stock taking report · 2017-07-05 · ii stock taking report findings are drawn from the food...
TRANSCRIPT
i
ii
Stock Taking Report
Findings are drawn from the Food Security Monitoring Systems experience in 26 countries and a
few sub-regional systems as well as from 15 countries with Market Monitoring Systems (MMS).
Prepared by: Vagn Mikkelsen- VAM Consultant; Rama Mwanundu- VAM Consultant; Wanja
Kaaria- Programme Advisor VAM
Cover page: Photo was retrieved from International Research Institute on Climate and Society (IRI) Website
June 2009
© World Food Programme, Food Security Analysis Service
http://www.wfp.org/food-security
United Nations World Food Programme
Headquarters: Via C.G. Viola 68, Parco de’ Medici, 00148, Rome, Italy
Food Security Analysis Service
Joyce Luma, Chief
Tel: +39 06 6513 2168
E-mail: [email protected]
Wanja Kaaria, Programme Advisor - VAM
Tel: +39 06 6513 3061
E-mail: [email protected]
This Stock Taking report of Food Security Monitoring Systems has been made possible through the
generous support of the Spanish Government and the German Quality Improvement Grant.
iii
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS................................................................................................. v
SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................... 1
1. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 4
2. TOWARDS AN UNDERSTANDING OF FOOD SECURITY MONITORING ............................ 6
2.1 WFP Corporate Understanding of Food Security Monitoring .................................... 6
2.2 Consultations in May and June 2009 ............................................................................ 8
2.3 A Comment on Early Warning ..................................................................................... 10
3. REVIEW OF FOOD SECURITY MONITORING SYSTEMS INITIATED OR
SUPPORTED BY WFP ............................................................................................................. 11
3.1 Country Overview .......................................................................................................... 11
3.2 Geographical Coverage................................................................................................. 12
3.3 Partnerships in Food Security Monitoring .................................................................. 12
3. 4 Indicators ........................................................................................................................ 14
3.5 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 17
3.6 Reporting Products and Periodicity ............................................................................. 18
3.7 Dissemination ................................................................................................................. 19
3.8 Sustainability .................................................................................................................. 19
3.9 The Challenges Ahead .................................................................................................. 20
4. CASE STUDIES OF FOOD SECURITY INFORMATION AND MONITORING SYSTEMS ... 21
4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Nepal ............................................................................................................................... 21
4.3 Burkina Faso................................................................................................................... 22
4.4 Ethiopia ........................................................................................................................... 23
4.5 Kenya............................................................................................................................... 25
4.6 Swaziland ........................................................................................................................ 27
4.7 Haiti ................................................................................................................................. 29
4.8 ASEAN Countries + China, Japan and Korea............................................................. 30
4.9 West Africa/Sahel .......................................................................................................... 30
4.10 Southern Africa ............................................................................................................. 32
4.11 Central America ............................................................................................................ 34
4.12 Potential for Partnerships and Capacity Development............................................ 36
5. REVIEW OF MARKET MONITORING SYSTEMS................................................................... 37
iv
5.1 WFP Corporate Understanding of Market Analysis and
Food Markets Monitoring ............................................................................................... 37
5.2 Current Global Context ................................................................................................. 38
5.3 Existing Market Monitoring Systems........................................................................... 38
5.4 Country Overview .......................................................................................................... 39
5.5 Partnerships in Market Monitoring .............................................................................. 40
5.6 Indicators ........................................................................................................................ 41
5.7 The Challenges Ahead .................................................................................................. 41
6. LESSONS LEARNED................................................................................................................. 43
7. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................. 46
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................... 48
ANNEX 1: NOTES ON FOOD SECURITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS........................................ 51
ANNEX 2: EARLY WARNING AND SCIENTIFIC WEBSITES OF RELEVANCE FOR FOOD
SECURITY..................................................................................................................... 58
ANNEX 3: FOOD SECURITY MONITORING SYSTEM COUNTRY FACT SHEETS.................... 66
ANNEX 4: MARKET MONITORING SYSTEM COUNTRY FACT SHEETS................................... 90
TABLES
Table 1: Country FSMS’s Reviewed.............................................................................................. 11
Table 2: Partnerships and Geographical Coverage of Country FSMS’s................................... 13
Table 3: Summary of Indicators Used in FSMS Country Reports ............................................ 16
Table 4: Country Market Monitoring Systems Reviewed .......................................................... 39
Table 5: Partnerships in WFP Market Monitoring....................................................................... 41
Table 6: Summary of Indicators Used in MMS’s ........................................................................ 42
v
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AFSIS ASEAN Food Security Information System ADPC Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (Thailand) ADRC Asian Disaster Reduction Center (Japan) ALRMP Arid Lands Resource Management Project (Kenya) BMI Body Mass Index CAC Central American Agricultural Council CFSAM Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission CFSVA Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment CHS Community and Household Surveillance CILSS Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel CISA Inter-Ministerial Council for Food Security (Haiti) CNSA National Food Security Council (Burkina Faso) CNSA National Coordination for Food Security (Haiti) CP Country Programme (WFP) CSI Coping Strategy Index DFID Department for International Development (United Kingdom) DFSN District Food Security Network (Nepal) DGPER Directorate-General for Promotion of the Rural Economy (Burkina Faso) DMFSS Disaster Management and Food Security Sector (Ethiopia) DNPGCA National System for the Prevention and Management of Food Crises
(Niger) DPPA Disaster Preparedness and Prevention Agency (Ethiopia) DR Congo Democratic Republic of Congo EC European Commission EFSA Emergency Food Security Assessment EMOP Emergency Operation (WFP) EPWEB Emergency Preparedness and Response Web (WFP) FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN FCS Food Consumption Score FEWS NET Famine Early Warning Systems Network FIVIMS Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping System FSMAS Food Security Monitoring and Analysis System (WFP Nepal) FSCB Food Security Coordination Bureau (Ethiopia) FSMS Food Security Monitoring System GIEWS Global Information and Early Warning System HEWSweb Humanitarian Early Warning Service IASC Inter-Agency Standing Committee on Preparedness and Contingency
Planning IAWG Inter-Agency Working Group IGAD Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (Greater Horn of Africa) INCAP Central American and Panamanian Institute for Nutrition IRI International Research Institute on Climate and Society ISDR International Strategy for Disaster Reduction FANR Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Directorate (SADC) KFSM Kenya Food Security Meeting KFSSG Kenya Food Security Steering Group MoAC Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives (Nepal) MoAR Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ethiopia) MDG Millennium Development Goal MUAC Mid-Upper Arm Circumference NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (USA) OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
vi
OEDP Policy, Planning and Strategy Division (WFP) OM Operations and Management Department (WFP) OMB WFP Regional Bureau Bangkok OMC WFP Regional Bureau Cairo OMD WFP Regional Bureau Dakar OMJ WFP Regional Bureau Johannesburg OMP WFP Regional Bureau Panama City OMS WFP Regional Bureau Sudan OMXC Cooperation and Partnership Programme (WFP) OMXF Food Security Analysis Service (WFP) P4P Purchase for Progress (WFP) PDA Personal Digital Assistant PRRO Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation (WFP) RRC Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (Ethiopia) RVAC Regional Vulnerability Assessment Committee SADC Southern African Development Community SATCA Central American Early Warning System SENAC Strengthening Emergency Needs Assessment Capacity SICA Central American Integration System SIDA Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency SSM Sentinel Surveillance Method UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund USDA United States Department of Agriculture USGS United States Geological Service VAC Vulnerability Assessment Committee (SADC) WFP World Food Programme WHO World Health Organisation
1
SUMMARY
The WFP Strategic Plan 2008-2011 lays out a framework for potential action for the
Organisation in the context of emergencies, prevention of acute hunger and investment in
disaster preparedness, restoration of livelihoods in post-disaster situations, and the
reduction of chronic hunger and under nutrition. The Plan marks a shift from traditional
food aid towards food assistance, reduction of dependency and national capacity building.
The main tools required to attain these objectives are specified and include various Food
Security Analytical Tools, which are further detailed in the Strategic Synopsis for WFP Food
Security Analysis Service. Food Security Monitoring and Food Markets Monitoring
(FSMS/FMM) form part of these tools.
Since 2002, and particularly from 2004-2005 onwards, WFP has promoted an approach to
Food Security Monitoring that focused on the micro-level of food insecurity, particularly
Household Food Access, Consumption and Nutrition. National partnerships and previous
experiences with Early Warning or Food Security Monitoring at country and sub-regional
level have also influenced existing FSMSs. In most cases the FSMS has been promoted as
a WFP tool, which often has not directly connected with existing national or sub-regional
monitoring systems.
With an orientation towards Household Food Access, Consumption and Nutrition, it is not
surprising that the most commonly used indicators in the FSMSs are Food Consumption
Score, Coping Strategy Index, Expenditure on Food, Food Prices and Global Acute
Malnutrition. There is, however, no single indicator that has been used in all twenty six
FSMSs. This probably reflects the absence of corporate guidance because it would be
logical to assume that a certain level of harmonisation would be desirable for FSMS as a
major analytical tool within WFP.
Recent work on Food Markets constitutes a relatively new domain in food security analysis
and is receiving increasing attention in the context of High Food Prices and the Financial
Crisis. While WFP Food Security Analysis Service has initiated a process of monitoring
trends in staple food prices, a number of WFP/VAM Country Offices have commenced
regular reporting on food markets and prices. The reporting products of this initiative are
generally much more focused than the more traditional FSMS reports, which is due to
subject and issues being monitored. While such issues as reporting intervals and indicators
would need to be addressed, incorporating selected market indicators in FSMS reporting is
a desirable and feasible option.
Early Warning has received limited attention from the WFP Food Security Analysis Service.
This represents a departure from the framework provided by the Good Practice literature
on emergency food operations, where Early Warning is seen as the basis for Food Security
Monitoring. The definition of Food Security Monitoring that was formulated within
WFP/VAM during 2004-2005, makes reference to both food security trend monitoring and
identification of potential threats/shocks. However, in practice most FSMS have focused on
analysing trends due to the retrospective nature of household surveys.
2
It might be useful to link Early Warning with WFP Food Security Monitoring, particularly in
relation to Risk Analysis & Knowledge, because such link would strengthen FSMS as an
analytical tool for identifying potential threats and providing timely information for decision
making in the context of hazards and shocks.
The most recent revision of the FSMS definition constructed during In-House Consultations
in May 2009 is clearly oriented towards the household level: A system that tracks and
reports on household vulnerability to food insecurity. It eliminates the restrictions
identified in relation to the previous definition and is thus more generic. On the other
hand, the recommended Indicators that resulted from the Stakeholder Consultations of
June 2009 provide a set of information requirements that cut across the classical
dimensions of food security and go beyond the micro-level of food insecurity.
There is a basic understanding within WFP Food Security Analysis Service that FSMSs
should be “light” and should neither include too many indicators nor be heavy in terms of
data collection. Therefore, it is recommended that WFP/OMXF Management review the
recent recommendations on an FSMS definition and indicators with a view to reconciling
them, taking into consideration that various partners may have divergent visions on what
constitutes an FSMS. As for hazards and shocks, it is recommended that the related Risk
Analysis would part of Food Security Analysis and therefore should receive adequate
attention within FSMS.
Most WFP-initiated FSMS’s are oriented towards household Food Access and Consumption
are based on data collected through purposive and random sampling and subsequently
analysed in the accordance with the selected Interest Domains and Indicators. Purposive
sampling may provide an adequate basis for decision-making in relation to household
access, particularly in relation to the identification of potential threats or impending
shocks, however it is not clear if this would be sufficiently robust to justify conclusions that
directly feed into detailed programming decisions. It would therefore be advisable to
review alternatives to the current approach of sampling and survey design in the context
of FSMS and adjust, if appropriate, existing methodologies to a wider use of probabilistic
sampling. Integration with national household surveys should be pursued in contexts
where such would yield better results and enhanced sustainability than with WFP-initiated
surveys.
Partnership with other actors is a fundamental aspect of Food Security Monitoring and the
establishment of Food Security Information Systems in general. This has also been
recognised by WFP and is reflected in most FSMSs currently operating. However, in order
to meet the stated objective of national capacity building, which is not a short-term
undertaking, WFP would benefit from a more structured approach to both partnerships
and capacity development. Hence, establishing frameworks for analysing potential
partnerships and assessing national capacities would constitute a first step towards
implementing such a structured approach. It would assist WFP/Regional and Country
Offices in dealing with the initial stages of partnership development and capacity building.
Funding for activities related to national capacity building should be of a medium-term
nature and separate from project funding.
3
The FSMS’s have generally focused at national/sub-national level and only limited effort
has been invested in working at regional or sub-regional level. There are several
international and sub-regional organisations involved in Early Warning and Food Security
Monitoring activities, which could benefit from a new and coherent WFP strategy for
partnerships. Therefore, WFP should consider a broader collaboration with international
and sub-regional organisations. Such collaboration could be with international actors with
the objective of creating new synergies for food security monitoring or with sub-regional
organisations to strengthen their capacities in food security monitoring.
On the basis of a corporate understanding of what constitutes an FSMS tool, WFP/OMXF
should initiate a process of preparing guidelines and guidance sheets. Initially, a
summarised set of “guidance sheets” may suffice, providing orientations on basic FSMS
issues (e.g. definition and objectives, interest domains and indicators, communication
strategy, etc.).
These would be are less demanding in terms of preparation and would begin to bridge the
FSMS guidance vacuum, pending the preparation of a complete set of guidelines.
The following subjects have been identified for preparation in the short term:
• FSMS indicators not previously covered by OMXF guidance material.
• Methodological issues: Instruments, sampling, data collection and analysis
• A detailed check-list of considerations when setting up an FSMS.
• Partnership development.
• Capacity assessment and strengthening.
• Preparation of FSMS reports, including assessment of changes, outlook and
recommendations for immediate action.
In the medium-term, work should also be initiated on:
� Preparation of detailed FSMS guidelines
� Strengthening WFP staff capacity to improve FSMS methodologies in relation to
sampling, data collection, data analysis and reporting; and
� Strengthening WFP staff in clarifying the linkage between FSMS information and
decision-making. The latter would be developed on the basis of a new typology for
hunger situations, while the former would require considerable preparatory work
on the issue of surveys as well as the possible incorporation of new Interest
Domains in FSMS.
4
1. BACKGROUND
WFP Strategic Plan: The WFP Strategic Plan 2008-2011 lays out a framework for
potential action for the Organisation in the context of emergencies, prevention of acute
hunger and investment in disaster preparedness, restoration of livelihoods in post-disaster
situations, and the reduction of chronic hunger and under nutrition. The Plan marks a shift
towards food assistance, reduction of dependency and national capacity building. The
main tools required to attain these objectives are specified. The Strategic Synopsis for
WFP Food Security Analysis Service (OMXF), which covers 2008-2009, specifically
mentions Food Security Monitoring Systems (FSMSs) as a component of WFP Food
Security Information and points at the need to increase the number of countries with an
operational FSMS.
Food Security Monitoring: For some years, WFP has been working on vulnerability
analysis and mapping in the context of food security. Initial partnerships were established
with national governments and the work undertaken served to improve the targeting and
appropriateness of WFP programme interventions. However, food security situations are
subject to dynamic changes, which can only be captured through periodic monitoring of
food security indicators. Such periodic monitoring of food security situations was
introduced by WFP in a few selected countries around 2002-2003 (e.g. Nepal, Palestine).
Also, WFP collaborated with other organisations/projects engaged in the implementation
of Food Security Early Warning Systems (e.g. FEWS NET, National Early Warning Units).
The Community and Household Surveillance (CHS) in Southern Africa is another
representation of a WFP initiative in food security monitoring, which came into operation
in 2003. CHS covers Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Swaziland and
Namibia. Its main orientation is towards monitoring programme outcomes and targeting
efficiency, for which data is collected bi-annually in relation to common household food
security indicators. The surveys cover both beneficiary and non-beneficiary households,
restricted to areas with WFP programme interventions. In Lesotho and Swaziland,
however, WFP has recently introduced data collection on a country-wide (rural) basis,
thereby providing a more comprehensive coverage in terms of population.
In 2004-2005, WFP embarked on a new initiative, which intended to introduce periodic
monitoring of food security in about 15 countries. This initiative emphasized three
operating principles: a) provide a food security update against a benchmark (CFSVA); b)
build on existing systems and foster partnerships; and c) strengthen national capacities for
food security monitoring1. During 2005-2008, an FSMS was introduced in a number of
countries, including Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Central African Republic, Cote D’Ivoire,
Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Burundi and DR Congo. It should also be mentioned that WFP
participates in a few FSMSs, where the main reporting product is managed in a
partnership under Government coordination and management. Three examples are
Mauritania, Kenya and Southern Sudan.
1 / This initiative on improving food security monitoring was discussed among WFP staff at a workshop held in
Johannesburg in November 2004. The activity was supported by a Draft Concept Note and Discussion Note issued in
early 2005. Basic information on the initiative and country prioritization were presented on the WFP VAM Portal.
5
Although traditionally WFP collected market data in the context of food aid operations,
food market analysis has only recently been recognized as an important dimension of food
security analysis and assessment. Thus, during 2005 and 2006 WFP commissioned a
number of country and regional food market-related studies and later on WFP developed a
number of market analysis tools. In parallel, WFP Country Offices/VAM Units began to
report on food market and price information. Thus, there are Market Monitoring Systems
(MMS) Bulletins available for nine countries (Afghanistan, Nepal, Pakistan, Benin,
Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Togo and Ethiopia), where WFP has initiated the preparation
of bulletins or supports national agencies in this field. Market and price information are
also available from some FSMS reports.2
In addition to the earlier efforts oriented towards Vulnerability Mapping and the ongoing
activities in relation to Food Security and Markets Monitoring, it is worthwhile mentioning
WFP’s work in relation to Early Warning and Forecasting for Natural Hazards. This work
formed the basis for the UN Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Humanitarian Early
Warning Service (HEWSweb), which constitutes a common platform for providing an early
warning service for all natural hazards.
