food security and water survey in tafea province€¦ · food security and water survey in tafea...

November 2015

Food Security and Water Survey in Tafea Province

Preliminary Report

01 September 2015

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Objective ............................................................................................................................... 5

2 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Area of coverage ................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Data collection and analysis .................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Household food security index access scale (HFIAS) indicators .............................................. 7

3 FINDINGS .............................................................................................................. 8

3.1 Food security ........................................................................................................................ 8 3.2 WATER ................................................................................................................................ 12 3.3 Gender Analysis ................................................................................................................... 14

4 PRIORITY NEEDS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 15

4.1 FOOD SECURITY ................................................................................................................... 15 4.2 Water .................................................................................................................................. 16 4.3 Gender ................................................................................................................................ 17

5 GAPS AND LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................... 17

6 ANNEX ................................................................................................................ 19

Food Security and Water Survey in Tafea Province Province

05 November 2015

05 November 2015 Food Security and Water Survey in Tafea Province

OVERVIEW

Communities across Tafea Province have been experiencing severe crop failures and water shortages. According to the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS), up to 50% of Tafea communities are experiencing some degree of food insecurity, ranging from mild to severe. Dry El Nino conditions have compounded the pre-El Nino vulnerabilities caused by Cyclone Pam, which devastated Tafea Province seven months prior. Communities are experiencing shortages of water for crops and for drinking; pests and wild animals are decimating agricultural output; and dry soil is inadequate for planting.

Teachers have reported students’ school attendance is declining, which is attributed to parents being unable to provide students with sufficient food to see students through the school day and schools unable to supply students with adequate water. This situation is seeing rising tensions and worries in communities, with community perception of the food security and water strongly pessimistic: 90% of respondents have worried about having insufficient food and 83% of respondents have worried about having insufficient access to water in the last four weeks.

Behavioural change is evident as a result of food and water shortages. 36% of respondents reported eating only one to two meals per day, an amount considered by respondents to be “below-normal.” Community members have limited access to food and must walk long distances to obtain water for drinking, often from sources such as rivers or creeks.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Immediate food support for Tafea Province

Immediate support for improvements to water quality in Tafea Province

Agricultural training and support for drought-appropriate farming and

water maximisation techniques

Immediate mapping of current water source functionality and alternate water sources

Support services for families experiencing increased stress throughout El Nino,

with a focus on Gender-Based Violence prevention and response

34,000 (17,400 men, 16,600 women) Number of people living in Tafea Province

100% Percentage of Tafea Province affected by El Nino

12% Tafea population as a percentage of total Vanuatu population

05 November 2015


Map of Tafea Province

05 November 2015


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

In March 2015, category five Cyclone Pam stuck Vanuatu, affecting 188,000 people. Tafea Province was one of the worst affected areas, needing emergency shelter, food, and WASH assistance for its 34,000 people. CARE Vanuatu has been responding across all five islands in Tafea, from initial emergency response to current recovery activities.

The onset of El Nino and the increasing severity of the event could have grave consequences for the already-vulnerable Tafea communities. CARE has been monitoring the effects of El Nino in communities through regular staff reporting of field observations, the analysis of community feedback, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews. Information over the last three months has been increasingly concerning, thus CARE initiated a survey across Tafea Province to assess the household level impact of El Nino.

CARE’s Food Security and Water Survey (FSWS) was conducted in tandem with CARE’s Cyclone Pam Post-Distribution Monitoring (PDM). The FSWS incorporated Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) indicators to measure food insecurity at household level over the preceding 30 days. The FSWS also asked questions on water availability and coping mechanisms during times of water stress.

1.2 Objective

The primary objective of the FSWS was to assess household food security and access to water in Tafea Province to inform CARE’s El Nino response strategy.

Photo 1. Dry soil in Aniwa

Insert heading here 11 June 2009

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Area of coverage

Monitoring was conducted across eight Area Councils in Tafea Province, CARE’s area of operation. This included West Tanna, North East Whitesands and South East Whitesands councils in Tanna island; and all councils in Erromango, Aniwa, and Futuna islands. Some surveys from Aniwa and Futuna have not yet been received and from 10 November 2015, Aneityum island will also be surveyed. This report will be updated to include these additional surveys by approximately 20 November 2015.

