,and

thereisalackofavailabilityofproductiveinputsoftherightquality,and

this is limiting production.

Where there is sufficient time to accrue thebenefits ofproduction, and

there are other means of ensuring adequate food consumption until suchbenefitsaccrue.

Complementary activities, such as provision of safe water, sanitation, hygiene education,health services, or public healthinterventions, nutrition education, awareness campaigns for improved child-care and feedingpractices, and road/market infrastructures.

Also,support toemergencyfood-security monitoring, assessmentandearlywarningsystems.

Where beneficiaries receiving assistance to improveaccessandavailabilityoffooddonotbenefitfullyfromthe assistance provided due to ill-health, poor foodconsumption and feeding habits, poor distribution offood at household level, inability to access markets tobuy available food or sell production accruing fromemergencyassistance;

Or where identification of specific individuals or groups facing transient food-insecure , and prioritisation ofgeographic areas, is necessary (ie for targeted asopposedtoblanketfeedinginterventions);

And where all interventions are linked to improved food consumption / food utilisation / nutritional outcomes.

poor food utilization

Milling of cereals. Food preparation and food storage materials. Items required for preparing food, such as cooking sets, cooking fuel and water.

Where beneficiaries are displaced or refugees, or othersituations where their means to prepare food is compromised.

Training and awareness raising on nutrition, dietary management,and feeding practices.

Where malnutrition and hunger is related to poorhygiene,carepracticesandknowledgeofnutrition;

Complementary activities, such as provision of safe water, sanitation, hygiene education,health services, or public healthinterventions.

Where beneficiaries receiving assistance to improveutilisation of food do not benefit fully from theassistance provided due, for instance,toill-health

And where all interventions are linked to improved food consumption / food utilisation / nutritional outcomes.

49

acutemalnutrition

Providing in-patient care foracutely malnourishedchildren/adults with medical complications through:

Facility based TherapeuticFeeding Centre (TFC)/Stabilization Centre (SC).ServicesbeingrenderedatTFCora SC in the hospital/ paediatric wards or through a MCH, or a health post with medical supervision.

Significant numbers or an evident increase in numbersof acutely malnourished individuals (children and/or adults) with medical complications (often severelymalnourished), and

geographically concentrated case-loads warrantestablishingTFCsorSCs,and

trained health staff are available (or can be madeavailable)tosuperviseTFCs/SCs

Providing treatment with therapeutic feeding products (RUTF) and simple routine medical treatment for children/adults with severe acute malnutrition without medical complications through:

Community based therapeuticprogramme or Outpatient Therapeutic Programme (OTP): OTP sites based in particularareas or villages with high malnutrition, or in targeted health posts. The community isempowered to facilitate identification and referral of the malnourished cases to the OTP or the SC, (if showing medical complications), for treatment with therapeutic feeding products.

Significant numbers of severely acutely malnourishedindividual (children and/or adults), or an evident increase in numbers of severely acutely malnourishedindividuals, and

populationsmaybedispersedand/or difficult to access, and

trained health staff are available (or can be madeavailable)toforsupervisionof OTPs in health structures orinthecommunity

Providing dry take home rationsand basic treatment forchildren/adults with moderateacute malnutrition withoutmedical complications through:

Supplementary feedingprogramme – moderate acute malnutrition cases identified in the community or referred fromTFC/SC/OTP are managed here. Often the SFP is attached to a TFC/OTP/SC.

Significantnumbersofmoderatelyacutelymalnourishedindividual (children and/or adults), or an evident increaseinnumbersofmoderatelyacutelymalnourishedindividuals; and

it is possible to identify and target malnourishedindividuals, and

TrainedstaffareavailabletosupervisetheSFPactivities

Blanket nutritional interventions (eg blanket SupplementaryFeeding programmes (BSFP)):-where nutritional commodities are distributed to all individuals of acertain age, in a certain area deemedtobefacingoratriskofanutritional crisis. The main aim is to prevent widespread malnutritionandrelatedmortalityinnutritionallyvulnerablegroups.

Whenglobalacutemalnutritionratesareveryhighandfood availability and quality, through general foodrationsorothersources,areconsideredtobeinadequate,and

if access to an area is difficult and regular on-sitesupervisionisnoteasy,and

duringtheearlystagesofanacutecrisisbeforeareliablepipeline can be established for an adequate general ration, and

treatment of severe acute malnutrition through TFC/SC/OTP would still be required in addition to ablanketfeeding.

50

Provision of micronutrient supplementation (eg Vit A, Vit B, Vit C, Iron, Niacin) or fortification of general foods.

Where rates ofmicronutrient deficiency and associateddiseasesareveryhigh;

andaccessto/availabilityof local or relief food sources containing the requisite micronutrients is compromised;

and products / approaches used are certified as safe and effective.

Complementary activities, such as provision of safe water, sanitation, nutrition and hygieneeducation, health services, or other public health interventions,within nutrition facilities, and at household / community level.Provision of healthcare for malnourished children is a basicrequirement for the treatment of malnutrition.

Also, nutritional screening, surveillanceandsurveys.

Also, provision of protection / take home / family rations forfamilies of malnourished individuals.

Where beneficiaries receiving nutritional care do notbenefit fully from the assistance provided due to ill-health,whichseverelyimpacts on nutritional status.

Orwherepoorfoodconsumptionandfeedinghabitsandpoor distribution of food, or sharing of the nutritionration, at household level;

Orwhereidentificationofspecificmalnourished/at-riskcases, and prioritisation of geographic areas, is necessary (ie for targeted as opposed to blanketnutritional interventions)

And where all interventions are linked to improved food consumption / food utilisation / nutritional outcomes.