Objectives of the Study: The objectives of this report is to take stock of existing Food Security Monitoring Systems (FSMS’s) and Market Monitoring Systems (MMS’s), learn from
practice and outline an overall plan for a roll-out and strengthening of FSMS. The overall
strategy for roll-out will focus on how to enhance the quality of monitoring and strengthen
both WFP and national organisations’ capacity to implement FSMS.
Structure of the Report: The basic structure of the report is as follows: 1. Background; 2. Towards an Understanding of Food Security Monitoring; 3. Review of Food Security
Monitoring Systems Initiated or Supported by WFP; 4. Case Studies of Food Security
Information and Monitoring Systems; 5. Review of Food Markets Monitoring; 6. Lessons
Learned; and 7. Recommendations. Detailed information on the country-based monitoring
systems as well as on the indicators used in reporting products is presented in the
Annexes. It should be noted that the stocktaking covers all countries, for which reports are
available at WFP HQ and VAM Portal. A few reports have also been obtained from WFP
Regional and Country Offices as well as from websites of national and sub-regional
organisations. An effort has been invested in securing reporting products from all countries
with ongoing WFP activities in monitoring. The present report covers work undertaken
from February through June 2009.
2 / This means that for a few countries, market and price information is presented in both the regular FSMS report and in a
separate Market Bulletin.
6
2. TOWARDS AN UNDERSTANDING OF FOOD SECURITY MONITORING
2.1 WFP Corporate Understanding of Food Security Monitoring
Workshop, Johannesburg, 2004: In November 2004, WFP organized a Food Security
Monitoring Workshop in Johannesburg. The purpose of the workshop was to define a
technical and institutional framework for the development of an FSMS and identify its main
elements3. The conclusions of the workshop have largely guided the introduction of FSMS
in a number of countries from 2005 onwards.
Prior to 2004, FSMS activities had been developed in a number of countries, e.g. Nepal,
Palestine and some Southern African countries. This means that already before the
Workshop, Food Security Monitoring had been initiated as tool applied by WFP in
generating regular information on food insecurity in a humanitarian context.4 The
presentation of case studies at the workshop represented a considerable degree of
diversity in terms of approach, methodology and indicators.
The conclusions of the Workshop may be summarized as follows:
• There is a need to monitor food security and livelihoods at various aggregation
levels (household, local, national and regional) to facilitate food security trend
analysis and provide early warning.
• Indicators should reflect Availability, Access and Utilization of Food.
• A country FSMS must be demand-driven and respond to the needs and priorities of
various users.
• A comprehensive baseline such as CFSVA is considered to be essential for the
establishment of a country FSMS.
• The ultimate responsibility to implement an FSMS should rest with national
governments and WFP must play an important role of promoting national
commitments and ownership.
• Cost effectiveness should be pursued by identifying complementarities and
eliminating duplication.
• Computer-based information and communication technologies should be applied to
enhance operational efficiency of FSMS’s.
Most of these conclusions remain valid till today. In practice, implementation has often
fallen short of the principles indicated, particularly with regard user needs other than those
of WFP and national ownership and responsibility.
While conclusions of the Workshop in regard to indicators did not point to a particular
emphasis on the collection of primary data at household level (Household Food Access and
Consumption), it is evident that many FSMS’s initiated from 2005 onwards are largely,
3 / See: WFP, Food Monitoring Workshop Report, 10-12 November 2004, Johannesburg, South Africa. 4 / The main tools are Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA), Emergency Food Security
Assessment (EFSA) and Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission (CFSAM),
7
although not exclusively, based on household data with an orientation towards an analysis
of household food access and consumption as well as nutrition. The WFP Southern African
initiative on Community and Household Surveillance (CHS) reinforces this tendency5.
Technical Notes on Food Security Monitoring System, 2005: A Discussion Note on FSMS issued in 20056 provides a general description of the FSMS tool and raises some key
issues for further discussion and development. The Note does not pretend to provide
detailed guidelines for the implementation of a FSMS but it presents a definition of a Food
Security Monitoring System:
• A system that on a continuous and timely basis collects, analyses and reports on data
relevant to the food security status and vulnerability of population groups to food
insecurity in specified geographic areas.
Although the definition indicates a focus on specific geographic areas, it clearly does not
directly link Food Security Monitoring to WFP Programme Monitoring & Evaluation
activities. In this context, the CHS experience of Southern Africa constitutes an exception
by focusing on the food security conditions of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries,
particularly with regard to outcomes and targeting efficiency.
Based on the conclusions of the Johannesburg Workshop, the Discussion Note summarizes
three main objectives of the FSMS tool:
• Identify and monitor trends of variables considered as critical to the availability, access
and utilization of food for population groups vulnerable to food insecurity in specified
geographic areas.
• Identify and monitor potential threats to household food security.
• Provide timely information to inform decisions to initiate assessments, influence policy
and strategies related to food security interventions.
The Discussion Note observed that WFP is considered to have a comparative advantage in
providing information on Household Access and Utilization, which should be combined with
information from other actors and generate a more complete and relevant monitoring
system. This observation was followed by a reference to the SENAC/CFSVA experience,
which had supported the introduction of new core indicators into the WFP vocabulary,
including Food Consumption Score, Sources of Food, Food Consumption Profiles, Coping
Strategy Index, Household Assets and Livelihood/Income Sources. Many of these
indicators appear in some of the more recent FSMS’s.7
While typical information/indicators available from partners include existing early warning
systems, satellite surveillance data and crop monitoring data, a typical WFP activity in the
context of FSMS is considered to consist of primary data collection at household and
community level.8 This statement constitutes an orientation towards primary data
collection and analysis. Survey and sampling methods are briefly discussed, clearly with
5 / CHS was initiated in 2003. 6 / Discussion Note: Principles – Technical Notes on Food Security Monitoring System, August 2005. 7 / The components of the Strengthen Emergency Needs Assessment Capacity (SENAC) project were Impact of Food Aid
on Households; Chronic and Transitory Food Insecurity; Non-Food Responses to Food Insecurity; Pre-Crisis Information;
and Role of Markets in Emergencies. The Pre-Crisis Information component included CFSVA and FSMS. 8 / Discussion Note, pp. 3-4.
8
the intention that the introduction of these methods would require more detailed
guidelines. Although indicators had been discussed in detail at the Johannesburg
Workshop, the Discussion Note did not provide guidance on which would be most
appropriate.9
It is noted that the Johannesburg Workshop attendance was limited to WFP Country VAM
Units and WFP HQ VAM personnel, while the Technical Notes were issued by the WFP HQ
VAM Unit. There seems to have been no further attempt to establish a common
understanding of what constitutes an FSMS within WFP, including its Policy, Disaster
Preparedness and Operational Services.
Sahel Workshop, Dakar, October 2007: In an event organised by the WFP Regional
Office in Dakar, the practical experience of FSMS in five Sahel countries were subject to
review and discussion.10 Interestingly enough, the attendance at this event also included
government staff with whom WFP/VAM is working in the various countries. The
conclusions and recommendations of the meeting raised a number of issues, some of
which are being addressed in the current work on FSMS (e.g. the need for guidelines and
guidance sheets) , and particularly pointed at key issues like government ownership, the
role of Early Warning and the need for harmonising tools and simplifying surveys.
2.2 Consultations in May and June 2009
In-House Consultations, Rome, May 2009: As part of the ongoing effort to strengthen Food Security Monitoring, a workshop with WFP/OMXF and VAM Units staff
was held in May 2009. The workshop focused on reviewing the findings of the first draft of
the present report, revising definition and objectives of Food Security Monitoring, and
concurring on a minimum set of indicators. Partnerships, sustainability and Capacity
Development were also discussed.
As for the definition of a Food Security Monitoring System the workshop came up with a
more generic, yet focused, definition, which eliminated area restrictions and reference to
population groups:
• A system that tracks and reports on household vulnerability to food insecurity.
Similarly, the objectives were rephrased to reflect the more generic approach:
• Monitor and analyze trends of food availability, access and utilization;
• identify and monitor risks and opportunities for household food security;
• Provide timely and relevant information for decision making.
With regard to indicators the workshop focused on those, for which WFP would be able to provide data and/or support national systems in collecting and analysing data:
9 / Perhaps, a reference to earlier work on indicators undertaken in continuation of the World Food Summit of 1996,
would have been helpful. For example, see Committee on World Food Security, Twenty-sixth Session, Assessment of the
World Food Security Situation, Document 2000/2, Rome, 18-21 September 2000. The session considered a proposal for
indicators, developed by the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) of the Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information
and Mapping System (FIVIMS), of which WFP was a member. 10/ See: WFP Regional Office Dakar: Report on Joint Review Meeting for Food and Nutrition Security Monitoring in the
CFSVA and FSMS’s, 1-3 October 2007.
9
Food Security Dimension
Interest Domain Indicators
Availability Supply/Demand Food Price Changes and Trends Market Availability
Access
Purchasing Power Food Consumption Coping
Terms of Trade Food Consumption Score or Dietary Diversity Coping Strategy
Utilisation Malnutrition Mid-Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC)
It was recognised, however, that climate/agro-ecological conditions, crop & livestock
production prospects, national policies, security, etc., which in the new WFP Conceptual
Framework for Food Security and Nutrition are considered under Context, would have to
be covered, preferably by other actors.
Stakeholder Consultations, Rome, June 2009: This event saw the participation of a number of agencies involved in food security monitoring, research institutions,
government representatives and WFP HQ and field staff. In the part of the consultations
concerned with interest domains and indicators a total of 38 indicators were identified,
ranging from hazards, shocks and national availability to access and utilisation. A synthesis
of these, which was based on equal considerations on utility and cost/complexity in data
collection, reflects a balance of information requirements for FSMS across the classical
food security dimensions:
Food Security Dimension
Interest Domain Indicators
Hazards and Shocks Hazards and Shocks None Availability Agricultural Production
Prices Crop Production Staple Food Prices Livestock Prices
Access
Purchasing Power Food Consumption Main Income Sources Expenditures Coping
Staple Food Prices, Wage Rates, Terms of Trade Food Consumption Score or Dietary Diversity Income in Cash and In Kind Food and Non-Food Expenditures Coping Strategies
Utilisation Malnutrition Diseases
Mid-Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC) Body Mass Index None
A comparison of the two set of interest domains/indicators reveals that those proposed in
June generally incorporate the proposal of the in-house consultations of May, widen the
interest domains to hazards and national availability and are more ambitious in relation to
access and utilisation. It was, however, recognised that data for certain indicators of high
utility (e.g. food consumption, food & non-food expenditures and coping strategies, are
difficult to collect and represent relatively costs in an FSMS.
A final series of plenary and group discussions focused on the main issues and challenges in FSMS and proposed actions over the short to medium term.
10
The challenges to be overcome mainly concerned divergent objectives, lack of
sustainability, inadequate funding for capacity building, the time needed for surveys and
analysis, lack of guidance on many aspects, integration of urban issues in monitoring, and
unclear links with other tools and related information systems. Actions focused on
harmonization, linking FSMS to decision-making, partnership development, capacity
building, institutional arrangements, sustainability, funding and linkages with early warning
and IPC. Actions were not proposed in detail but rather suggested for as areas of concern
for further FSMS work.
2.3 A Comment on Early Warning
It is noted that the “Good Practice” literature on emergency food security interventions
does not mention Food Security Monitoring in any other context than Project and Context
Monitoring, and considers Early Warning as the basic tool for monitoring trends and
identifying potential threats or shocks to food security.11 However, the need for continuous
monitoring of food security, based on well-defined indicators, in a wider context than that
of emerging food security crises is recognised by the same source.12
In recent years, Early Warning has received limited attention from the WFP Food Security
Analysis Service. Other WFP Units have played a role in setting up and managing Hazards
Monitoring & Warning Services at global or sub-regional level. However, these are rather
limited in scope and do not go beyond Monitoring & Warning Service. In this context, it
might be useful to refer to the ISDR work on Early Warning, which considers Risk Analysis
& Knowledge, Monitoring & Warning Service, Dissemination & Communication, and
Response Capability as the four main elements.13 There is justification for linking Early
Warning with WFP Food Security Monitoring, particularly in relation to Risk Analysis &
Knowledge, because such link would strengthen FSMS as an analytical tool for identifying
potential threats and providing timely information for decision making in the context of
hazards and shocks.
Some Scientific and Early Warning websites, which primarily focus on monitoring and
forecasting, are presented in Annex 2.
11/ See, for example: Daniel Maxwell et. al., Emergency Food Security Interventions, Good Practice Review, No. 10,
December 2008, pp. 20-22. 12 / Daniel Mawxwell et. al., Op.cit, p. 23. 13/ The ISDR platform defines Early Warning as “the provision of timely and effective information, through identified
institutions, that allows individuals exposed to a hazard to take action to avoid or reduce their risk and prepare for
effective response”. See: United Nations, Global Survey of Early Warning Systems - An assessment of capacities, gaps,
and opportunities toward building a comprehensive global early warning system for all natural hazards, Prepared for the
Third International Conference on Early Warning, Bonn, 27-29 March 2009, pp. 2-5.
11
3. REVIEW OF FOOD SECURITY MONITORING SYSTEMS INITIATED OR SUPPORTED BY WFP
3.1 Country Overview
The stocktaking covers monitoring reports from 26 countries, for which the majority of
reporting products have been prepared by WFP/VAM Units, in many cases in collaboration
with national agencies or and/or other partners. The stocktaking is based on an analysis of
the reports available at WFP HQ and, in some cases, supplementary information received
from VAM Units.
The countries with an FSMS, which have been reviewed in the present report, are shown
in the Table 1 (details of the FSMS by country are shown in Annex 3, Country Fact
Sheets):
Table 1: Country FSMS’s Reviewed Asia Middle East,
CIS West Africa East & Southern
Africa Latin America, Caribbean
Afghanistan Nepal Indonesia Sri Lanka
Palestine Tajikistan
Central African Republic Chad Côte D’Ivoire Guinea-Bissau Mali Mauritania Niger
Burundi DR Congo Ethiopia Kenya Lesotho Malawi Mozambique Namibia Sudan (Southern) Swaziland Zambia Zimbabwe
Haiti
The following FSMS’s have been supported by WFP HQ under the SENAC Project: Afghanistan, CAR, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Sudan and Haiti. Most FSMS’s of these countries are producing regular bulletins. Other FSMS’s have received external funding, such as the Southern African countries (DFID and SIDA) as well as Nepal and Tajikistan (DFID). Indonesia is a special case in being a pilot exercise undertaken in the context of high food prices with many features similar to an FSMS focusing on access, consumption and nutrition.
An initial observation from the review is that existing FSMS’s have been influenced by
WFP’s earlier work on vulnerability mapping and Comprehensive Food Security &
Vulnerability Assessments (CFSVAs), the 2004/2005 orientation towards household food
security (see Section 2.1) and the recent focus on food markets/prices. Where the
emphasis is on household food security (e.g. Côte D’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali,
Mauritania, Burundi, DR Congo, Southern African countries), the FSMS is primarily based
on the collection and analysis of primary data and/or the use of household data from other
sources. Where the reports reflect a more established tradition for early warning (e.g.
Ethiopia, Kenya, Haiti), providing information on rainfall anomaly as well as threats to crop
and livestock production, there is a tendency to rely more on secondary data or a
combination of primary and secondary data. Some FSMS’s rely on both primary and
secondary data (e.g. Nepal, Tajikistan, Kenya and Haiti).
12
3.2 Geographical Coverage
The first objective of an FSMS, which concerns identification and monitoring of variables
critical to food security, includes a reference to specified geographical coverage (2005
definition). In other words, FSMS is supposed to operate in certain areas of a country,
which could mean either areas with a population considered to be more at risk in relation
to food insecurity14, or areas with WFP food assistance intervention. There are examples of
both options in the FSMS’s reviewed for this report, but there also cases where the
coverage is extended to rural areas in general or is nation-wide. It should be noted that in
countries with a longer tradition for FSMS (e.g. Kenya), the area coverage may have been
extended due to changes in the food security situation in areas not previously considered
to be prone to food insecurity.
It would appear that the focus on specific geographic areas through household surveys is
often based on earlier work on Vulnerability Mapping (e.g. CAR, Guinea-Bissau, Mali),
while the CFSVAs have influenced the FSMS process where such assessments were
available (Nepal, Palestine, Central African Republic, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Mali, Niger,
Burundi, Sudan and Haiti). It should be noted, however, that not all CFSVAs provided
national coverage. There are cases where the FSMS area coverage has been established
on the basis of an Emergency Food Security Assessments (EFSA); Tajikistan is one such
case.
Actual coverage has also been influenced by the existence of other systems in place for
monitoring, e.g. by NGOs, or the existence of secondary data on cereal production or
other aspects of food availability. In some cases, security reasons will have influenced the
coverage as well (e.g. Afghanistan, Chad, and Sudan).
The geographical coverage of Country FSMS’s is shown in Table 2, which also attempts to
classify the type of partnership under which the FSMS’s are operating. It should be noted
that geographical coverage in this report mainly refers to the coverage of household
surveys conducted for FSMS’s. Where no household has been conducted, the coverage has
been assessed on the basis of the main contents of the reporting product, particularly
issues like agricultural and livestock production, markets, livelihood zones and nutrition
(Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Palestine, Ethiopia, Kenya and Southern Sudan).
3.3 Partnerships in Food Security Monitoring
Development of Partnerships in FSMS: Institutional setting and partnerships are important for both initiating a Country FSMS and making it sustainable. It would appear
that partnerships have been developed on an ad-hoc basis. However, it is obvious that
WFP has promoted the idea of partnerships in almost all FSMS’s (if not all). The issue is
dealt with in the Discussion Note referred to in Section 2.1, which points at various factors
to be considered in relation to institutional setting and management of FSMS.
The ideas of avoiding the creation of parallel systems and anchoring monitoring in
government agencies, international organisations, etc. are basic points raised in the
14 / Such areas could have been identified in baseline studies (CFSVAs) or through Vulnerability Mapping.