CARE’s PDM collected 650 responses and was conducted between 19 October and 30 October 2015. All PDM respondents also completed the FSWS, because it was a section of the longer PDM questionnaire. A total of 750 FSWS responses were collected between 19 October and 30 October 2015. This included the 650 PDM respondents and 100 standalone FSWS’s. The main focus of this report is the FSWS results, however in parts of this report, PDM results have also been included for the additional contextual analysis they provide; references to the PDM are clearly delineated from FSWS results where applicable.

The 750 FSWS respondents included:

Age FSWS PDM (including FSWS) TOTAL

Male Female Male Female

Under 18 1 1 7 22 31

18 to 22 1 9 117 92 219

22 to 60 34 46 148 156 384

Over 60 3 5 53 55 116

TOTAL 39 61 325 325 750

CARE teams made a specific effort to seek out vulnerable groups and speak with a variety of community members. The FSWS included:

44 men with a disability and 44 women with a disability;

349 non-heads of household (127 men, 222 women);

401 heads of household (237 men, 164 women);

112 pregnant or breastfeeding women.

2.2 Data collection and analysis

Surveys were conducted concurrently by four gender-balanced teams, two in Tanna, one in Erromango and one in Aniwa and Futuna. The FSWS used the Kobo Toolbox platform, and was CARE Vanuatu’s first major electronic survey. Analysis was conducted by CARE’s in-country Monitoring and Evaluation staff.


2.3 Household food security index access scale (HFIAS) indicators

The FSWS is a short survey designed to capture a basic understanding of household food security and water. It used the HFIAS to measure food insecurity and its frequency at household level over the preceding 30 days. Questions focus on the perception of food vulnerability or stress, while other questions enquire about respondent’s behavioural responses to food insecurity1. Nine questions were asked to determine “occurrence,” with nine “frequency of occurrence” questions asked as follow-up to determine how often the reported condition occurred (one time, sometimes, and often).

Questions are grouped into three categories:

- Anxiety and uncertainty - Insufficient quality (including variety and food preferences) - Insufficient food intake and its physical consequences

Photo 2. Crop damaged by pests, Aniwa

1 HFIAS survey taken from ACF International, 2011, ‘ACF Food Security and Livelihood Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines’, http://www.actionagainsthunger.org/publication/food-security-and-livelihoods-monitoring-and-evaluation-guidelines

http://www.actionagainsthunger.org/publication/food-security-and-livelihoods-monitoring-and-evaluation-guidelines


3 FINDINGS

3.1 Food security

A. HOUSEHOLD FOOD INSECURITY ACCESS SCALE (HFIAS) FINDINGS CARE’s field teams used the HFIAS to measure food security and its severity at household level over the preceding 30 days. Results showed that up to 50% of respondents are experiencing some degree of food insecurity, ranging from mild to severe.

The following table outlines HFIAS results:

Question (Frequency of Occurrence) One time Sometimes Often

1. In the last four weeks, have you worried your household does not have enough food? 14% 26% 50%

2. In the last four weeks, were you or any household member not able to eat the kind of foods you wanted to eat because of lack of food availability? 19% 34% 39%

3. In the past four weeks, did you or any household member eat a limited variety of food, because of lack of food availability? 20% 33% 41%

4. In the past four weeks, did you or any member of your household have to eat some foods you really did not want to eat, because of a lack of resources to obtain other foods?

23% 36% 35%

5. In the past four weeks, did you or any household member have to eat a smaller meal than you felt you needed because there was not enough food? 13% 40% 38%

6. In the past four weeks, did you or any household member have to eat fewer meals in the day because there was not enough food? 19% 35% 33%

7. In the past four weeks, was there ever no food to eat of any kind in your household because of lack of resources to get food? 16% 39% 30%

8. In the past four weeks, have you or any household member gone to sleep at night hungry because there was not enough food? 17% 20% 15%

9. In the past four weeks, did you or any household member go a whole day and night without eating anything because there is not enough food? 17% 20% 13%

Food secure Mildly food insecure

Moderately food insecure

Severely food insecure

Table 1: Percentage of overall respondents falling into each HFIAS category of food insecurity in Tafea Province

These HFIAS results show that communities’ concerns about food security are extremely high, with 90% of respondents reporting that they were concerned about food. The area with the highest levels of concern is South East Whitesands, an Area Council in Tanna island, with 96% of South East Whitesands respondents reporting they were worried about food. Even prior to Cyclone Pam, South East Whitesands agricultural outputs were badly affected by ash fall from the nearby, active Mt Yasur volcano.