51

annex e: Council regulation (eC) no 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid

Article 2

Theprincipalobjectivesofthehumanitarianaidoperations referred to inArticle1shallbe:

(a) to save and preserve life during emergencies and their immediate aftermath and natural disasters thathaveentailedmajorlossoflife,physical,psychological or social suffering or material damage;

(b)toprovidethenecessaryassistanceandrelieftopeopleaffectedbylonger-lastingcrisesarising,inparticular, from outbreaks of fighting or wars, producing the same effects as those described insubparagraph(a),especiallywheretheirowngovernmentsproveunabletohelporthereisavacuumof power;

(c) to help finance the transport of aid and efforts toensurethatitisaccessibletothoseforwhomitisintended,byall logisticalmeansavailable,andbyprotectinghumanitariangoodsandpersonnel,butexcludingoperationswithdefenceimplications;

(d) to carry out short-term rehabilitation and reconstruction work, especially on infrastructure andequipment, in close association with local structures, with a view to facilitating the arrival of relief, preventing the impact of the crisis from worsening and starting to help those affected regain a minimum level of self-sufficiency, taking long-term development objectives into account wherepossible;

(e) to cope with the consequences of population movements (refugees, displaced people and returnees) causedbynaturalandman-madedisastersandcarryoutschemestoassistrepatriationtothecountryoforigin and resettlement there when the conditions laid down in current international agreements are in place;

(f) to ensure preparedness for risks of natural disastersorcomparableexceptionalcircumstancesanduseasuitablerapidearly-warningandinterventionsystem;

(g) to support civil operations to protect the victims of fighting or comparable emergencies, inaccordance with current international agreements.

52

annex f: references

ACFIN (2006) Position Paper on Political Aspects of Food Aid, Policy Paper – Technical andResearchDepartment,June2006

BarrettC.&D.Maxwell(2005)TowardsAGlobalFoodAidCompact,CornellUniversity.

ClayE.,BRiley&I.Urey(2005)AnAssessment of the Developmental Effectiveness of Food Aid and the Effects of its Tying Status, Report to theWorkingGroup onAid effectiveness and Donor Practices, of the DAC. (DCD/DAC/EFF(2004/9) Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD.Paris.

Devereux, S. (2006) Distinguishing between chronic and transitory food insecurity in emergencyneedsassessments.SENAC,WFP,Rome.

Department for International Development (2002) Eliminating Hunger- Strategy for Achieving theMillenniumDevelopmentGoalonHunger,May2002

DepartmentforInternationalDevelopment(2006)Savinglives,relievingsuffering,protectingdignity:DfID'sHumanitarianPolicy,2006.

Dilley M. and Boudreau T.E. (2001) Coming to terms with vulnerability: a critique of the foodsecuritydefinition.FoodPolicy,Volume26,Number3,pp.229-247(19)

European Commission (2001) Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development – An Assessment,COM (2001) 153 final of 23.04.2001

European Commission (2004) Communication from the commission to the council and the European Parliament Financial Perspectives 2007 -2013COM(2004)487final,14.7.2004

EuropeanCommission(2007)Foodsecuritythematicprogrammethematicstrategypaperandmulti-annualindicativeprogramme2007-2010DocumentC/2007/19244.05.2007

FAO (1996) World Food Summit: Rome Declaration and Plan of Action. October 1996.http://www.fao.org/wfs/

FAO(2006)TheStateofFoodInsecurityintheWorld,Rome

GHD (2003) Principles and Good Practice of Humanitarian Donorship. Endorsed in Stockholm, 17 June2003

MaxwellD.etal.(2008)EmergencyFoodSecurityInterventions,CommissionedandPublishedbytheHumanitarian Practice Network at ODI

MaxwellD.etal.(2008)RethinkingFoodSecurityin Humanitarian Response, Paper Presented to the FoodSecurityForumRome,April16-18,2008

OxfamGB(2002)GuidingPrinciplesforResponsetoFoodCrises

53

PARTICIPGmbH(2004)ThematicEvaluationofFoodAidPolicyandFoodAidManagementandSpecialOperationsinSupportofFoodSecurity,July2004.

Sen, A.K. (1981) Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlements and Deprivation. Oxford:Clarendon Press.

Smith L. and Lawrence Haddad (2000) Overcoming Child Malnutrition in Developing Countries: Past Achievements and Future Choices. Food, Agriculture, and the Environment. Discussion Pa per 30. InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstitute,Washington,D.C.,U.S.A.

TefftJ.,McGuireM.andMaunderN.(2006)PlanningfortheFuture.Anassessmentoffoodsecurityearlywarningsystemsinsub-SaharanAfrica.SynthesisReport.FAO,Rome,2006

UNMillenniumProject,TaskForceonHunger(2005) Halving Hunger: It Can Be Done; Achieving the Millennium Development Goals

Welthungerhilfe(2008)TheStruggleAgainstHungerisDeterminedinRuralAreas,PolicyPaperNo2/2008

WFP (2006) Ending Child Hunger and Under-nutrition Initiative: Global Framework for Action,ExecutiveBoardSecondRegularSessionRome,6–10November2006

WFP (2009) Gender Policy- Promoting Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women inAddressing Food and Nutrition Challenges, Presented at Executive Board First Regular Session,Rome,9–11February2009

WFP (2009)WFP Policy on Disaster Risk Reduction, Presented at Executive Board First RegularSession,Rome,9–11February2009

World Bank (1986) Poverty and Hunger: Issues and Options for Food Security in DevelopingCountries.

© European Union, 2010

Humanitarian Aid

Civil Protection