13
Discussion Note15. Such ideas seem not always to have prevailed in the constitution of
partnerships. Thus, some WFP partnerships are with projects, which are likely to be
phased out when external funding is withdrawn16, or with NGOs that may not have a
permanent presence in the country. In four cases (Mauritania, Burundi, Kenya and
Southern Sudan), WFP is a partner under Government coordinating mechanisms that
provide the basis for consolidating the much desired “national ownership”. In other cases
(e.g. Guinea-Bissau, Haiti), the activities and the reporting product appear, at least
formally speaking, as part of a government food security information system, although
WFP may still have the lead in conducting surveys and preparing reports. Where WFP has
introduced households surveys to generate data for the FSMS (e.g. Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea-
Bissau, Niger and Burundi), particularly in relation household food access and
consumption, it would appear that national capacity building was not high on the agenda
because the focus was on immediate results. In the case of CHS in Southern Africa, issues
of staff training and handing over to national institutions were considered from the outset.
Classification: An attempt to classify the current partnerships of Country FSMS’s, in
combination with their geographical coverage, is shown in Table 2:
Table 2: Partnerships and Geographical Coverage of Country FSMS’s Partnership
Geographical Coverage
WFP/Int. Org. and NGOs
WFP/Government and Int. Orgs/
NGOs
WFP Only Government Institution(s) with Participation of
WFP/Int.Org./NGOs National Afghanistan,
Palestine Mauritania, Kenya
Rural, General Coverage
Tajikistan CAR, Ethiopia, Guinea-Bissau, Lesotho, Swaziland
Southern Sudan
Rural, Specific Coverage
Chad, Côte D’Ivoire, Niger, DR Congo, Mali, Niger, Haiti
Nepal Burundi
Rural/Urban, Programme Coverage
Sri Lanka Malawi,
Mozambique,
Namibia, Zambia,
Zimbabwe
Rural/Urban, Specific Coverage
Indonesia
Notes: Partnership refers to the FSMS and not general coordinating mechanisms for Food Security in a given country. WFP only = WFP has the responsibility for data collection and analysis. During the stocktaking it was noted that some reporting products did not recognise the participation of government agencies in FSMS. This was the case for some Southern African countries and has been taken into consideration in the above classification.
FSMS Partnerships on an Ad-hoc Basis: As information on the process of establishing
the FSMS in each country is generally not available, it difficult to conclude anything about
15 / Discussion Note, pp. 5-6. 16 / A good example is WFP’s partnership with FEWS NET (Ethiopia, Southern Africa), which definitely has produced
interesting results, though not on a sustainable basis.
14
why a specific strategy was applied from the onset with regard to the FSMS partnership. It
is very likely, however, that partnerships were established on some kind of pragmatic
principle, based on alliances with existing actors in humanitarian/development aid as well
as government agencies, where such are firmly established at the level of food aid/food
security coordination. A thorough analysis on where to start, how to link with existing
information systems of relevance for food security, etc. may not have constituted a priority
from the outset.
There are, however, exceptions to this general observation. In Nepal, where WFP has
been developing a Food Security Monitoring and Analysis System since 2002, there is now
a shift towards national capacity building, particularly through monitoring of food security
at district level.17 In Tajikistan, an FSMS was initiated in 2008 after discussions in the Food
Security Cluster Group (UN Agencies and NGOs) and there is a clear ambition to support
national capacity building so that FSMS may become a National Government
responsibility.18 In Mauritania, the biannual household survey well integrated with the
activities of the Food Security Commission. In Indonesia, WFP undertook a pilot
monitoring exercise on the impact of high food prices in selected urban and rural areas,
with the stated objective of enhancing national ownership and sustainability through
partnerships with Government Agencies as well as international organisations and NGOs.19
The WFP experience in FSMS partnerships confirms the observation presented in a wider
context of WFP operations that although partnership is considered of utmost importance,
practice shows an ad-hoc approach to the subject.20There are, however, ways of
addressing this situation, which furthermore is a corporate responsibility under the current
WFP Strategic Plan.
3. 4 Indicators
Selection of Indicators: The choice of indicators is extremely important because it
determines the focus in monitoring as well as the methodology to be applied in FSMS data
collection. The choice of indicators also determines to what food security trend monitoring
actually covers the three main dimensions of food security – Availability, Access and
Utilisation.
Use of Indicators in FSMS: A wide range of indicators have been used in Country FSMS’s. Considering the various influences that have shaped the development of the WFP
FSMS tool21, this is not surprising. However, there is also a considerable degree of
variability in the application of certain indicators in an analytical context. For the purpose
of monitoring trends or seasonal variation, particularly in relation to access and utilisation.
17 / Communication from WFP/VAM Nepal dated 11 March 2009. 18 / See: WFP Country Office Tajikistan, Concept Note – Tajikistan Food Security Monitoring System, November 2008. It
is noted, however, that national capacity building may not be feasible in the short term. 19 / See: WFP/UNICEF, Report on Pilot Monitoring of High Food Price Impact at Household Level in Selected
Vulnerable Areas, April 2009. 20 / See: WFP, Programme Design and Support Division, Cooperation and Partnership Programme, A Framework for
Partnership, Capacity Development and Hand-Over: Challenges, Approaches and Next Steps, Rome, 14 May 2009, p. 29. 21 / See Section 2.1. It should also be noted that five FSMS’s of 26 reviewed do not operate in accordance with the WFP
“approach” (i.e. primary attention given to household food access and consumption). These are Sri Lanka, Palestine,
Ethiopia, Kenya (partly) and Southern Sudan.
15
It would appear that the number of indicators go beyond what in reality in required for
providing timely and relevant information for decision making.
Generally, the overall trend points towards an increasing emphasis on food access
(livelihoods, household food access & consumption, prices), which constitutes the main
thrust of the CHS Southern African experience as well as in recently initiated FSMS’s (e.g.
Tajikistan, Cote D’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, DR Congo). Secondly, nutrition receives
considerable attention, which reflects both the CHS experience and the incorporation of
nutrition indicators in other types of FSMS (e.g. Tajikistan, Mauritania, and Kenya).
Thirdly, availability is covered to a lesser extent, which reflects the WFP tendency in recent
years to focus more on household food access, consumption and nutrition22in its food
security analysis.
Availability: The most commonly used indicators in terms of Availability relate to Rainfall,
Threats to Crop/Livestock Production and Crop/Livestock Production Prospects. In most
cases, the indicator of rainfall is a simple reference to precipitation data, while the use of
satellite imagery and anomaly estimates is very limited. It would appear that the
traditional Early Warning activities have been excluded from the WFP-managed FSMS’s
because such were considered to be covered by other WFP services or specific projects
like FEWS NET.
Access: As for Access to Food, the most commonly used indicators are Food Consumption
Score (FCS), Food Expenditure, Prices/Price Trends and Coping Strategies/Coping Strategy
Index (CSI). These are quantitative indicators, which require the collection of primary data
at household level as part of the FSMS activities, or the use of similar data originating from
other surveys. The influence of methodologies developed for the Comprehensive Food
Security and Vulnerability Assessments (CFSVA) is evident, even where no CFSVA has
been conducted in the country. This shows that the thrust towards monitoring and
analysing household food access and consumption has been sustained.
Utilisation: Indicators for Utilization/Nutrition mainly relate to Global Acute Malnutrition (< five years), Chronic Child Malnutrition (stunting), Wasting as well as and Maternal
Health & Nutrition. There are some examples of the use of secondary nutrition data from
other health & nutrition surveillance systems, like such maintained by Ministries of
Health.23
Food Security Status: The review reflects a general tendency to classify food security and/or vulnerability (19 cases) by category, in some cases on a map, although the
methodology used in data collection and analysis may not be sufficiently robust to support
such classification when it is applied at sub-national or national level. A few FSMS’s go
beyond a general classification by assigning estimated population figures to food security
status (e.g. Nepal, Tajikistan, Mauritania).
22 / However, WFP’s work on food markets and financial crisis represents a new tendency, which provides an opportunity
to link Shocks with Household Food Access in the context of Food Security Monitoring. 23 / A quick comparison with earlier attempts to define indicators in relation to global monitoring of food security status
shows some similarity and also some important additions, particularly in relation to Household Food Access and
Consumption (Food Consumption Score, Coping Strategies/Coping Strategy Index and Household Food Stocks). See:
Committee on World Food Security, Twenty-sixth Session: Suggested Core Indicators for Monitoring Food Security
Status, Document 2000/2-Sup. 1, Rome, 18-21 September 2000. This confirms the assertion by WFP/VAM staff that the
contribution of WFP to food security monitoring lies in the Access dimension.
16
A summary of indicators used in 26 FSMS country reports is shown in Table 3:
Table 3: Summary of Indicators Used in FSMS Country Reports Food Security Dimension
Indicator Cases (total of 26)
Primary Data Source
Secondary Data Source
Availability Rainfall 8 �
Rainfall Anomaly 5 �
Threats to Crop/ Livestock Production
7 � �
Crop/Livestock Production Prospects
7 �
National Cereal Availability 4 � Cereal/Crop/Livestock
Production 5 �
Market Stocks 4 � � Use of Land to Grow
Cereal/Food Crops 2 � �
Food Aid 3 �
Access Coping Strategies/ Strategy Index
14 �
Food Consumption Score 17 �
Household Food Stocks 12 �
Livelihoods and Income Sources
13 �
Asset Ownership 4 �
Food Expenditure 16 �
Frequency of Meals 3 �
Prices/Price Trends 15 � � Terms of Trade 4 � � Utilization/Nutrition Daily Energy
Requirement 1 �
Water Access 2 �
Education 3 �
Sanitation 1 �
Global Acute Malnutrition or MUAC
15 � �
Chronic Malnutrition (stunting)
11 � �
Wasting 10 � � Maternal Health and Nutrition
(BMI) 10 � �
Child Mortality 2 � �
Access to Health Services 2 � �
Diseases 3 � General Classification/Prevalence of
Food Insecurity and/or Vulnerability
19
� �
Outlook/Food Security Implications
6 � �
Targeting Efficiency 7 �
Analytical Application: The analytical application of certain indicators for access varies to some extent in the FSMS’s. This may be a result of variations in the formulation of
questions in household questionnaires or the need to adapt the calculation of indicators to
the context of the country, e.g. in relation to food consumption and food expenditure. For
indicators on hazards and availability, it is more difficult to detect variations. This is due to
the use of secondary data and the lack of a verifiable record in risk analysis in relation to
the impact of natural hazards on national availability and household food security.
17
3.5 Methodology
Improvements in Methodologies: As rightly pointed out by many WFP/VAM staff, WFP
has the advantage of being closer to the millions of people suffering from hunger through
its large field presence, which is unique in relation to other UN Agencies.24 In addition, the
analytical capacity is perceived to have been enhanced during recent years through the
introduction of baseline studies (Comprehensive Food Security & Vulnerability Assessments
- CFSVAs) as well as improvements of other more well-known tools, including Emergency
Food Security Assessments (EFSA) and Crop and Food Supply Assessments Missions
(CFSAM)25. The emphasis on Household Food Access, Consumption and Nutrition, which is
common in most FSMS’s initiated or promoted by WFP, reaffirms an orientation pursued in
the CFSVAs.
Sentinel Sites: In 19 FSMS´s, sampling for household surveys is purposive, is purposive,
e.g., through a selection of areas with a high percentage of vulnerable households or WFP
Final Distribution Points. There are cases, where sentinel sites are randomly selected
within the pre-selected areas (e.g. Burundi and probably in some West African countries),
while households are always randomly selected from the sentinel sites. In one case, i.e.,
that of Tajikistan, a multi-stage selection method has been applied on the basis of
purposively selected zones, which lends some credibility to the subjectivity of sampling, at
least till village level. However, it should be mentioned that the statistical objectivity of
random sampling at household level or at primary level, when combined with an initial,
purposive selection, is contradictory because purposive selection is an integral part of the
sentinel site methodology and does not provide a basis for statistical inference beyond the
boundaries of the chosen sentinel sites.26
The use of Sentinel Sites was originally developed for facility-based surveillance in the
Health Sector. It is more cost-effective and allows for routine monitoring in specific
environments (e.g. disease control). It is useful for monitoring trends, particularly in
surveillance where all units of analysis with the same characteristics (e.g. HIV/AIDS
patients receiving treatment at health facilities) are followed over a certain period of time.
Today, the Sentinel Sites Methods (SSM) is widely used for monitoring of diseases and
health indicators in both developed and developing countries, mainly as facility-based
monitoring. It is also being introduced by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in the
monitoring of nutrition and health indicators in developing countries (e.g. Pakistan).
Linking FSMS Information to Decision-Making: The utility of primary data collection
and analysis should be related to the objective of an FSMS which in many cases seems to
be more of a direct decision-making tool for policy and programming rather than a trigger
for a rapid or an in-depth assessment (e.g., an EFSA) after the identification of a problem.
This important distinction has not made been clear in the FSMS consultations but many
24/ As a logistics organization, WFP has many more field staff than any other UN Agency. These are supported by VAM
Units at both regional and country level. 25 / Now called Crop and Food Security Assessment Missions. 26/ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Sentinel Surveillance Method, Washington, D.C, October 2003. For
comments on the use of sentinel sites in monitoring nutritional status in projects, please see: Saul S. Morris. Measuring
Nutritional Dimensions of Household Food Security. Technical Guide # 5, IFPRI, March 1999, pp. 12-13. The objective
of random or probabilistic sampling is to establish a basis for statistical inference.
18
Country VAM Officers state that conclusions from an FSMS often feed directly into
programming decisions. It could be argued that in this case, more robust, statistical
methods are required in comparison with those based on purposive selection of areas or
sites.27 However, this in itself has cost implications because data collection based on
probabilistic sampling invariably is more expensive in comparison with purposive selection
basis. Mauritania is one such case (the only one) and here FSMS reports feed directly into
programming and annual revisions.
Although clear evidence is not at hand, it is probable that conclusions from several FSMS’s
based on household surveys and purposive sampling actually are used in direct
programming decisions, which in principle is difficult to justify unless information
emanating from FSMS is supplemented by other sources. On the other hand, in the case
of project monitoring & evaluation the purposive sampling method is on a sounder basis
and has proved its utility, one example being CHS in Southern Africa. In either case, FSMS
reporting should provide a clear understanding of the context and objective of monitoring
as well as some indication of what is expected to change over the coming months
(outlook). The latter aspect has been somewhat overlooked in many FSMS due to the
retrospective nature of household and nutrition surveys.
Alternatives to the Use of Sentinel Sites: An option that could be considered but not always feasible, in the introduction of rotating panels in successive cross-sectional studies
would allow for a study of household dynamics while at the same time undertake trend
analysis. This kind of survey design would be more cost effective than a traditional cross-
sectional study and would also allow for a reduction in attrition, which tends to be high in
fixed panel studies (e.g. Burundi).
Use of Secondary Data: While the generation and use of primary data have developed
with some consistency as well as methodological limitations, the secondary data collection
and analysis have been very much based on the situation of each country and the
partnership on which the FSMS is based. The partnership with FEWS NET in Ethiopia and
Kenya are examples of how a strong partner with a well-defined product has influenced
not only the use of secondary data but also the content of reporting products. If the use
of secondary data is to be maintained or even expanded in FSMS, e.g. in relation to
hazards, national food availability and markets, there is a need to introduce more
consistency and guidance on how this can be achieved.
3.6 Reporting Products and Periodicity
The regularity of reporting determines the workload associated with FSMS and should in
practice be linked to the selection of indicators. A more frequent schedule of reporting
generates a pressure on data collection, particularly when such is based on household
surveys. There are attempts to regularise quarterly surveys in a number of countries, of
which Burundi has recorded the longest experience with 14 rounds till June-October 2008.
Bi-annual surveys are the most common and are being applied in some West African
countries and in Southern Africa, with the exception of Namibia.
27
/ See Greg Collin´s observations on the issue in: WFP Burundi Food Security Monitoring System Review,
June 2007.
19
It is observed that some FSMS’s are fledging and have only produced one or two reports
over more than two years, while others seem to attain regularity from the outset. Various
factors may influence regularity, including WFP VAM Unit staffing, WFP programming and
most importantly, the availability of separate funding for Food Security Monitoring.
The reporting product of most FSMS’s is a Food Security Update or Monitoring Report, the
extent of which varies from about eight to more than 30 pages. In the case of CHS for the
Southern African countries, the reporting product is a Fact Sheet of four to six pages,
basically presenting survey results in same format for all countries in the sub-region.
Many reporting products are (or intended to be) disseminated on a quarterly basis, while
CHS reports are bi-annual, and has so far reported 12 rounds till March 2009. There are
also examples of more frequent reporting (e.g. Monthly Food Security Updates for Ethiopia
and Kenya) but here the use of primary data is limited and micro-level information scarce.
There is tendency to report on the same indicators in each report, particularly on
household food security and nutrition. This, however, would need to be adjusted to report
on different indicators relating to seasonal events (e.g. rainfall anomaly, crop production).
Hence different seasons would incorporate different sets of information in FSMS reports.
3.7 Dissemination
Generally, the dissemination of reporting products is through web-sites, by e-mail in
accordance with lists established by WFP and partners, and in a couple of cases by
subscriptions. Although distribution in hard copy may take place at local level, e.g. among
Government Agencies, this modality is little used. Lists of distribution seem to have been
established through the decision of individuals, e.g. WFP VAM Unit staff or contacts within
Government Agencies.
Although dissemination through websites is widely used, there is little use of a ‘Real Time
Update’ facility in the monitoring systems reviewed for this report. In fact, only one has
such facility (SICA/CAC Weekly Update of Wholesale Food Staple Prices) was identified
during stocktaking. On the other hand, such facility is common for websites providing
Early Warning information (see Annex 2).