In terms of the quality of food, the HFIAS results show very limited food availability, which is consistent across all islands in Tafea. The most strongly affected communities are South East Whitesands and the rain-dependent atoll of Aniwa. 93% of community members are eating limited diets due to lack of food availability – which raises concerns about ongoing nutritional deficiencies – and 93% are eating foods they do not want to eat. This is consistent with staff field trip observations over the last few months, which have noted community members are consuming “bush rope,” a vine eaten in times of food stress. Teachers attending a CARE focus group on 28 September 2015 noted that students were often sent to school with bush rope to eat. The lack of nutritious food for children was attributed to causing poor concentration, attendance and behaviour. Even more concerning are reports in the FSWS recording that even “bush rope” is becoming limited in availability.

Photo 3. Bush rope being consumed by Tafea communities

The quantity of food intake has been affected; 92% of respondents reported smaller meal portions and 87% reported eating fewer numbers of meals. 85% of respondents reported a time in the last four weeks where there has been no food to eat of any kind in their household.

The final two HFIAS questions measure the most severe food insecurity levels. In Tafea, percentages of food insecurity were lower for these two “behavioural” questions, than other questions relating to perception and quantity of food. 53% of respondents reported going to sleep at night hungry and 50% reported a time where they have gone 24 hours without food. It is important to note that while behavioural results are lower, over half the Tafea population reported experiencing this level of food insecurity, which is still of great concern.

When analysed by Area Council, South East Whitesands consistently ranks higher than any other area in terms of food insecurity indicators. Most significantly, respondents from South East Whitesands rank at 83% of their total for the final two HFIAS indicators, compared to the overall Tafea Province result of 53% and 50% respectively. This indicates that South East Whitesands is the area of greatest need.


Also of note are results from the island of Futuna. Futuna had a more positive outlook in regards to its food security; in fact, the island recently donated a surplus of its food to the Port Vila Hospital and only 60% of Futuna respondents are worried about food, compared to 90% overall in Tafea Province. This is reflected in the perception-related indictors in the HFIAS: community members in Futuna are less worried about food security than other areas. However, the “behaviour” related indictors for Futuna do demonstrate signs of food stress, in some cases higher than other “more worried” islands (for example, it ranks only third lowest for the final, most severe, indicator). Thus, it is important to monitor all islands, regardless of perception and ensure an awareness of the situation informs local level food management practices.

B. VERBAL FEEDBACK

During the course of this survey, staff recorded a number of verbal comments made to them by community members. Comments from across Tafea include:

“No food…”

“Stopped trying to plant”

“No food in the garden”

“Gardening no good”

“Sun is too strong, food doesn’t grow well”

“No local food in market”

Photo 4 Pest-damaged crops, Erromango


C. POST-DISTRIBUTION MONITORING (PDM)

As part of CARE’s October 2015 PDM, conducted in tandem with the FSWS, CARE found that 36% of total respondents reported eating one to two meals per day, and that they do not consider this to be normal:

Graph 1. Number of meals per day eaten by respondents, classified by whether respondents consider this normal or not normal consumption habits

When compared to a baseline survey conducted by CARE in August, this indicates an increasing number of people are eating fewer meals per day.

The types of food being eaten is also limited, with cereals and root crops as the dominant food sources. The consumption of fruit is low as fruit crops were destroyed by Cyclone Pam. Consumption of sugar is high. Tafea communities require support to access a suitably nutritious range of foods. A full breakdown of foods being consumed:

Food item Meal 1 Meal 2 Meal 3

Cereals (rice, bread) 70% 67% 78%

Root crops 81% 87% 85%

Pulses (beans, lentils) 12% 13% 23%

Meat/fish/eggs 16% 18% 46%

Dairy products (milk) 4% 4% 4%

Oils and fats 17% 13% 13%

Sugar 31% 19% 19%

Vegetables 37% 43% 71%

Fruits 2% 3% 4%

Other 2% 3% 2%

Total # respondents consuming this meal

650 631 134

9

223

210

274

132

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3

No

Yes


3.2 WATER

A. FOOD SECURITY AND WATER SURVEY (FSWS)

The FSWS found that 83% of respondents across Tafea have felt worried about the amount of water they have access to in the last four weeks. The majority of respondents were concerned about both water for drinking and water for their gardens (77%). Rural Tafea communities are largely subsistence farmers, so failing rains and reduced access to water directly affects food security. This is reflected by the high number of respondents reporting problems with their gardens (89% overall):