3.8 Sustainability
External funding has largely driven the introduction of WFP-managed FSMS’s, originally
through the SENAC project, which provided funds for FSMS’s in a number of countries.28
DFID is currently an important donor on a country-by-country basis. As the WFP approach
basically has focused on the methodology and the technical content of monitoring (e.g.
indicators), the issue of sustainability under national ownership has received less
attention. Where the FSMS’s primarily is based on data from household surveys at sentinel
sites, the cost per household/round is in the range of USD 30 – 50, which may include the
cost of interviewing key informants as well. The figure seems low when compared with the
cost of national household surveys. Funding has varied from country to country and
included external sources, Government and WFP programme funds (e.g. ODOC).
28 / See reference in Table 1. The main donor was ECHO.
20
From an organisational point of view, the introduction of WFP food security monitoring has
largely progressed on the basis on perceived information needs from a WFP point of view
(e.g. household food access) rather than as a joint decision between national partners and
WFP. Where the Government has a strong coordinating mechanism in place (e.g.
Mauritania, Kenya), however, decisions have been made jointly.
The staff of government agencies and of other partners have received training, when
there has been an involvement in data collection in surveys undertaken for the FSMS. In
general, however, training has taken place on an ad-hoc basis and not as part of an
overall capacity building strategy, which should consider institutional and organisational
issues as well. This situation is similar to what has been observed in a wider context of
WFP operations29.
3.9 The Challenges Ahead
Widening the coverage of FSMS (roll-out) and enhancing the quality of monitoring in the
context of increasing national ownership, would require a concentration of efforts in the
following areas:
a) revise the definition of Food Security Monitoring and achieve an in-house WFP consensus on the subject, while acknowledging that each case may require a context-specific approach;
b) reduce and harmonise the number of indicators in the context of a Conceptual Framework for Food Security and Nutrition;
c) improve methodologies in relation to sampling, data collection and data analysis;
d) clarify the linkage between FSMS information and decision-making, particularly in relation to WFP policies and programming;
e) develop a framework for partnership development and capacity assessment;
f) improve content and structure of reporting within a communication strategy.
The following chapter of case studies attempts to show the coverage and orientation of a
number of national and sub-regional food security information and monitoring systems,
incorporating the contribution by WFP. The chapter serve the purpose of providing a more
comprehensive entry point for food security monitoring by looking at the wider context of
national coordination, food security information systems and food security monitoring.
29 / WFP, Programme Design & Support Division, Cooperation and Partnership Programme, Op.cit.
21
4. CASE STUDIES OF FOOD SECURITY INFORMATION AND MONITORING SYSTEMS
4.1 Introduction
Details for each Country FSMS are presented in the Country Fact Sheets, included as
Annex 3. A description of a few cases is presented below, with an attempt to situate each
FSMS in the context of WFP operations as well as Food Security Co-ordination and
Information Systems at country or sub-regional level. WFP is not involved in all the
systems described. However, the existing scope of these leaves considerable potential for
WFP to introduce new elements of food security monitoring, e.g. in relation to household
food access and consumption at national level and food security markets monitoring at
sub-regional level.
Food Security Information and Monitoring Systems is quite diverse and no single model for
organising the management of information stands out. Where Food Security Co-ordination
is relatively strong at national level, there is probably a tendency to reduce the number of
reporting products.
4.2 Nepal
WFP Assistance: Current activities include two Protracted Relief and Recovery Operations (PRROs): a) Food Assistance for Populations Affected by Conflict and High
Food Prices and b) Food Assistance to Bhutanese Refugees, as well as development
assistance under a Country Programme that covers school meals and maternal & child
health care. WFP assistance reaches up to 3.5 million people in about 40 of Nepal’s 75
districts.
Food Security Co-ordination: Traditionally, food security has received little attention in the Nepalese policy agenda. The Three-year Interim Plan 2007-2010 dedicates for the first
time a separate section to food security and makes the National Food Security Policy a
priority. In order to co-ordinate the issue of food security, the Government has recently
established a National Food Security Steering Committee under the Planning Commission
and a Food Security Co-ordination Group with the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-
operatives (MoAC).
Food Security Information: Government activities in relation to food security
information are basically limited to periodic crop assessments undertaken by MoAC. The
Food Security Monitoring and Analysis System (FSMAS), launched by WFP in 2002, is the
main source of information. The FSMAS conceptual framework considers a range of sub-
systems managed by WFP, including sectoral analysis, baseline surveys, macro- and
micro-level analysis, surveillance system, assessments and policies.
Food Security Monitoring: Primary data are collected by 31 WFP Field Monitors that
collect and transmit data on household food Security, crop production and food prices
from 35 to 40 rural districts. Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and mobile phones are
used. The establishment of District Food Security Networks (FSNs) is promoted with the
22
objective of strengthening data collection, data sharing and debate about food security
issues at local level.
The main reporting products are:
• Food Security Bulletin, a monthly bulletin summarising the most important changes
and observations reported by the Field Monitors, the salient features of the food
security analysis and may include conclusions from other reports, such as flood
impact assessments, etc. The overall analysis is presented in the form of Food
Security Classification Maps and an Outlook for three months, which integrates a
situation report, immediate/underlying causes and short-term outlook.
• Crop Situation Update, which is published twice a year with information on rainfall,
agricultural production and production prospects.
• Emergency Alert, which flags the predicted impact of hazards (mainly drought).
• Market Watch, a monthly bulletin with information on market developments and
prices.
Comments: WFP Nepal food security monitoring and analysis activities are rather unique
in the sense that they are based on a broad-based conceptual framework largely
conceived by WFP alone, for which generous, external funding has been made available.
Recently, WFP has initiated a programme of training government staff in food security
concepts, data collection, etc. and intends to implement a programme of capacity building,
particularly in relation to the establishment of district-based Food Security Networks.
4.3 Burkina Faso
WFP Assistance: Country Programme (CP) operations focus on food assistance to
women and children with the objective of promoting adult literacy and basic education as
well as assistance to undernourished children in rural areas with structural food insecurity;
a PRRO addressing acute under-nutrition among children, pregnant women and lactating
mothers as well as support to the National Plan for Nutrition; and an Emergency Operation
(EMOP) providing emergency response to high food prices in the main cities through a
cash voucher scheme and the distribution of ready-to-use food for young children and
fortified foods for pregnant women and lactating mothers. Burkina Faso also benefits from
the newly initiated Purchase for Progress (P4P) project.
Food Security Co-ordination: The National Food Security Council (CNSA) was created in April 2006. Its role is advisory through the presentation of policy recommendations to
the government. CNSA is chaired by the Minister of State for Agriculture. Members include
line ministries and government agencies, technical and financial partners (external
agencies) and Civil Society. CNSA organs comprise of the General Assembly, the Technical
Committee, the Executive Secretariat and the Decentralised Councils (regional, provincial,
etc).
Food Security Information: The main information systems are: i) the Permanent
Agricultural Survey for forecasting and assessing cereal production, which covers about
4,000 rural households; ii) the Early Warning System; iii) the Cereal Market Information
System; and iv) the Livestock Market Information System. Others include FEWSNET and
the agro-meteorological system developed by CILSS/AGRHYMET. Although the Permanent
23
Agricultural Survey, which is carried out every year, includes an anthropometric indicator
for children (MUAC), information on nutrition is somewhat lacking. This is even more so
for household access to food. Outputs from the national food security information system
is often complemented by joint assessment or studies by external agencies. A recent
example is the study on Impact of Rising Food Prices on Food Security in Urban Areas,
which was undertaken by WFP, FAO, UNICEF, UNDP and Save the Children UK.
Food Security Monitoring: The reporting products generated by the national food security information system include:
• Quarterly Information Bulletin for Food Security (Bulletin Trimestriel d’Information
sur la Sécurité Alimentaire au Burkina Faso), which reports on government policies
and programmes, crop production, exports, prices, seed production and cereal
balances.
• Monthly Early Warning Bulletin (Mensuel d’Information du Système d’Alerte
Précoce), which reports on rainfall, crop and pasture conditions, and prices;
• Agro-Alert (AgriAlerte), a newssheet published occasionally with information on
threats to production (e.g. flooding) and levels of market stocks.
• Weekly Information Bulletin on Agricultural Markets (Bulletin Hebdomadaire
d’Information sur le Marché Agricole au Burkina Faso), which reports on
agricultural markets and prices
Reports are normally prepared by staff of the Directorate-General of Forecasting and
Agricultural Statistics (now transformed into the Directorate-General for Promotion of the
Rural Economy - DGPER) or other departments/institutions under the Ministry of
Agriculture. External agency staff, including WFP, occasionally contributes to the Quarterly
Food Security Bulletin.
Comments: Food security information systems and food security monitoring are firmly
institutionalized in a Government-coordinated system for both food security policy and
planning as well as food security information. Food security monitoring is clearly oriented
towards natural hazards and food availability, although the permanent agricultural survey
also covers nutrition and dietary diversity.
4.4 Ethiopia
WFP Assistance: Current operations include Emergency Food & Nutrition Support,
Productive Safety Net Programme (Government), Targeted Supplementary Food
Programme and Support to HIV/AIDS affected families. Recovery or development
operations (Country Programme) include two core components: food for assets and school
meals. In most years, the WFP programme in Ethiopia is the second-largest of all country
operations. In 2009, WFP is planning to reach 9.7 million beneficiaries, which is
considerably higher than during previous years. The Purchase for Progress (P4P) also
operates in Ethiopia.
Food Security Co-ordination: The institutional set-up originates from 1974, when the
Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (RRC) was established, following the outbreak of
famine in Northern Ethiopia (Wollo and Tigray).
24
There were several institutional changes until 1995, when the Disaster Preparedness and
Prevention Agency (DPPA)
was established. DPPA activities were overseen by the National Disaster Prevention and
Preparedness Committee (NDPPC), which had the overall decision-making responsibility at
national level regarding disaster management. There were similar arrangements at
regional, zonal and woreda level. A recent development is the integration of DPPA in the
Disaster Management and Food Security Sector (DMFSS) under the Ministry of Agriculture
& Rural Development, which now coordinates emergency-oriented food aid programmes
as well as interventions addressing structural and development-oriented food security
programmes.
Food Security Information: There are several, national systems in place, mostly related
to climate, weather and agricultural production. Apart from DMFSS, the main agencies are
the National Meteorological Department and the Central Bureau of Statistics. Generally,
information on rainfall anomaly and crops are fairly comprehensive. Pastoral areas,
however, are not adequately covered. External agencies, including NGOs, often collect
data from their areas of operation. Their data collection is often integrated with that of the
former DPPA system.
Food Security Monitoring: Food security monitoring in Ethiopia is characterized by the
existence of several systems, some of which are closely related to Early Warning. The
most comprehensive monitoring system is that of the former DPPA, which covers most of
the rural woredas (district) on a monthly basis. Although WFP collects data on rainfall,
crop and pasture conditions, markets, health and nutrition through the VAM Focal Points,
WFP has ceased to prepare a monitoring bulletin and now collaborates with FEWS NET on
the Monthly Food Security Update. Ethiopia is one of the few examples of a WFP-
supported food security monitoring, which does not rely on regular household surveys.
The most important reporting products are:
• DPPA, Monthly Bulletin.
• DPPA, Monthly Report of the Ethiopian Early Warning System.
• DPPA, Emergency Nutrition Quarterly Bulletin.
The content and structure of these reporting products are currently under revision, while
FEWS NET/WFP monitoring is consolidated in:
• FEWS NET/WFP, Food Security Update.
Under the new DMFSS structure the content, frequency and number of government-issued
reporting products will be subject to review and reorientation.
A number of bulletins provide frequent updates on food security, humanitarian situation
and ongoing interventions. Among others, these include:
• OCHA Ethiopia, Humanitarian Bulletin.
• WHO, Ethiopia Country Office Weekly Update.
25
Comments: Although food security monitoring appears to be fairly comprehensive in
relation to hazards, crop production and agricultural prices, there are gaps in the
geographical coverage, particular for the pastoral areas.
Household data on food access and consumption are limited, which reflects the absence of
a national integrated household survey as well as the traditional bias towards support to
meeting the national food availability gap through food aid.
4.5 Kenya
WFP Assistance: The largest WFP activity is Food Assistance to Populations Affected by
Drought and Post-Election Violence (EMOP). Other activities include Food Assistance to
Somali and Sudanese Refuges and a school meals programme, which operates in arid and
semi-arid areas as well as Nairobi. The post-election violence at the beginning of 2008,
which resulted in displacement of a large number of people in Nairobi and the Rift Valley,
led to a partial shift in food assistance towards areas, where food insecurity previously was
considered to be non-existent.
Food Security Co-ordination: The current food security coordination set-up originates in 1998, when the Kenya Food Security Meeting (KFSM) was established. The KFSM is an
open forum, which generally meets once a month. Its membership consists of Government
Departments, UN Agencies, International Donors and NGOs. KFSM is chaired by the
Ministry of State for Special Programmes (Office of the President).
The Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG) is the operational arm of KFSM, which
primarily coordinates food security monitoring, bi-annual assessments and special studies.
KFSSG is currently chaired by the Drought Management Co-ordinator of the Arid Lands
Resource Management Project (ARLMP) in the Ministry of State for the Development of
Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands (Prime Minister’s Office). WFP holds the co-chair.
Both KFSM and KFSSG have been operational since 1998/99. The coordination set-up has
not been institutionalised and until to date the planned secretariat for KFSSG has not been
established. However, the institutional context has been quite effective in securing an
adequate coordination of the food security information system in Kenya. In practice, most
sectors respect the coordinating role of both KFSM and KFSSG, and parallel initiatives in
terms of food security analysis have largely been avoided30.
Food Security Information: The main reporting products in relation to food security
information are a) the Short- and Long-Rains Season Assessment Reports (bi-annual); b)
the monthly Kenya Food Security Update; c) the Kenya Food Security Outlook. These
regular reports are complemented by special studies, e.g. the recent Rapid Urban
Assessment, which covered urban slums in Nairobi and Mombassa, and the Report on the
Impact of Rising Food Prices on Disparate Livelihood Groups. It should be mentioned that
various national institutions (Ministry of Agriculture, Meteorological Department, etc.)
30 / There are, however, examples of food security analysis and assessments that have not been coordinated by KFSSG.
One is the FAO-implemented “Food Insecurity Assessment in Kenya-2005/06 Kenya Integrated Household Budget
Survey”, which was published by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics in March 2008.
26
operate their own information systems, which contribute to the consolidated reporting
products prepared under KFSSG coordination31.
The Short- and Long-Rains Assessments constitute the main tools for determining the food
security status of the Kenya population. The Assessments provide an overview of rainfall
performance, national maize supply situation, maize price trends, and status of the food
security situation by geographical region/livelihood cluster and recommendations for
priority interventions by sector (food assistance, non-food interventions). While the bi-
annual assessment originally was based on the information system established by the
ARLMP for arid and semi-arid areas, the current geographical coverage also includes the
North Rift & Western Mixed Farming Cluster and the Lake Region. The Short-Rains Season
Assessment of 2008/09 furthermore covers urban slums in Nairobi and Mombassa, based
on a separate (preliminary) urban food insecurity assessment study32.
WFP EMOP and PRRO interventions are defined on the basis of the Short- and Long-Rains
Assessment reports and separate food security assessments are not undertaken.
Food Security Monitoring: The basic food security monitoring products are:
• Kenya Monthly Food Security Update, which provides updated information on
rainfall, water and pasture conditions, crop development, livestock situation, maize
supply, food prices, etc. The participating institutions provide inputs/reports for the
monthly Update, for which FEWS NET has the responsibility of final editing.
• Kenya Food Security Outlook, a publication prepared twice a year with two
scenarios (most likely and worst cases), based on either the regional Climate
Outlook Consensus or the National Rainfall Forecast and a number of assumptions
concerning food prices, pre- and post-harvest losses, resettlements, control of
pests and diseases, resource-based and political conflicts, as well as the effects of
mitigation and cross-sectoral interventions.
Comments: Although the coordination mechanisms for food security information and
response opportunities are informal, Kenya has achieved considerable progress in
producing consistent reports in terms of monitoring and assessments. While the original
efforts were oriented towards the drought-prone areas, a recent tendency has been to
widen the geographical coverage and also include urban food insecurity. There is a certain
overlap between assessment reports and monitoring reports, e.g. through the
incorporation of information from assessments in the monthly update and the presentation
of recommendations for action in both type of reports.
The immediate potential in terms of improvement seems to relate to institutional
strengthening and capacity building as well as streamlining data collection, analysis and
reporting.
31/ The most elaborate information system seems to be that of the ALRMP, which generates a monthly Drought Bulletin
by district/livelihood zone. The Bulletins includes Early Warning stages (normal, alert, alarm and emergency) and
information on rainfall, livestock and crop production, produce and livestock prices, terms of trade (cereal/meat), nutrition
(MUAC) and intervention measures. 32 / It should be mentioned that Kenya has adopted Livelihood Zoning as a basic approach for organizing and analyzing
food security as well as Integrated Phase Classification (IPC) for defining the level or severity of food insecurity.
27
In this way, monitoring tools and reporting would focus more on the identification of
critical areas and potential threats and shocks to food security, while the assessments
would provide the in-depth food insecurity status report and proposals for intervention.
4.6 Swaziland
WFP Assistance: A PRRO provides school meals, food assistance to families affected by
HIV/AIDS, supplementary feeding to persons receiving anti-retro viral and tuberculosis
treatment, support to those enrolled in prevention of mother-to-child transmission and
maternal & child health nutrition programmes, and supports food-for-assets activities.
Currently, WFP expects to reach about 200,000 people through its operations in
Swaziland.
Food Security Co-ordination: In the late 1980s, a National Early Warning Unit was
established within the Ministry Agriculture. The activities of the Unit were focused on the
availability dimension of Food Security (rainfall, cereal production forecasting, etc.), which
received support from a FAO-managed Early Warning Project operating at both regional
and national level within the then nine SADC member states. From the mid-1990s
onwards, Save the Children UK initiated work on household food security analysis,
applying the Household Food Economy Approach, which eventually led to the formation of
a National Vulnerability Assessment Committee (VAC).
Currently, the Swazi VAC membership includes Government Departments, UNDP, WFP,
UNICEF, WHO and NGOs. The Chairman is a senior statistician from the Central Statistical
Office. Recently, the Disaster Management Agency (DMA) has been established by an Act
of Parliament and a proposed Early Warning and Vulnerability Unit under DMA is expected
to constitute the secretariat for VAC. In the area of nutrition, the Swazi National Nutrition
Council, which administratively operates under the Ministry of Health, performs a
coordinating role. There is close coordination between VAC and the National Nutrition
Council.
Food Security Information: The main reporting products in relation to food security are
a) the Annual Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis, which is the responsibility of VAC; b)
the bi-annual Community and Household Surveillance (CHS), carried out in a partnership
between VAC and various external agencies (WFP plays a leading role); c) the newly
revived Food Security Update, prepared by the National Early Warning Unit for Food
Security of the Ministry of Agriculture. These regular reports are complemented by special
studies, e.g. the recent Vulnerability and Food Insecurity in Urban Areas study, which was
prepared by VAC. Other information systems include the Integrated Disease Surveillance
System and National Nutrition Surveys.
The Annual Vulnerability Assessment constitutes the main tool for providing an update on
the food security status of the Swazi (rural) population. While the annual assessments
originally were designed to look at food access and food availability at household level,
based on the use of questionnaires applied to livelihoods/food economy zones, the most
recent approach combines household surveys with the use of secondary data from other
surveys as well as information on National Food Availability.
28
Thus, the 2008 Assessment provides an overview of the national economy, data on
national food availability (rainfall, crop production, cereal balance sheet and commodity
prices) as well as analysis of household food security (livelihoods, food consumption,
water & sanitation, health, nutrition and HIV/AIDS). Reference is also made to the
Millennium Development Goals and the attainment of these under the Poverty Reduction
Strategy and Action Programme. The number of vulnerable people is based on an estimate
of households with a food shortage or expenditure deficit to meet basic needs.
Food Security Monitoring: The basic food security monitoring products are:
• WFP/VAC, Fact Sheet of the bi-annual Community and Household Surveillance
(CHS), a summarised report on the results of the survey.
• Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security Update, which reports on rainfall, vegetation
and agricultural production.
The CHS was originally designed to monitor WFP food assistance outcomes and targeting
efficiency in geographical areas with ongoing WFP activities (two districts). Recently, the
CHS has been expanded to cover all four districts of Swaziland (rural only). The survey
methodology is based on a selection of sentinel sites in combination with a population-
based sample from the community register (originally, 50% beneficiary/50% non-
beneficiary). Thus, the current Swazi version of the CHS attempts to combine the needs of
WFP programme outcome monitoring with an overall monitoring of food security trends in
rural areas.
The recently revived Food Security Update provides a quarterly updating of information on
rainfall, vegetation, crop development and cereal supply situation, including a revision of
the annual cereal balance sheet by marketing year and forecast of cereal import
requirements. The Update also provides information on constraints in production as well
as input supply. It contains no information on household food security.
Comments: The coordination mechanisms for food security information and disaster
management are moving towards a level of institutionalisation within the National
Government, which would facilitate the consolidation of reporting products in relation to
food security monitoring. The Swazi Government is giving high priority to food security
issues and the current political commitment provides a conducive context for providing
further support to institutional strengthening, capacity building and improvements in
methodologies and geographical coverage.
The immediate challenges would appear to include a revision of the CHS, including a
review of indicators to make possible a clearer identification of potential threats and
shocks to food security; this would also include the incorporation of market indicators.
Other challenges include the definition of periodicity in relation to reporting products and
specific indicators, as well as the introduction of probabilistic sampling for household
surveys.
29
4.7 Haiti
WFP Assistance: The programme is one of the largest in the Americas and Caribbean
including both an EMOP and a PRRO. The EMOP is primarily providing food assistance to
beneficiaries affected by recent hurricanes and tropical storms, with a focus on the
reduction of under-nutrition. The PRRO includes assistance to anaemic mothers and
underweight children, a large school meals programme, targeted distribution of family
rations, and labour-intensive food-for-work schemes. Current operations reach a total of
2.3 million beneficiaries.
Food Security Co-ordination: The Inter-ministerial Council for Food Security (CISA)
was established in November 1996. Its mandate covers the preparation of policy options
for food security and the coordination of technical cooperation programmes in the area of
food security. CISA is chaired by the Minister of Agriculture; members are the Ministers of
Health, Planning, Finance and Trade. A Technical Support Office (CNSA – National Co-
ordination for Food Security) is responsible for food security analysis, co-ordination of
programmes and external technical assistance as well as relations with external agencies,
NGOs, private sector and Civil Society. CNSA operates the National Observatory for Food
Security (ONSA), which basically is a common denominator for the various initiatives on
food security information.
Food Security Information: CNSA publishes a number of reports on a regular basis.
Most of these reports are prepared with external assistance. The most important reporting
products are: i) a National Update on Food Security (Bilan de la Sécurité Alimentaire),
which normally covers the developments over the last two to three years; ii) the monthly
Haiti Food Security Update; iii) Haiti Food Security Outlook; iv) the quarterly Early Warning
Bulletin (SAPSAP); and v) the weekly Price Bulletin. In 2007, WFP carried out a
Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment (CFSVA) for Haiti (rural areas
only). Sector-based information systems are generally weak, although efforts have been
invested in improving monitoring and statistical information.
Food Security Monitoring: Both the Food Security Update and Food Security Outlook are FEWS NET reporting products, which are published under CNSA co-ordination, while
the Early Warning Bulletin is prepared by WFP in collaboration with PLAN. The Early
Warning Bulletin covers rainfall, retail food prices, agricultural production and information
of household food access and consumption (coping strategies, sources of food, food
expenditure) from sentinel sites in North and North-Eastern Haiti.
Comments: Although food security monitoring in principle is coordinated by CNSA, there
seems to be some overlap between the FEWS NET reporting products and the Early
Warning Bulletin prepared by WFP/PLAN. This is particularly the case for rainfall, weather
hazards and agricultural production prospects (outlook). The Early Warning Bulletin
provides additional information on household food access and consumption in North and
North-Eastern Haiti, which currently do not represent the areas with the most serious
situation of food insecurity. It seems feasible to establish a collaboration with FEWS NET
and merge the Early Warning Bulletin and the Food Security Update into one reporting
product under CNSA coordination.
30
4.8 ASEAN Countries + China, Japan and Korea
WFP Assistance: The largest operation is in Indonesia, where a PRRO targets about 845,000 beneficiaries, providing nutritional rehabilitation assistance to vulnerable children
and pregnant women, recovery rations top to vulnerable tsunami survivors, school meals
to primary school students and rations to TB patients. In Cambodia, a PRRO provides
assistance to food-insecure people in a post-conflict environment, mainly in the form of
food-for-work schemes, while a DEV operation addresses the nutritional needs of young
children and pregnant women. In Myanmar, an EMOP provides food assistance to families
affected by the Cyclone Nargis.
Food Security Information: In October 2002, the Ministers of Agriculture of the ASEAN Member States (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines,
Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam) as well as China, Japan and Korea approved a project
to strengthen food security information in the region. The project is managed by the
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand and funded by the Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan. The ASEAN Food Security Information System
(AFSIS) initiative took off in 2003 and a second phase has been approved for 2008-2012.
AFSIS covers the ten ASEAN countries as well as China, Japan and Korea.
The activities are oriented towards the establishment of statistical data bases for the
agricultural sector, information network development and staff training. Consequently,
AFSIS is strongly biased towards Food Availability.
Food Security Monitoring: Recently, AFSIS has integrated monitoring as part of its
activities. So far, monitoring has centred on the rice sub-sector, most likely in response to
the Soaring Food Prices situation of 2007/08. Two reporting products are available:
• ASEAN Early Warning Information, a biannual report on the situation of the rice
sub-sector in the AFSIS countries
• ASEAN Agricultural Commodity Outlook, which reports on the prospects for rice
production as well as market trends.
Comments: Although its scope so far has been quite limited, there is considerable
potential in building more comprehensive, sub-regional food security information and
monitoring system on the basis of AFSIS. As there is an existing link with the Asian
Disaster Preparedness Centre (ADPC) in Thailand and the Asian Disaster Reduction Centre
(ADRC) in Japan, the integration of Early Warning into AFSIS is an immediate and feasible
option. Also, the prospect of gradually introducing information on household food access
should be explored.
4.9 West Africa/Sahel
WFP Assistance: There is a diverse portfolio of activities in 15 countries, mostly as
PRROs. The largest operations are located in Chad, Liberia, Central African Republic (CAR)
and Côte d’Ivoire. PRROs provide food assistance to refugees, internally displaced persons
or returnees in conflict and post-conflict areas. Most countries also benefit from
Development Programmes, focused on School Meals, Nutrition, etc. Some countries also
host Purchase for Progress projects.
31
Food Security Coordination: The Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control
in the Sahel (CILSS) is the main regional body responsible for food security coordination.
CILSS is an intergovernmental organization of nine Sahel countries (Cape Verde, Burkina
Faso, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Chad), which was
established in 1973 in the wake of the serious drought of 1968-1970. Its mandate is to
study food security issues and combat the effects of drought and desertification to help
reestablish an environmental equilibrium in the Sahel. In recent years, CILSS has extended
its general coverage to the “costal states”, which include Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana,
Nigeria, Liberia, Togo, Sierra Leone and Guinea-Conakry. CILSS is headquartered in
Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. It includes two specialized agencies, the Regional
AGRHYMET Centre in Niamey, Niger and the Institut du Sahel (Sahel Institute) in
Bamako, Mali. CILSS enjoys technical collaboration with a number of international and
regional organizations.
Many Western African and Sahel countries enjoy a relatively institutionalized set-up for
food security coordination and information systems. Several have a Food Security
Commission (e.g. Mali, Mauritania and Senegal), while others have a National Council or
Committee for Food Security Coordination (e.g. Burkina Faso and Niger).
Food Security Information: In principle, the information system is based on rapid
targeted assessments, regular agricultural surveys conducted at the country level, joint
annual assessment missions and the processing of satellite imagery and market data. The
annual harvest assessment for each growing season, which is based on the regular
agricultural surveys, is the primary information source for regional food security
information. Although the CILSS framework for indicators and data collection (the Cadre
Harmonisé) is clearly oriented towards agricultural, livestock and fisheries production as
well as natural hazards, the framework also covers income, food consumption (type and
source), nutrition (Global Acute Malnutrition) and migration. An initiative is under way to
adjust the Cadre Harmonisé to IPC requirements.
Food Security Monitoring: The CILSS monitoring system operates year-round on a
continuous basis through regular consultations, which involve the Sahel countries and the
“coastal states”. Representatives of regional and international food security information
systems as well as technical and financial partners also participate. Thus, in principle
CILSS will organize five regional consultations over the course of the year, where country
and regional data are reviewed and confirmed33:
• The June consultation updates the list of at-risk areas just before the beginning of
the pre-harvest lean period. It also makes necessary preparations for the growing
season in the Sahel and takes stock of the performance of the monitoring system.
• The September meeting conducts a mid-term review of the rainy season
(producing a qualitative pre-harvest assessment, a preliminary list of at-risk areas
and corresponding food outlooks).
33 / A somewhat similar and more focused mechanism of consensus creation exists for seasonal climate outlooks at a sub-
regional basis. Examples are PRESAO for West Africa/SAHEL, GHACOF for the Greater Horn of Africa, GHACOF for
Southern Africa and FOCRAII for Asia.
32
It also schedules joint harvest assessment missions (CILSS/FAO, with support from
FEWS NET) to the Sahelian countries during the month of October and establishes
their composition.
• The November consultation confirms preliminary grain production figures and helps
establish country and regional cereal balance sheets and food outlooks for the
following consumption year.
• The December consultation brings together Sahelian food security officials and
donors within the framework of the Food Crisis Prevention Network for the Sahel
(RPCA). It takes stock of the overall food and agricultural situation in the
Sahel and helps provide decision-makers and donors active in the Sahel with a
recap of relevant information to improve the decision-making process.
• The March meeting establishes an updated assessment of the previous growing
season with final production figures (including off-season and late-season crops),
cereal balance sheet, market and prices and nutrition. It updates the list of areas
and population groups vulnerable to food insecurity problems, takes stock of
existing relief programs and operations and makes recommendations for individual
countries and their food security and development partners.
While the consultation process of the CILSS monitoring system is elaborate, the output of
the system is somewhat limited, which is largely a result of the inability of some countries
in maintaining a regular flow of information from their national systems. This is to some
extent compensated by other means, such as the newsletter issued by the Food Crises
Prevention Network (FCPN), a joint initiative by CILSS, SWAC, FAO, FEWS NET and FAO,
which mainly reports on National Availability, Prices and the Agricultural Season:
• Note Information Sécurité Alimentaire
As well as the more comprehensive monitoring bulletin (CILSS, FAO, FEWS NET and WFP):
• West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security
Comments: It would appear that data for the CILSS harmonised framework are not
always collected, or at least not reported, on a regular basis from all countries. Therefore,
the regional food security analysis prepared by CILSS appears less comprehensive than
would be expected from the harmonised framework. This leaves considerable gaps in the
CILSS reports made available to the public.34 It remains to be seen if the current IPC
initiative will be able to rectify this situation.
4.10 Southern Africa
WFP Assistance: WFP operations in the Southern African countries (SADC) are generally
oriented towards social protection and safety nets through both EMOPs and PRROs. The
emphasis is on food assistance to chronically poor and food insecure households
(HIV/AIDS affected), protracted relief to vulnerable groups, school meals and nutrition
interventions. With an extensive vulnerable group feeding programme, WFP operations in
Zimbabwe are by far the largest in the region.
34 / See, for example: CILSS, Compte Rendu – Concertation régionale sur la situation alimentaire et nutritionnelle au
Sahel et en Afrique de l’Ouest, Cotonou du 11 au 13 mars 2009
33
WFP also implements a support project for strengthening vulnerability monitoring systems
in South Africa and the analytical capacity of the Regional Vulnerability Assessment
Committee.
Regional Food Security Co-ordination: During 1987-96, substantial donor funds were invested in a Regional Early Warning Unit and National Early Warning Units through a
project managed by FAO. Although institutional and financial sustainability has continued
to constitute a constraint for the strengthening of Early Warning in Southern Africa, the
Food, Agricultural and Natural Resources (FANR) Directorate of the SADC Secretariat
maintains a system of Early Warning and Food Security Information, which primarily is
focused on Weather Hazards and Food Availability. The SADC Secretariat is located in
Gaborone, Botswana.
A Regional Vulnerability Assessment Committee (RVAC) has also been established under SADC/FANR, whose role is to coordinate and provide support to the National Vulnerability
Assessment Committees (VACs) that have been established in most SADC countries. These
were formed during 2000-2002, consolidating previous efforts oriented towards household
food security analysis and vulnerability assessments. Generally, the VACs have promoted
the analysis of vulnerability to household food security, although each VAC now pursues a
more varied approach to food security analysis. In most countries, the VACs remain
informal groupings, which have not been institutionalized in the context of national
administrations.
Regional Food Security Information: SADC/FANR maintains information systems on
Early Warning as well as Agricultural Production Monitoring and Statistics. The main sub-
units/systems in place are the Regional Warning System, the Drought Monitoring Centre
and the Regional Remote Sensing Unit. These are linked to Early Warning Units at national
level.
Through its regional centre in South Africa and four national offices in Malawi,
Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe, FEWS NET continues to play a major role in
providing food security information, particularly in relation to early warning, food
production and markets/trade.
WFP has traditionally focused on Household Food Security and Trade, providing support to
both regional (e.g. RVAC) and national groupings (VACs) as well as undertaking
Community and Household Surveillance in seven SADC countries.
Regional and National Food Security Monitoring: Regional and national food security monitoring systems primarily focus on weather hazards, food availability, trade
and vulnerability. However, particularly monitoring on household food access,
consumption and nutrition is not consolidated at regional level.
The WFP Community and Household Surveillance (CHS) has been in operation since 2003
and currently covers Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia and
Zimbabwe. The CHS consists of bi-annual surveys undertaken in districts with WFP
activities, with a stratified sample of households (approx. 50 per cent beneficiary/50 non-
beneficiary). The objectives of the CHS are to monitor programme outcomes and trends in
household food security situation in specific geographical areas, i.e. those with WFP
34
activities. Recently, CHS coverage in Lesotho and Swaziland has been expanded to cover
all rural areas.
The main reporting products in the SADC Region are:
• SADC Agromet Update, providing a regional overview of rainfall performance.
• SADC Outlook, which includes a rainfall forecast and el Niño/la Niña update.
• SADC Food Security Update, an occasional publication providing information on
agricultural prospect, cereal balance and maize balance sheet.
• FEWS NET Southern Africa Food Security Update, a monthly bulletin providing
information on rainfall, agricultural production, markets & trade as well as an
assessment of humanitarian assistance needs.
• FEWS NET/WFP Bulletin for Informal Cross Border Food Trade in Southern Africa,
which monitors informal trade flows of food commodities among SADC countries.
• Regional Food Security Report, a recent initiative by UN Agencies that provides a
monthly update on the agricultural situation, food availability, markets & prices,
etc.
The reporting products of Community and Household Surveillance are not consolidated at
regional level and appear either as:
• Community and Household Surveillance Fact Sheet, a four-to six page report on
the results on the bi-annual survey (Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zambia and
Zimbabwe); or
• Community and Household Surveillance Findings, which is more detailed report on
survey findings (Lesotho and Namibia).
Comments: The SADC Region is characterised by a multitude of externally financed food
security information and monitoring support projects, which not always manage to work in
close coordination with existing regional or national systems. Although there are gaps in
terms of information, particularly in relation to household food access and nutrition, there
is also some degree of duplication and replication, particularly in relation to food
availability.