Graph 2. Percentage of respondents experiencing problems with their gardens, by Area Council

More than half the number of respondents (55%) reported drinking less water than normal in the last four weeks. This is consistent with CARE staff field team reports of communities walking significant distances to access water and not having the means to transport large volumes of water back to their residential areas.


B. POST-DISTRIBUTION MONITORING (PDM)

It is also relevant to include some results from CARE’s PDM around water. A total of 57% of respondents reported difficulty accessing water over the last year:

Graph 3. Percentage of respondents who had difficulty accessing water from their usual water source over the last year, by Area Council.

Reasons for water shortages included the lack of rain, broken pipes, empty tanks, low water pressure, leakage and dirty water. Respondents reported that a common coping mechanism was to travel further to access water. People reported travelling for a few kilometres, up to five kilometres, two hours, or more. A reliance on rivers and creeks is evident, indicating water sources may be available but raising questions about their proximity and quality. It is also reported by CARE staff that households are beginning to relocate to be closer to water sources, raising concerns about internal displacement, land issues and pressure on currently functional water sources. Further mapping of water resources is urgently required.

78% of respondents stored water in their homes but have limited or small storage containers. This indicates that long trips to distant water sources and/or harvested rainwater may not be being maximised due to lack of storage. 76% of respondents reported collecting rainwater; therefore support for maximising this practice is recommended.

The ability of community members to identify safe water for drinking is low. Approximately 41% of respondents were unsure of how to identify if water was safe for drinking, with only 9% mentioning boiling water as an option to ensure water safety. Given the reported increase in usage of river or creek water, this raises concerns for safe water access.

Awareness of water management and maximisation techniques was low, with the 84% of respondents throwing greywater away after one use. 75% of respondents did not know about El Nino (35% men, 40% women). These low levels of knowledge about El Nino indicates support is required for increasing community awareness of how best to maximise available water and how long this situation will last.


Graph 4.Secondary uses of water, disaggregated.

C. FOCUS GROUP: SCHOOL TEACHERS

On 28 September 2015, CARE conducted a focus group with 16 teachers from the Whitesands area in Tanna. Teachers identified food and water as the biggest issues facing schools at present. Many schools had problems refilling tanks, and were unable to provide sufficient water for students during school days. A consensus among schools was that additional water storage options were required, as well as repair work on latrines and water systems. Teachers agreed that the number one priority for school assistance must be water.

3.3 Gender Analysis Disaggregated data analysis shows show that men and women’s perceptions of food security were often close to equal (1-3% difference, with women marginally higher). There were two exceptions to this trend: HFIAS Indicator Six asked if household members had fewer meals, to which “yes” responses from women were 8% higher than men’s. HFIAS Indicator Seven asked if the household was unable to obtain food, to which “yes” responses from women were 10% higher than men’s.

Additionally, women’s perceptions of how frequently food insecurity occurred was consistently higher. For eight out of nine indicators, “often” was the most frequent response for women. For eight out of nine indicators, “Sometimes” was the most frequent answer for men.

Photo 5. Rain water harvesting system,

Erromango


Men and women also worry about access to water close to equally (41% of men, 42% of women). The frequency category with the highest number of responses was “often” for both men and women (24% of men, 30% of women).

Men were significantly more likely to have reduced their water consumption over the last four weeks (35% men reported ‘small’ consumption compared to 20% of women).

4 PRIORITY NEEDS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 FOOD SECURITY

Communities are currently facing food shortages, a situation that is unlikely to change with El Nino effects predicted to last until March 2016.

Food will be scarce on the islands in the immediate future, so food support is required in the initial phases of the response. It is important to consider foods that are nutritious, support local markets (where functioning), are acceptable to local populations, and do not require large quantities of water to cook.