4.11 Central America
WFP Assistance: The largest operations are in Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua,
primarily as Development Operations (DEVs). The focus is on school meals, food
assistance to vulnerable groups and supplementary feeding to pregnant and lactating
women as well as children. A regional PRRO provides assistance to disaster preparedness
and mitigation among marginalised populations. The Purchase for Progress (P4P) initiative
is operational in the three countries as well as in El Salvador.
Regional Food Security Co-ordination: Food security co-ordination is managed
through the Central American Integration System (SICA), which was established in
December 1991. Member countries consist of Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama. The SICA hierarchy of organs consists of the Annual
Meeting of Presidents, the Central American Parliament (PARLACEN), the Central American
Court of Justice, the Executive Committee and the Secretariat-General.
35
At sector level a number of secretariats, councils and specialized institutions have been
established, of which the Central American Agricultural Council (CAC), the Secretariat for
Social Integration (SISCA), the Central American and Panamanian Institute for Nutrition
(INCAP) and the Centre for the Coordination of Prevention of Disasters in Central America
(CEPREDENAC), are of relevance for food security and nutrition. The SICA Secretariat is
located in El Salvador.
Food Security Information: Information on food security and nutrition is mainly
managed by INCAP. The main information systems are Statistical Information for Food
Security & Nutrition and the Integrated System for Food Security and Nutrition Indicators
(SIRSAN). A recent addition is the Regional Observatory, which a bi-monthly bulletin on
various food security and nutrition issues. Some information is published in reports but the
bulk of food security and nutrition information is available on the SICA/INCAP website.
Data bases include historical information on a range of indicators, including daily cost of
basic food basket, purchasing power of minimum rural wage, monthly cost of basic food
basket, CPI, nutrition, etc. These are available by country.
Food Security Monitoring: There are currently two systems in place:
• Regional Observatory on Food Security and Nutrition.
• Food Basket Price Information System.
The Regional Observatory, which is managed by INCAP, publishes the Seasonal
Information Bulletin on Food Price Increases (Información de Coyuntura sobre el Alza del
Precio de Alimentos). The title is a bit of a misnomer because the bulletin includes
information and evaluation of trends in Global Hunger Index, Monthly Cost of Basic Food
Basket, General CPI and Food CPI, price trends for basic food items, wholesale price for
agricultural commodities, trends in areas under cultivation and nutritional analysis (e.g.
chronic malnutrition and overweight/obesity).
The Food Basket Price Information System is managed by the Central American
Agricultural Council (CAC). It is website-based system, which provides a weekly update on
wholesale prices for the main agricultural commodities (rice, maize, beans, and sorghum)
and livestock products (milk, meat, eggs).
Early Warning: Recently, WFP took the initiative to establish an Early Warning system
for Central America and the Caribbean (SATCA), which is a web-based platform for
alerting on natural hazards (weather, drought, flooding, hurricanes, earthquakes and
volcanoes). SATCA is similar to the HEWSweb platform developed by WFP in 2004. SATCA
is supported by a large number of institutions, including various Central American
agencies, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the US Geological
Service, Dartmouth Flood Observatory and others. SATCA is incorporated in SICA through
CEPREDENAC.
Comments: Compared to most regional or sub-regional institutions of Africa, SICA is
much more consolidated and institutionalised, with reasonable financing and staff levels. It
is, however, somewhat surprising that food security monitoring at regional level is
relatively limited and does not cover food availability or household food access in a more
substantial manner.
36
At national level, these dimensions are well covered through sector-based information and
monitoring systems, although consolidation tends to take place only in the form of Annual
Reports on Food Security and Nutrition, rather than regular monitoring reports.
4.12 Potential for Partnerships and Capacity Development
There is considerable potential at both sub-regional and national level in improving
existing monitoring systems. WFP has specific experience in markets monitoring for food
security, which apart from Central America is weak at sub-regional level. The introduction
of interest domains like Purchasing Power (terms of trade, cost of food basket) and
International Trade (Food Imports) would supplement existing sub-regional systems and
would also fit in well with many national system that currently do not work with indicators
of these domains. At national level, where household food access and consumption are
not covered on a regular basis, WFP’s experience in these domains would provide an
interesting supplement to existing systems. In all cases, and on a priority basis, a
partnership and capacity assessment should be undertaken in order to determine entry
point, short-to medium term strategy and modalities of partnership.
37
5. REVIEW OF MARKET MONITORING SYSTEMS
5.1 WFP Corporate Understanding of Market Analysis and Food Markets Monitoring
Initial Focus: WFP’s initial focus on the role of markets and food price analyses in food
security analysis and food assistance operations was initially cultivated through the
Strengthen Emergency Needs Assessment Capacity (SENAC) project. One of the five
components was the Role of Markets in Emergencies, which formed part of the objective
to “reinforce WFP’s capacity to assess humanitarian needs in the food sector during
emergencies and the immediate aftermath through accurate and impartial needs
assessments”.
Food Markets: Market analysis and assessment has evolved considerably since early
discussions on the importance of markets in emergencies. In fact, during 2005 and 2006,
WFP commissioned 20 country market profiles and market-related case studies and later
on WFP developed a number of market analysis tools. Other agencies and institutions also
engaged in market-related issues and initiatives, particularly the testing and development
of market analysis tools (e.g. Oxfam’s Rapid Market Analysis Toolkit for Sudden Onset
Emergencies and collaborative inputs to WFP’s Market Tool), cross-border trade (in
particular collaboration with FEWS NET), and close collaboration on research related to
markets and food insecurity (the recent publication of the World Hunger Series on Hunger
and Markets). Much of WFP’s work has benefited from technical discussions between WFP
and partner institutions (e.g. CARE, FAO, FEWS NET, World Bank and others).
At the second Markets Technical Meeting held in Subiaco, Italy, in January 2007, market
indicators and the integration of market analysis into Food Security Monitoring were
discussed35. There was a general agreement that market analysis would reinforce decision-
making in relation to both early warning and food assistance programme
formulation/revision. Consequently, market analysis should be incorporated in Food
Security Monitoring. The Technical Meeting concluded that:
• The sustainability of a monitoring system depends on low cost (human resources
and operation expenses in all phases of monitoring) and close partnerships with
others, but WFP must ensure that the information required for the Organization’s
own decision-making is collected;
• Better use of existing data should be ensured and pertaining data sets should be
examined to determine their relevance for the definition of core indicators.
• The choice of indicators to be monitored in each country or region should also take
into consideration existing WFP assessments and baseline information.
The participants proposed some key indicators and how to use them. Thus, the main
staple food prices are considered to be fundamental, while terms of trade relevant to the
main livelihoods of vulnerable people (e.g. livestock/cereal or casual labour/cereal) were
35 / The Meeting also deliberated on markets analysis in relation to Comprehensive Baseline Studies and Food Security
Assessments. See: WFP, Technical Meeting Report – Food Security and Markets, 10-12 January 2007, Subiaco, Italy.
38
considered to be important. Qualitative statements on the volume of trade and national
policy issues would be useful in complementing the information on basic indicators.
5.2 Current Global Context
Food Price Crisis and Global Financial Crisis: The initial momentum created by
SENAC in providing due attention to market analysis for food security profiling was further
compounded in 2008 and early 2009, initially with the high food price crisis and later on
with the global financial crisis. The point was driven home that simply focusing on
targeted baseline market profiles, or market analysis within the context of emergency
needs assessment, is not sufficient to understand the unfolding nature of economic shocks
and crises, that can be propagated by or potentially mitigated by markets and market
functioning.
The recent studies on the impact of high food prices as well as on the impact of the
financial crises on food insecurity has revealed the extent to which households do in fact
rely on markets not only to ensure a large part of their food security, but also to secure
their livelihoods. As such, greater attention has been given to the role that markets play in
dynamics of hunger and vulnerability not only within WFP, but across other international
organizations and governments.
Monitoring of Food Markets and Trade: The understanding is that, had there been more effective monitoring of markets, the evolution of the high food price crisis may have
been more effectively identified and mitigated36. In fact, the United Nations’
Comprehensive Framework for Action (CFA) on the Global Food Security Crisis makes clear
the importance of mitigating food price risks that are transmitted through international
and domestic markets through careful monitoring of “communities, households, markets,
as well as cross-boarder trade to enable effective management of the current crisis”. What
is ever clearer is that market monitoring is not necessary just for the current crisis, but
also for the unfolding financial crisis, as well as future economic shocks.
5.3 Existing Market Monitoring Systems
Orientation of Market Information Systems: Monitoring and information systems
exist within various contexts, which often are not related to food security. Often, a
plethora of market information is being collected by government agencies, typically the
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Livestock Development and/or National Bureau of
Statistics. These market information systems, however, mostly form part of the
agricultural marketing and agri-business development policies of governments, not only in
the developing world but also in the developed world. Hence, the objective is to ensure
that accurate and consistent information is provided to farmers and traders alike in order
to ensure efficiency in the agricultural market chain. Good examples of this orientation are
some of the market monitoring systems of West Africa and that of Nicaragua.
Market Monitoring for Food Security: The ultimate objective of a market information
system will determine the types of prices that are collected and monitored and the
36 / During this time period was also the onset of the 2005 Niger Food Crisis, which had been clearly visible on the ground
without an understanding of its causes. In reality, the market signals had been present but no one had been monitoring
markets with a view towards food security.
39
interpretation of indicators. The use of market information systems to enhance market-
oriented production means that the farm-gate and producer prices are typically tracked for
of crop produce and livestock units. While this can be used for food security purposes in
relation to households that rely on agricultural production and sales for their livelihood, it
does not go far in providing insight into how markets impact net-buyers of food. Also,
important cash-crop items are often excluded, as are other items such as firewood that
can make up an important part of the income and expenditure of households. In other
words, market monitoring with a food security bent requires additional and slightly
different data, indicators and interpretation.
Furthermore, often market monitoring systems, regardless of objective, report on prices
and trends in prices with little further analysis. This is currently the case also with many
market components to existing food security monitoring systems, as well as individual
market bulletins.
Finally, market information systems within WFP, which have a deliberate focus on food
security, have only recently been implemented with some regularity, mainly as a result of
the high food price crisis. Hence, while market information was collected (for example, in
Afghanistan) since 2003, market bulletins were only regularly published from 2008
onwards.
An eventual incorporation of market indicators into food security monitoring will require
regularity and accuracy of prices tracked and indicators imputed from those for a clear
understanding of the evolution of markets and their impact on household food security.
5.4 Country Overview
The stocktaking covers monitoring reports from only 14 countries, for some of which a
FSMS report is also prepared, and a sub-regional report on informal cross border trade.
The stocktaking is based on an analysis of the reports available at WFP HQ. Contrary to
the situation with FSMS’s, it is assumed that all countries with a functioning WFP Market
Monitoring System (MMS) have been included in the present review. Countries, where
Market Monitoring is being developed but has not yet resulted in a reporting product, have
not been considered.
The countries are shown in the table below (details are included in Country Fact Sheets,
Annex 4):
Table 4: Country Market Monitoring Systems Reviewed Asia Middle East,
CIS West Africa East &
Southern Africa Latin America, Caribbean
Afghanistan Nepal Pakistan
None
Benin Burkina Faso Mauritania Niger Senegal Togo
Ethiopia Uganda Sudan (Northern) Southern Africa Zambia
Nicaragua
It should be noted that WFP does not participate in the preparation of reports for Burkina Faso, Senegal, Uganda, Zambia, Sudan and Nicaragua. All WFP-managed MMS’s were initiated in 2008, although interest in markets and data collection in relation to food and non-food prices in some cases began earlier (e.g. Afghanistan and Nepal)
40
WFP/OMXF has begun to prepare a Price Watch Bulletin (Trends in Staple Food Prices in
Selected Most Vulnerable Countries), which provides information on price changes for
staple food commodities. Issue No. 3 of March 2009 provides information on 32 countries,
including a summary of price changes over three months and calculations of quarterly
price changes and their contribution to the cost of the food basket. Information on prices
is provided by WFP Country Offices/VAM Units to WFP/OMXF, in some cases without the
publication of a Country Market Bulletin. The coverage of Price Watch Bulletin is expected
to expand with the forthcoming issues.
5.5 Partnerships in Market Monitoring
Contrary to partnerships in Food Security Monitoring Systems, WFP´s work on food
markets has provided considerable space for exploring the issue of partnership between
WFP and other agencies/institutions involved in food security analysis and food assistance
operations. Thus, at a Technical Meeting held in December 2007, the issue of partnership
in market analysis was on the agenda, primarily with a view to create a better
understanding of how successful partnerships can improve the quality of market analysis
and influence decision making37.
Based on the presentation of a number of country cases it was suggested that:
• It is necessary to find a balance between large, inconclusive arrangements and
small, effective partnerships; and
• Presently, partnerships and collaboration in relation to market analysis are ad hoc
and depend on personal contacts rather institutional arrangements.
Successful partnerships would depend on a number of factors, including the sharing of
information, expertise and resources available, confidence building, avoidance of
duplication, transparency, frequent interaction and discussions, etc. It was suggested that
partnerships should be formed only when it makes sense and that it could relate to a
specific activity or cover a series of activities to be developed over a number of years. It
should be noted that the considerations on partnership in the context of market analysis
were based on examples that included emergency food security assessments, specific
assessments (e.g. cash vouchers), cross-border trade monitoring and more in-depth
studies like those of IFPRI in Ethiopia. Thus, partnership in relation to market data
collection and analysis in the context of monitoring was not subject to a more
comprehensive discussion at the Technical Meeting, neither was the issue of national
ownership and strengthening of market monitoring and analysis by national agencies.
The current partnerships in MMS’s are shown in Table 5, which includes nine cases where
WFP plays a role. Unfortunately, access to market bulletins prepared by national agencies
has been limited and it has therefore not been possible to consider the extent to which
such are prepared. However, it is clear that quite a few countries do produce this kind of
bulletin, e.g. in West Africa and Latin America.
37 / See: WFP, Technical Meeting Report – Partnerships in Market Analysis for Food Security, 11-13 December 2007,
Johannesburg, South Africa.
41
Table 5: Partnerships in WFP Market Monitoring Bulletin Issued by WFP Data collected by WFP + Use of Data Collected by Government Agencies and FAO
Bulletin Jointly Issued by WFP, Government Agencies and Private Sector Organisations. Data Collected by WFP + Use of Data Collected by Government Agencies
Bulletin Issued by Government Agency in collaboration with WFP/Others. Data Collected by Government Agency or Government Agency/WFP/Others
Bulletin Jointly Issued by WFP and FEWS NET. Date collected by WFP and FEWS NET
Afghanistan Pakistan Benin Ethiopia
Nepal Togo
Mauritania Niger
Southern Africa
The table includes only those MMS’s, where WFP plays a role.
5.6 Indicators
Indicators in MMS’s have been summarized in accordance with the following market
characteristics: price, purchasing power, international trade and others. Nominal retail
food prices in major consumer markets is the most commonly used indicator, followed by
terms of trade and consumer price index (CPI). In import parity price is the most
commonly used indicator in the context of international trade. If the summary only
considered systems maintained by government agencies, wholesale prices of agricultural
commodities and international cereal prices would represent the most commonly used
indicators. This reflects the orientation of such systems discussed in Section 4.3.
A summary of indicators used is shown in Table 6 on page 42.
5.7 The Challenges Ahead
The basic challenges for improving Food Markets Monitoring relate to the identification of
food security appropriate indicators38 for which data can be collected in a reliable and
regular manner. Secondly, the incorporation of such indicators in existing market
information systems would provide for a new dimension to such systems by emphasising
food security in addition to the marketing/agri-business orientation. Furthermore, it would
be desirable to include selected market indicators (e.g. import capacity, terms of trade) in
regular FSMS reporting.
38 / Appropriate implying relative simplicity in the identification and construction of the indicator, while ensuring
comprehensiveness in relation to implications for food security.
42
Table 6: Summary of Indicators Used in MMS’s Market Dimension Indicator Cases
(total of 14)
Primary
Data Source*
Secondary
Data Source*
Price Consumer Price Index (CPI)
5 � �
Nominal Retail Prices of Key Food Items
11 � �
Nominal Wholesale Prices of Agricultural Commodities
5 � �
Real Retail Prices of Key Food Items
4 �
Real Wholesale Prices of Agricultural Commodities
1 �
Producer Prices of Agricultural Commodities
1 �
Purchasing Power Terms of Trade between Casual Labour or Livestock and Key Food Item
6 � �
Contribution of Price Changes on the Cost of the Food Basket
1 �
International/Cross Border Trade
Price of Cereals in International Markets
5 �
Retail Prices of Imported Key Food Items
3 � �
Import Parity Prices 4 � �
Informal Cross Border Trade of Agricultural Commodities
3 � �
Export and Import Trade Flows
2 �
Trends of Cross Border Trade
2 �
Export Parity Prices 1 � �
Retail Prices of Food Items in Neighbouring Countries
1 �
Other Level of Market Availability
3 � �
Market Supply Across Regions
1 � �
Crop Calendar 1 � �
Note: Whether the source is primary or secondary basically depends of which organisation has published the report. The distinction may not be relevant for the accuracy of the data.
43
6. LESSONS LEARNED
The new WFP approach to Food Security Monitoring with an emphasis on the micro-level
aspects of food insecurity marks a departure from the traditional Early Warning type of
monitoring in the context of emergencies. This orientation clearly fills a gap in terms of
providing regular information on changes, seasonal variations and trends in food security,
particularly at household level. Thus, in many countries the WFP approach generally
complements existing Food Security Monitoring Systems, which have tended to focus on
Early Warning in relation to Natural Hazards as well as monitoring of National Availability
of Food.
The overall attainment of the WFP FSMS objectives as stated in 2004-2005 has been
rather uneven. This is the result of several factors, including the absence of corporate
guidance on the implementation of FSMS and the circumstances of each country, where
the WFP approach has been introduced. It is probable, however, that insufficient attention
was paid to existing information and monitoring systems that provide, albeit incompletely,
data on food security. It is likely that more a more structured approach to partnerships
and capacity building at the national level could have contributed to improving conditions
for sustainability of FSMS from the outset. However, this being said it is also evident that
WFP has primarily focused on specific information needs for humanitarian aid
interventions, which may not always fit into the established routines of some national or
sub-regional monitoring systems.
Apart from the CHS in Southern Africa, which was oriented towards the monitoring of WFP
programme outcomes and targeting efficiency, most FSMS’s attempt to capture food
security trends at household level as well as nutrition status and do not explicitly focus on
WFP programmes. There is, however, a need to feed regular food security information into
decision making and achieve some synergy with WFP Programme/Project Monitoring &
Evaluation. However, it should be emphasised that an FSMS should be able to capture
dynamic changes in food security situations that may take place among other population
groups or in other geographical areas than those pre-selected for FSMS.
There are cases where Food Security Monitoring and Needs Assessment tend to become
somewhat overlapping but there are probably more cases where conclusions from FSMS
feed directly into WFP programming. This is justified if the quality and depth of the
information generated by an FSMS warrant the formulation of conclusions that go beyond
the mere identification of changes, potential threats or impending shocks. Unfortunately,
this is not always the case because the methodology for primary data collection and
analysis tend to be based on purposive sampling, which in principle do not allow for
extrapolations like the those expressed in food security status calculations. There is
therefore a need to provide more guidance on the matter of conclusions to be drawn from
an FSMS report, which in any case have to context specific, and clearly define the type of
decisions that are recommended in terms of further assessment, contingency planning and
programme adjustment. For such guidance it might be useful to prepare a new typology
for hunger situations and their implications, which go beyond the traditional classification
of food security crises.
44
Many FSMS reports do not provide adequate information on how data are collected, e.g. in
relation to sampling, survey design, etc. Such are standard issues in any survey and
should be explained in each report. Although this will lead to some degree of repetition in
reports that are produced on a regular basis but is necessary so that reader can have an
understanding of what has changed (e.g. introduction of new Sentinel Sites) and what are
the limitations of the survey.
All FSMS’s are striving at preparing reporting products at regular intervals (from one
month to every six months), mostly reporting on the same indicators. Trends are
explained in most reports, although there is insufficient attention to separating trends from
seasonal variations. Although the reporting on core indicators, a concept that is yet to be
established, may be required for each reporting product, this may not be relevant for all
indicators. However, where WFP-initiated FSMS’s become more integrated with national
systems and hopefully contribute to enriching them, one should expect changes in the
original concept of indicators as well as in the regularity of reporting them, simply because
national priorities are not necessarily similar to those of WFP. This is already clear from
FSMS’s operating under national mechanisms for coordination and management.
Recent work on Food Markets constitutes a relatively new domain in food security analysis
and is receiving increasing attention in the context of High Food Prices and the Financial
Crisis. While WFP Food Security Analysis Service has initiated a process of monitoring
trends in staple food prices, a number of WFP/VAM Country Offices have commenced
regular reporting on food markets and prices. The reporting products of this initiative are
generally much more focused than the more traditional FSMS reports, which is due to
subject and issues being monitored. While such issues as reporting intervals and indicators
would need to be addressed, incorporating selected market indicators in FSMS reporting is
a desirable and feasible option.
The current focus on the micro-level aspects of food insecurity leaves a gap within WFP in
terms of Risk Analysis and Knowledge, primarily linked to the issue of Hazards. While WFP
has strengthened Early Warning Services through various initiatives, the link between
alerts and forecasting, prediction and potential impact on household food security has not
received sufficient attention. This can be done in various ways, probably through a
combination of alliances with other monitoring actors as well as additional in-country work.
This may not be a consideration applicable to all countries but it definitely is required for
some.
The FSMS approach promoted by WFP has generally focused at the national/sub-national
level and with one or two exceptions (informal cross-border trade); little effort has been
invested in working at sub-regional level. There are several sub-regional organisations
involved in Early Warning and Food Security Monitoring, and some engagement with these
would be beneficial for Food Security Monitoring.
The WFP Strategic Plan 2008-2011 highlights the need to further develop the main food
security analysis tools as well as strengthen the capacity of national organisations to apply
such tools. The Strategic Synopsis for WFP/OMXF (Food Security Analysis Service)
specifically mentions FSMS as a component of the WFP Food Security Information System
and points at the need to increase the number of countries with an FSMS. A strategy for
45
achieving a wider coverage, as well as attaining the objective of national capacity building,
has, however, not been formulated. Such is very much required if WFP is to achieve a
long-term impact with Food Security Monitoring. This being said, it is also clear from the
experience with FSMS till to date that the articulation with national organisations, whether
government, NGOs or private, is an undertaking that may operate under longer term
perspectives than the short-terms horizons for humanitarian aid. For that reason, funding
for related activities should be of a medium-term nature and separate from project
funding.
46
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
a) FSMS Definition: The definition and objectives of FSMS established in 2004-2005 were seem to be somewhat restrictive by referring to Food Security Trend Monitoring
(Food Security Status) and Food Security Crisis/Emergency Monitoring (Identification of
impending Threat or Shocks), with both a population group and geographical area focus.
The restriction lies in the limited ability to capture dynamic situations, where both
population groups and geographical areas severely exposed to food insecurity may change
in relatively short periods of time.
The most recent revision of the FSMS definition arrived at during in-house consultations in
May 2009 is clearly oriented towards the household level: A system that tracks and reports
on household vulnerability to food insecurity. It eliminates the restrictions referred to
above and is therefore more generic. On the other hand, the recommended interest
domains and indicators that resulted from the stakeholder consultations of June 2009
provide a set of information requirements that cut across the classical dimensions of food
security, going beyond the micro-level of food security.
• It is recommended that WFP review these recommendations and reconcile them with
the more generic definition of FSMS, taking into consideration that various partners
may have divergent visions on what constitutes an FSMS.
b) Hazards and Shocks: Ways should be sought to fill the gap of Risk Analysis, which is
currently not covered by the various Early Warning initiatives established by WFP. It would
be logical to consider Risk Analysis as part of Food Security Analysis and Food Security
Monitoring. Where the gap cannot be covered by other organisations, WFP VAM Units
should be prepared to take up the challenge through the necessary in-country monitoring
and analytical work.
c) Survey Methods: Most WFP-initiated FSMS’s are oriented towards household Food
Access and Consumption are based on data collected through purposive and random
sampling and subsequently analysed in the accordance with the selected Interest Domains
and Indicators. Purposive sampling may provide an adequate basis for decision-making in
relation to household access, particularly in relation to the identification of potential
threats or impending shocks, however it is not clear if this would be sufficiently robust to
justify conclusions that directly feed into detailed programming decisions.
• It would be advisable to review alternatives to the current approach of sampling and
survey design in the context of FSMS and adjust, where possible, existing
methodologies to a wider use of probabilistic sampling. Integration with national
household surveys should be pursued in contexts where such would yield better results
than with WFP-initiated surveys.
d) Partnership with other actors: This is a fundamental aspect of Food Security
Monitoring and the establishment of Food Security Information Systems in general. This
has also been recognised by WFP and is reflected in most FSMS’s currently operating.
However, in order to meet the stated objective of national capacity building, which is not a
short-term undertaking, WFP would benefit from a more structured approach to both
partnerships and capacity development.
47
• Establishing frameworks for analysing potential partnerships and assessing national
capacities would constitute a first step towards implementing such structured
approach. It would assist WFP/Regional and Country Offices in dealing with the initial
stages of partnership development and capacity building.
e) Collaboration with other actors: The FSMS’s have generally focused at
national/sub-national level and with one or two exceptions little effort has been invested in
working at regional or sub-regional level. There are several international and sub-regional
organisations involved in Early Warning and Food Security Monitoring activities, which
could benefit from a new and coherent WFP strategy for partnerships.
• WFP should consider a broader collaboration with international and sub-regional
organisations in particular Interest Domains. Such collaboration could be with
international actors with the objective of creating new synergies for food security
monitoring or with sub-regional organisations to strengthen their capacities in food
security monitoring.
f) Guidance Material: On the basis of a corporate understanding of what constitutes an FSMS tool, WFP/OMXF should initiate a process of preparing guidelines and guidance
sheets. Initially, a summarised set of “guidance sheets” may suffice, providing orientations
on basic FSMS issues (e.g. definition and objectives, interest domains and indicators,
communication strategy, etc.). These would be are less demanding in terms of
preparation and would begin to bridge the FSMS guidance vacuum, pending the
preparation of a complete set of guidelines.
The following subjects have been identified for preparation in the short term:
• FSMS indicators not previously covered by OMXF guidance material.
• Methodological issues: Instruments, sampling, data collection and analysis
• A detailed check-list of considerations when setting up an FSMS.
• Partnership development.
• Capacity assessment and strengthening.
• Preparation of FSMS reports, including assessment of changes, outlook and
recommendations for immediate action.
g) WFP Capacity: In the medium-term, work should also be initiated on:
� Strengthening WFP staff capacity to improve FSMS methodologies in relation to
sampling, data collection, data analysis and reporting; and
� Strengthening WFP staff in clarifying the linkage between FSMS information and
decision-making. The latter would be developed on the basis of a new typology for
hunger situations, while the former would require considerable preparatory work
on the issue of surveys as well as the possible incorporation of new Interest
Domains in FSMS.
48
REFERENCES
The review is based on a large number of Food Security Monitoring, Market Monitoring
and Early Warning Reports, which are too numerous to list here. Reports from the
following countries were reviewed (listed by order of WFP Regional Offices): Afghanistan,
Nepal, Indonesia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka (OMB); Palestine, Tajikistan (OMC); Benin, Burkina
Faso, Central African Republic, Chad, Côte D’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger
(OMD); Burundi, DR Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland,
Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe (OMJ); Sudan (OMS); Haiti and Nicaragua (OMP).
Reports and websites of the following regional or sub-regional organizations were
reviewed: ASEAN Food Security Information System (AFSIS), Permanent Inter-State
Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS), South African Development
Community Secretariat (SADC), Central American Integration System (SICA) and the
Central American and Panamanian Institute for Nutrition (INCAP).
Concept Notes, General References, Guidelines and Reports from Meetings and Workshops
Babu, Suresh & Ergeneman, Ayca. A Framework for Evaluating Food Security and Nutrition
Monitoring Systems. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, Vol.
5 (2), 2005
Babu, Suresh & Sanyal, Prabuddha. Food Security, Poverty and Nutrition Policy Analysis:
Statistical Methods and Policy Applications. Academic Press, Burlington, 2009
Burg, Jericho. Measuring populations’ vulnerabilities for famine and food security interventions – The case of Ethiopia’s Chronic Vulnerability Index. Disasters, Vol. 32 (4), 2008
Carletto, Calegero. Constructing Samples for Characterizing Household Food Security and for Monitoring and Evaluating Food Security Interventions: Theoretical Concerns and Practical Guidelines. Technical Guide # 8, IFPRI, March 1999.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sentinel Surveillance Method. Washington, D.C, October 2003
Chikumbirike, T. Loewenson, R. Community-Based Monitoring and Research on Food
Security and Social Welfare. CBMS Network Session Paper, 5th PEP Research Network
General meeting, 18-22 June 2005, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Committee on World Food Security, Twenty-sixth Session. Assessment of the World Food Security Situation. Document 2000/2, Rome, 18-21 September 2000
Committee on World Food Security, Twenty-sixth Session. Suggested Core Indicators for Monitoring Food Security Status. Document 2000/2-Sup.1, Rome, 18-21 September 2000
Collins, Greg. WFP Burundi Food Security Monitoring Systems Review. June 2007
Devereux, Stephen. Why does Famine persist in Africa? Food Security, No. 1, 2009
49
FAO. Handbook for Defining and Setting up a Food Security Information and Early Warning System. Rome, 2000
FAO/WFP. Joint Guidelines for Crop and Food Security Assessment Missions, Rome, 2009
Lepkowski, James M. Sampling the Difficult-to-Sample. The Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 121 (3), 1991
Maxwell, Daniel et.al. Emergency Food Security Interventions. Good Practice Review, No. 10, December 2008
Melgar-Quinonez, Hugo R. et.al. Household Food Insecurity and Food Expenditure in Bolivia, Burkina Faso and the Philippines. The Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 136, Supplement, 2006
Migottto, Mauro & el.al. Measuring Food Security Using Respondents’ Perception of Food Consumption Adequacy in Guha-Khasnobis, Basudeb et.al. (eds). Food Security – Indicators, Measurement and the Impact of Trade Openness. UNU-WIDER Studies in Development Economics, Oxford University Press, London, 2007
Morris, Saul S., Measuring Nutritional Dimensions of Household Food Security, Technical Guide # 5, IFPRI, March 1999
Mukeere, Baker. The Basics of Market Analysis for Food Security – Background Notes. WFP/OMXF, Rome, March 2009
Ponder, Kelley. A Review of the Food Security Monitoring System (FSMS) and Proposed Integration of Nutrition Indicators. WFP Burundi and Regional Bureau for East & Central Africa VAM Units, July 2007
Tadesse, Tsegaye et. al. The need for integration of drought monitoring tools for proactive food security management in sub-Saharan Africa. Natural Resources Forum, No. 32, 2008
UNDP. Capacity Assessment Practice Note. October 2008
United Nations. Global Survey of Early Warning Systems - An assessment of capacities, gaps, and opportunities toward building a comprehensive global early warning system for all natural hazards. Prepared for the Third International Conference on Early Warning, Bonn, 27-29 March 2006
WHO Pakistan Office. Sentinel Sites Surveillance System for Nutrition and Health – Concept Note. 2009
WFP. Be Part of the Solution (Annual Report 2007)
WFP. Strategic Plan 2008-2011
WFP. Strategic Results Framework
WFP. Comprehensive Food Security & Vulnerability Analysis Guidelines. First Edition, Rome, January 2009.
WFP. Emergency Food Security Assessment Handbook. Second Edition, Rome, January 2009
WFP Country Office Nepal. Food Security Monitoring at the Local Level: The Food Security Monitoring and Analysis System in Nepal. 2009
50
WFP Country Office Tajikistan. Concept Note – Tajikistan Food Security Monitoring System.November 2008
WFP Regional Office Dakar. Report on Joint Review Meeting for Food and Nutrition Security Monitoring in the CFSVA and FSMS’s. 1-3 October 2007
WFP, Office of Evaluation. Evaluation of WFP’s Capacity Development Policy and Operations, 2 May 2008
WFP/ODAN. Technical Meeting Report – Food Security and Markets. 10-12 January 2007, Subiaco, Italy
WFP/ODAN. Technical Meeting Report – Partnerships in Market Analysis for Food Security. 11-13 December 2007, Johannesburg, South Africa
WFP/OMXC. A Framework for Partnership, Capacity Development & Hand-Over: Challenges, Approaches and Next Steps. Working Paper Series No. 1, 14 May 2009
WFP/OMXF. Strategic Synopsis for the Food Security Analysis Service 2008-2009. June 2008
WFP/OMXF. Workshop Report – Analysing National Capacities to Respond to Food Security Crises. Rome, 29 February 2008
WFP/OMXF. Trends in Staple Food Prices in Selected Vulnerable Countries. Issue No. 3, March 2009
WFP/VAM. Food Security Monitoring Workshop Report. 10-12 November 2004, Johannesburg, South Africa
WFP/VAM. Discussion Note: Principles – Technical Notes on Food Security Monitoring System. August 2005
WFP/VAM. EFSA Guidance Sheet No. 4 – Trigger criteria for an emergency food security assessment in slow-onset crises. February 2009
Young, Helen. Looking beyond food aid to livelihoods, protection and partnerships – Strategies for WFP in the Darfur States. Disasters, Vol. 31 (S1), 2007
51
ANNEX 1: NOTES ON FOOD SECURITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS
1. INTRODUCTION
A Food Security Information System includes all information systems that focus on
elements or dimensions of food security. At country level, these normally include
agricultural and livestock production, early warning of hazards, international trade, market
and prices, household income and expenditure, nutrition, etc. Normally, these sub-systems
are not consolidated into one system and often some are not even operational. At global
level, attempts have been made to monitor food security status since the World Food
Summit of 1996, using an agreed set of indicators. In practice, food security information is
managed by various UN agencies, regional organizations, national government institutions,
trade associations and NGOs. Since the definition of the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) in 2000, food security information has also been partly associated with poverty
reduction monitoring, particularly in relation to MDGs 1 and 4.
Food Security Information is generated by a variety of approaches and tools that often
focus on particular aspects of food security. These are probably most developed in the
context of Early Warning and Emergency/Crisis situations. While some approaches are
focused on the development of food security information systems at country level
(capacity building), others attempt to tackle specific issues, such as Early Warning or
Classifications of Food Security Situations.
The WFP Food Security Information System supports decisions relating to policy of food
assistance as well as decisions relating to programming. The system consists of tools that
will generate relevant information for the various emergency, crisis and chronic hunger
situations. The principal tools are:
• Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment (CFSVA)
• Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission (CFSAM)
• Food Security Monitoring System (FSMS)
• Emergency Food Security Assessment (EFSA)
WFP continuously works towards improving the tools, covering gaps and tackling specific
methodological challenges; these tools include risk analysis, urban food insecurity
assessments, market analysis and conflict analysis.
2 FOOD INSECURITY AND VULNERABILITY INFORMATION AND MAPPING SYSTEM (FIVIMS)
2.1 Background
FIVIMS operated for ten years under the management of FAO, with the participation of a
large number of agencies involved in food security, nutrition, health, agricultural
development, etc. It received funding from a number of donors, including CIDA, DFID, the
52
European Commission, UNDP and others. The inter-agency arrangement for FIVISM was
discontinued in 2007 and currently the system is maintained as an inter-service focal point
for technical work on food security undertaken by various divisions of FAO. The FIVISM
web site continues to function, mainly informing about work on food security undertaken
by FAO’s Divisions and projects.39
2.2 Approach and Products
Work conducted under FIVIMS has included the development of guidelines and principles
in support of improved food security information and vulnerability analysis for better
decision-making and targeting at country and regional level. FIVISM complemented many
agency-led initiatives and products, particularly by producing a common list of indicators
for cross-sectoral analysis of food insecurity and vulnerability as well as undertaking
conceptual and normative work on food security. Also, FIVISM promoted the coordination
of action among partner agencies in support of best practices in the development of food
insecurity information and mapping systems.