Communities are worried about the current food and water situation; this needs to be monitored and managed, by providing education on El Nino, its effects and mitigations options. Support is needed for implementing techniques for managing, preserving and maximising the nutritional value of available foods.

In the longer term, support for re-establishing gardens is a priority. This includes the need for a technical assessment of the causes of current agricultural and pest problems. Communities then need appropriate training to implement technical recommendations in a way this understandable and building on current farming practices.

South East Whitesands has the added burden of the Mt Yasur volcano’s proximity. The volcano frequently emits ash, and this ash fall damages crops, compounding post-cyclone crop damage and dry El Nino conditions. This particularly vulnerable community needs prioritisation.

Photo 6. Women often hold primary responsibility


Recommendations:

Immediate food support for Tafea Province, with special consideration of additional needs in Whitesands, Tanna;

Agricultural training and support for drought-appropriate farming and water maximisation techniques, such as drip irrigation, mulching, composting, food preservation, grey water usage;

Nutrition training in communities and support for access to nutritious food;

Long term focus on supporting the re-establishment of gardens, with consideration to the changing environmental conditions.

4.2 Water In terms of water quantity, a priority need is for more information on the status of water sources: there are significant gaps in knowledge around the current operational status of water supplies in communities. Community members are already using alternate sources: is this the best or only option? If water is available locally, repairs and rehabilitation of existing supplies require prioritisation. If water is not available within a suitable distance, support for water transport or construction of additional systems must be investigated.

In terms of water quality, support to improve access to safe drinking water is urgently required. Access to water is currently inadequate, with reports of community members travelling long distances to access water breaching Sphere guidance, which recommends households should be no more than 500m from water points. To determine the water quality of currently used sources, Sphere recommends a rapid sanitary survey. This includes a need for community-level training/awareness on safe water use and identification, water testing, support for clean water storage options, hygiene promotion, and raising awareness on how to maximise scarce water resources.

In the rural communities of Tafea, it must be acknowledged that there is a strong link between food security and water. Complementary activities that address WASH and agricultural needs are needed.

Recommendations:

Immediate support for improvements to access to water and water quality in Tafea Province

Immediate mapping of current water source functionality and alternate water sources

Rapid sanitary survey and development/implementation of water safety plans for each source

Water source repairs and rehabilitations in line with Sphere Standards

Integrated WASH and agriculture activity planning

Community awareness training for grey water management, household-level options for rainwater harvesting and water maximisation techniques

Photo 7. Barrels being used to collect rainwater


4.3 Gender Men, women, boys and girls are affected differently by El Nino and these differences must be assessed and considered in program decision-making. Presently, there are signs that women are more concerned about food security, which may be a reflection of gender roles and the responsibility women take in harvesting and preparing food for their families. Food security awareness should be appropriately targeted to ensure maximum benefit.

The higher number of men reporting decreased water consumption required further investigation, including an assessment of gender roles in water management and consumption to ensure appropriately targeted response.

Recommendations:

Support services for families experiencing increased stress throughout El Nino, with a focus on Gender-Based Violence prevention and response

Groups considered at-risk for GBV involved in community activities and, where possible, program leadership roles

Gender-responsive WASH assessments in CARE areas identify specific needs of women, girls, men and boys. Consideration of increasing difficulty in water collection (traditionally a women’s role) and how this might increase tensions and GBV risk. Consider this risk when prioritizing WASH activities and ensure at risk women included in WASH assessments2

Rapid assessment with men and women farmers to ensure input into design of food activities to best meet needs, capacities and knowledge, particularly of vulnerable or marginalized groups.

Assessments consider the local capacities and coping mechanisms of women, men, girls and boys during food insecurity or drought.

Consideration of Vanuatu’s Gender and Protection Cluster Lessons Learned Recommendations and Women in Emergency Response and Recovery Forum Recommendations Framework for inclusive and appropriate programming

5 GAPS AND LIMITATIONS

Information gap

CARE have identified that technical agricultural support is required to combat the agricultural difficulties being faced by communities. A surge team of specialists from the Department of Agriculture is currently deployed in Tafea to assess the specific agricultural problems (such as increasing numbers of pests or seemingly unfertile soils) and provide technical guidance for these problems. This assessment report is expected to be available on 19 November 2015.

It must be acknowledged that the FSWS is not a technical assessment, but rather a household-level survey to assess the situation on the ground in Tafea. In addition to the above-mentioned technical agricultural assessment, a WASH needs assessment is urgently required in Tafea to ascertain the total number of water schemes, their level of functionality, and the quantity of water they currently provide to communities. The availability of alternate water sources such as rivers and creeks currently relied up by communities also must be mapped.

2 WASH, Guideline for integrating Gender Based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Action, IASC, 2015


Methodology

The analysis of the HFIAS has been completed at provincial level, which may skew results. Each island in Tafea is significantly different to the next, thus a province-wide analysis may miss important, context-specific details. It is recommended that the independent analysis of each island is prioritised to more accurately assess food and water insecurity issues in each unique geographic location.

A limitation of the FSWS was the delay in availability of some data from Aniwa and Futuna, and any data from Aneityum. As outlined in the methodology section of this preliminary report, this data will be incorporated and results re-tabulated as soon as available. However, it is unlikely this data will change the overall trends as current results strongly show food and water insecurity.

Photo 8. Dry gardens in Tanna


6 ANNEX

Food Security and Water Survey Questions:

1 Tick Eria Kounsel

North Aniwa NE Whitesands

South Aniwa SE Whitesands

Futuna West Tanna

Aneityum North Tanna

North Erromango South Tanna

South Erromango SE Tanna

Other

2 _____________________________________________

3 Yu nao yu stap lukaotem famili blong yu/Hed blong haos hol? YES NO

4 Wanem jenda blo intavui? (please circle) MAN WOMAN

5 Wanem age blong yu? 0-17 18-22 23-60 60+

6 Yu gat wan disabiliti? YES NO

7 Sipos woman, Yu gat bel o kivim titi YES NO

8 Long las 4 wiks, yu bin warrie se bai HH blong yu bai i no kat enaf Kakai?

YES NO

8.1 Sipos yes: Wan taem nomo Sam taem Plante taem

9

YES NO


10

YES NO

10 Sipos yes: Wan taem nomo Sam taem Plante taem

11

YES NO


12

YES NO


13

YES NO


Long last 4 wiks, yu or eni HH i mas kakae few meal long

wan dei from nokat inaf kakae?

Nem blo vilej blo yu:

Long last 4 wiks, yu or eni haoshol memba i no bin save

kakae ol kaen kakae we yu wantem kakae from nokat

kakae?

Long last 4 wiks, yu or eni HH memba i kakae smol kaen

blong kakae nomo from nokat kakae?

Long last 4 wiks, , yu or eni HH memba i mas kakae sam

kakae we yu rili no wantem kakae from i nokat risos

blong karem ol narafala kakae ?

Long past 4 wiks, yu or HH memba i mas kakae smol

kakae nomo even yu wantem mo be from i nokat inaf

kakae?


14

YES NO


15

YES NO


16

YES NO


17

YES NO

17.1 Sapos yes: Wan taem nomo Sam taem Plante taem

17.2

Wota blong drink Wota blog Karen Tugeta

18

Smol Semak Mo

19

20 Wanem nao yu save abotem ol helti style blong kakae

21 Yu bin stap kakae ol niu kakae lo last few months? YES NO

22 Hemi wan gudfala jensi or nogud? GUD NO GUD

Sapos i nokat ol aeland kakai or rice, yu save talem nem blong wan kakai we yu save usum instead blong kipim

wan helti diet?

Tank yu tumas. Sipos got sam narafala commens, plis visitem Office blo CARE o tellem mi nao ia.

Long last 4 wiks ,i bin nomo kat eni kaen kakae nom

oblong kaake long HH blong yu, from nokat risos blong

karem kakae?

Long last 4 wiks, yu or eni HH memba blong yu i ko slip

hungry nomo from i nokat enaf kakae?

Long last 4 wiks, yu or eni HH memba i no bin kakae 1 ful

dei mo nait from i nokat enaf kakai?

Long last 4 wiks yu bin filim yu wari from amount blong

wota yu save aksesem?

Sapos yes, yu wari from wota blong drink or wota blong

Karen or tugeta?

Long last 4 wiks, yu bin wantem drink wota, yu bin drink

semak amount blong wota olsem oltaem, smol wota or

mo wota?

food security and water survey in tafea province€¦ · food security and water survey in tafea...

Documents