Apart from initiating the preparation of certain products currently made available through
work undertaken by FAO, e.g., The State of Food Insecurity in the World and Nutrition
Country Profiles, FIVISM carried out normative work on food security information systems:
• Handbook for Defining and Setting up a Food Security Information and Early
Warning System
• Background and Principles for National FIVIMS
Though somewhat outdated, both documents contain many valuable suggestions on how
to improve existing food security information systems and make them sustainable.
Institutional organization, promotion of partnerships and development of multimedia
resources, are also dealt with in considerable detail.
At country level, the impact of FIVISM has been somewhat limited, primarily due to the
lack of funding to promote inter-agency activities in the context of food security
information systems.
3 FAMINE EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS NETWORK (FEWS NET)
3.1 Background
FEWS NET is an USAID-funded network that collaborates with international, regional and
national partners to provide early warning and vulnerability information on food security
issues. FEWS NET builds on more than 20 years of experience in Sub-Saharan Africa and
currently operates in 17 African countries40 as well as Haiti, Guatemala and Afghanistan.
The activities are managed by a private consulting firm, Chemonics International Inc.,
supported by a number of US Government Agencies (United States Geological Service,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
39 / www.fivism.org 40 / West Africa: Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Nigeria. East Africa: Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya,
Somalia, Sudan (Southern), Tanzania and Uganda. Southern Africa: Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
53
Administration and United States Department of Agriculture). The Food Economy Group,
Michigan State University and Webfirst are also associated with FEWS NET activities.
Chemonics maintains three regional (Ouagadougou, Nairobi and Pretoria) and 20 national
offices in the countries covered by FEWS NET. These offices employ a mix of national and
international field staff. In addition, a core team of professionals located in Washington,
DC provides support in early warning, food security and vulnerability analysis, markets and
trade analysis, livelihood analysis, communications, website design and management and
project management.
3.2 Approach and Products
The original outputs of FEWS NET were based on the interpretation of satellite imagery
and ground data (e.g., Rainfall Estimation, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index), etc.,
which were projected on high quality maps, prepared on a monthly basis. Later on, FEWS
NET incorporated other food security dimensions in its work, particularly markets & prices
as well as livelihood profiling and zoning. This has generated a wider range of products,
including Market Reviews, Trade Bulletins and Livelihood Maps. Reporting products are
prepared for each country and on a regional basis (Sub-Saharan Africa only).41
FEWS NET offers a range of products, which reflect the activities undertaken at country or
regional level. At country level the most important reporting products are:
• Monthly Food Security Updates incorporate information on seasonal progress
(rains, crops, production, etc.), markets, prices, food access and livelihoods.
Although the FS Update normally begins with an analysis of seasonal progress in
crop and livestock production, the emphasis in each Update may vary, providing
information on thematic FS issues, crises, etc. at certain intervals.
• Alerts are published to provide early warning information (rains, drought, floods,
etc.). It is circulated when an early warning is considered relevant.
• Weather Hazards Assessments report on climate, rainfall, snowfall and other
weather phenomena. It is published with a variable frequency, at times up to
four issues per month.
• Food Security Outlook provides a quarterly assessment of food security
conditions and project scenarios (most likely, worst case) for the subsequent
quarter.
The Seasonal Calendar and Critical Events Timeline, which provides a quick overview of
hunger, crop and livestock production/marketing periods, etc., is a permanent feature in
many FEWS NET reports.
Although FEWS NET has diversified its activities and reporting products over time, its
strength continues to lie in reports and maps based on the interpretation of satellite
imagery and ground data related to weather conditions and weather hazards. In recent
years, markets, price and trade analysis and reporting constitute an additional, strong
feature. Another strength is a well organized web site. Although contingency and response
41 / Information on FEWS NET as well as its products are available on www.fews.net
54
planning form part of the FEWS NET remit, such areas have traditionally received limited
attention.
3.3 Partnerships
The activities of FEWS NET are to some extent based on the information generated by the
supporting US Government agencies. There are, however, strong links with host
government institutions (e.g., National Meteorological Department, Ministry of Agriculture)
as well as other partners. FEWS NET national reports are generally published in the name
of the Network only, although there is participation of Government, FAO and/or WFP in
the cases of Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia and Haiti. The picture is somewhat different for
regional reports, particularly those covering West and Southern Africa. In the former there
is collaboration with the Sahel-West African Club (SWAC), Comité permanent Inter-états
pour la Lutte contre la Sécheresse dans le Sahel (CILSS), FAO and WFP, while in latter
there is participation from various SADC institutions and projects, FAO, WFP, Save the
Children (UK), OCHA as well as Regional and National Vulnerability Assessment
Committees.
Although FEWS NET has fostered partnerships and trained many professionals in the
countries of its coverage, its long-term presence has to some extent “crowded out” the
activities of national or sub-regional organizations involved in early warning services or
food security information systems. Although FEWS NET has ceased operating in certain
countries, e.g. some in Central America, there has been no exit strategy and no real
attempt to leave the field to competent national or sub-regional organizations.
4 INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY PHASE CLASSIFICATION (IPC)
4.1 Background
The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) is a system for defining the
severity of a food insecurity situation (from ‘Generally Food Secure’ to
‘Famine/Humanitarian Catastrophe’), which is based on a wide range of indicators of
human life and livelihoods. It integrates food security, nutrition and livelihood information
into a single statement about food security in a country, region or locality, attempting to
identify the fundamental aspects of a food security situation through a set of protocols.
Contrary to other initiatives in food security information, the IPC does not generate new
food security information but rather provides a format for organizing such information.
The IPC was originally developed by the Food Security Assessment Unit (FSAU) of FAO in
Somalia. Subsequently, it was adopted by a group of Global Partners, which include FAO,
WFP, FEWS NET, Oxfam, Save the Children (UK), Save the Children (US), CARE
International and the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. In addition to
Somalia, it has been introduced in a number of countries, mostly on a pilot basis (e.g.,
Burundi, DR Congo, Cambodia, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Tajikistan). Apart from Somalia,
the countries with a more regular implementation of IPC are Kenya and Nepal.42
42 / Information on the progress in the implementation of IPC is available on www.ipcinfo.org
55
4.2 Approach and Products
The analytical logic of the IPC is that varying phases of food security and humanitarian
situations are classified based on outcomes on lives and livelihoods. Outcomes are a
function of both immediate hazard events and underlying causes as well as the specific
vulnerabilities of livelihood systems (livelihood assets and livelihood strategies). The
outcomes are in most cases referenced against internationally accepted standards, the
convergence of which substantiates a phase classification for any given area. Each phase
is associated with a strategic response framework, while the outcome configuration for
any given situation guides the creation of a tailored response specific to that situation.
Whereas the phase classification describes the current or imminent situation for a given
area, levels of risks for worsening phase are a predictive tool to communicate the
probability of a potential further deterioration of the situation beyond the phase
classification itself.
The IPC consists of four tools: Reference Table, Analysis Templates, Cartographic
Protocols and Population Tables.
The Reference Table guides the analysis for both the Phase Classification and Risk of
Worsening Phase. In accordance with the IPC Manual of 2008, the Phase Classification is
divided into six phases – Generally Food Secure 1A and 1B, Moderately/Borderline Food
Insecure, Acute Food and Livelihood Crisis, Humanitarian Emergency and
Famine/Humanitarian Catastrophe. The six phases are broad enough to accommodate a
wide range of causes, livelihood systems and political/economic contexts.43
Each Phase is linked to a comprehensive set of Key Reference Outcomes on human
welfare and livelihoods, which guide the classification. These include: crude mortality rate,
wasting, stunting, disease, food access/ availability, dietary diversity, water
access/availability, destitution and displacement, civil security, hazards, coping, structural
conditions and livelihood assets. Some reference outcomes are not applied in all phases
(e.g., stunting, destitution and displacement). There is also a link to a strategic response
framework that provides guidance to achieve three objectives: a) mitigate immediate,
negative outcomes, b) support livelihoods, and c) address underlying/structural causes.
Furthermore, the Reference Table includes three levels for Risk of Worsening Phase: a)
Watch, b) Moderate Risk, and c) High Risk. Each of these is associated with key
information required for the effective early warning of potential further deterioration.
These include Probability, Severity, Reference Indicators, Implications for Action and
Timeline.
The Analysis Templates are tables, which organize key pieces of information in a
transparent manner. They facilitate analysis to substantiate a Phase Classification and
guide response analysis. The Cartographic Protocols are a set of standardized mapping
and visual communication conventions, which are designed to convey information
concerning situation analysis of a single map. The Population Tables are a means to
43 / For more details on IPC analysis, see Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, Technical Manual, Version 1.1,
FAO, Rome, 2008. There were five phases in the original version of the IPC Manual. FEWS NET has adopted the original
IPC classification of five phases in their Food Security Outlook reports.
56
consistently and effectively communicate population estimates according to administrative
boundaries, livelihood systems and livelihood types.
The IPC is not an assessment method per se, but a classification system with a set of
protocols for situation analysis, which integrate multiple data sources, methods, etc. The
IPC does not replace existing food security information systems or methodologies. In
practice, however, there is some distance between IPC analysis as presented in the
Technical Manual and how it is undertaken in practice. This is best illustrated by looking at
two countries, where some experience has been gained with the approach, i.e. Kenya and
Nepal.
In Kenya, food security analysis and monitoring is an inter-agency effort that operates
under the Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG), which is constituted by
Government Departments, UN Agencies, NGOs and Donors (see below under
Partnerships). Originally, the work under KFSSG was very much linked to the activities of
the Arid Lands Resource Management Program, covering ten pastoral districts of Northern
and Eastern Kenya. Recently, the analytical and monitoring work has been expanded to
include six geographical clusters that cover most of rural Kenya. KFSSG validates the work
undertaken at cluster level and publishes the reporting products:
• Seasonal (long rains, short rains) Cluster Reports with livelihood zoning and
information on rainfall, major threats, food availability and access, outlook,
ongoing interventions and recommendations.
• National Food Security Classification Map incorporated in the regular Food
Security Update
Seasonal reports are published twice a year, while the Food Security Updates are
published monthly. An analysis of the templates used to determine phases for each cluster
shows that information for many reference outcomes is not available, which leads to a
considerable degree of individual and subjective judgment.
In Nepal, WFP produces a quarterly Food Security Bulletin, which incorporates phase
classification maps, which cover up to 50 out of the country’s 75 districts. The food
security phase classification methodology is broadly based on the original IPC reference
table, which contained five phases. However, the standard reference table and analytical
tools have been simplified to suit the needs of the monitoring system by modifying the key
Reference Outcomes. Thus, the indicators include food availability (production, stocks),
food access (wage employment opportunities, sale of agricultural produce, and market
price of rice), hazards, out-migration, coping, food utilization (wasting, disease) and civil
security. Thus, there is a marked difference between the Reference Outcomes indicated in
the IPC Manual and the Reference Indicators used by the Food Security Monitoring and
Analysis System in Nepal.
One criticism of the IPC approach has been the lack of data to substantiate many of the
indicators for Reference Outcomes. By deviating from some of the standard IPC indicators
in Nepal, it has become possible to classify small areas, for which the information required
for many of the standard indicators are not available.
57
Consequently, in the case of Nepal the output of the application of the IPC approach is:
Quarterly Food Security Classification Maps with estimates of highly and severely food insecure people and detailed situation and outlook reports by district/ward.
4.3 Partnerships
In principle, the application of the IPC approach requires a collaborative effort by a
number of agencies, both at national and local level. In the case of Kenya, data collection
and reporting for IPC are undertaken by Geographical Review Teams, which cover the six
geographical clusters, and reported to the KFSSG. Currently, the membership of KFSSG
consists of five Government Departments, UNICEF, WFP, DFID, EC, FEWS NET, Oxfam and
MSF-Spain.
In Nepal, the IPC approach forms an integral part of the Food Security Monitoring and
Analysis System (FSMAS) managed by WFP. Although WFP has promoted the formation of
local Food Security Networks, data collection for the FSMAS originates from periodic
household surveys organized by WFP, information from WFP Food Monitors as well as
specific surveys undertaken in disaster areas.
58
ANNEX 2: EARLY WARNING AND SCIENTIFIC WEBSITES OF RELEVANCE FOR FOOD SECURITY
1. Emergency Preparedness and Response Web (EPWEB)
The EPWEB of WFP is an internal website, not accessible from outside WFP. It is WFP’s
corporate system for early warning information management in emergencies. The site
provides a wide mix of information, and is a mix of often old and outdated information,
e.g. This Month's Early Warning Executive Brief (June 2007), and the latest conflict news
from Sudan (22 April 2009) See print screen below. It seems most of the information is
obtained from news services, newspapers and early warning websites. The website also
contains financial news, market news and similar, which has little to do with early warning
for food security.
59
2. Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET)
The Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) is a USAID-funded activity that
collaborates with international, regional and national partners to provide timely and
rigorous early warning and vulnerability information on emerging and evolving food
security issues (see Annex 1).
FEWS NET uses a suite of communications and decision support products to help decision-
makers act to mitigate food insecurity. These products include monthly food security
updates for 25 countries, regular food security outlooks, and alerts, as well as briefings
and support to contingency and response planning efforts.
FEWS NET also aims at strengthening early warning and food security networks at country
and sub-regional level. Activities in this area include developing capacity, building and
strengthening networks, developing policy-useful information, and building consensus
around food security problems and solutions.
The website includes an approximation of food security conditions, which is updated every
quarter and based on the original five-phase classification of IPC (see Annex 1). The main
focus is on African countries, and one country in Asia, one in the Caribbean as well as one
in Central America. The geographical limitation somehow reduces the universality of the
FEWS NET approach because many countries with both chronic and transitory food
security situations are not covered.
60
3. Global Information and Early Warning System (GIEWS)
The Global Information and Early Warning System (GIEWS) of FAO has developed over
several years, based on a number of information products addressing primarily agricultural
and food production. Its mandate is to keep the world food supply/demand situation
under continuous review, issue reports on the world food situation and provide early
warning of impending food crisis in individual countries. The main reporting products are
Food Outlook and Crop Prospects and Food Situation. These have recently been completed
by a data and analysis tool for National Food Prices.
GIEWS participates with WFP in the joint FAO/WFP Crop and Food Security Assessment
Missions, which are undertaken in countries facing a serious emergency food situation.
The GIEWS website provides estimated Dekadal Rainfall estimates for all African countries
(by state, region or district) and satellite imagery Normalised Difference Vegetation Index
(NDVI) for the developing world by sub-region.
The basic GIEWS tool is Windisp, which is a public domain, easy to use software package
for the display and analysis of satellite images, maps and associated databases. A GIEWS
Workstation is being promoted for implementation in developing countries to manage food
security data.
The GIEWS website includes links to a large number of Climate and Early Warning, Food
Security, Humanitarian and Agricultural Statistics websites.
See: www.fao.org/GIEWS/english
61
4. Humanitarian Early Warning Service (HEWSweb)
HEWSWEB positions itself as a Global Multi Hazard Watch Service to Support Humanitarian
Preparedness. It was originally developed by WFP and now operates as a service of the
IASC, the Interagency Standing Committee on Preparedness and Contingency Planning.
See: www.hewsweb.org
It contains information regarding droughts, floods, storms, locust, tsunami, volcanoes,
seismic, el Niño/la Niña, and tsunami. The pages regarding the tsunami are not updated,
and still reflect the big Tsunami of December 2004, other links are dead as well, e.g. FAO
update on Avian Flu, or last updates from 2007. The site has many links to other sites, like
the ones mentioned above.
A similar site has recently been established for Central America (www.satcaweb.org )
62
5. The International Research Institute on Climate and Society (IRI)
The IRI's mission is to enhance society's capability to understand, anticipate and manage
the impacts of seasonal climate fluctuations in order to improve human welfare and the
environment, especially in developing countries. The IRI was established as a cooperative
agreement between National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Climate Program Office and Columbia University. It is part of The Earth Institute at Columbia University.
IRI activities cover Climate, Health, Economics and Livelihoods, Environmental Monitoring,
Agriculture and Water. The website is easy accessible and easy to explore.
IRI has developed a range of methods for generating various inputs to food security
monitoring, particularly seasonal climate and probabilistic crop yield forecasting. IRI is
seeking to develop methods to improve the lead times and accuracy of forecasts which are
important for targeting and timely action.
IRI, WFP and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Climate Prediction
and Applications Centre (ICPAC) have partnered the Food Security Outlook Forums (FSOF)
for the Greater Horn of Africa (GHA) since 2003. Currently, IRI is developing its
partnerships with institutions such as the AGRHYMET (Sahel countries), WFP and other
regional and national partners. See: http://portal.iri.columbia.edu/
63
6. IRIN - Humanitarian News and Analysis
IRIN is an initiative of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
Although the IRIN has some similarity with EPWEB, it has more the look and feel of a
news site, which is not only reflected in the lay-out of the page, but also from the buttons
on the top bar (TV, Radio, Photo, RSS, Subscribe). A consequence of this is the overflow
of information on one page, which means that a first time visitor really has to find one’s
way around. A very positive aspect is that a visitor is able to choose a specific country and
then get a dedicated page with all articles related to that country or subject. Another
positive feature is the section ‘Most Read Articles’. The site has a wide selection of
partners, shown in the left hand column.
IRIN provides weekly updates (called ‘briefs’) per continent and per country, next to in-depth reports which cover a year, e.g. 2008. It is closely linked to Reliefweb, another service of OCHA, which provides a large number of maps, provided by a wide range of UN-agencies, NGO’s, Governmental Organizations and Private Sector Companies, e.g. BBC. See: www.irinnews.org/
64
7. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, which was established
in 1970 through the amalgamation of a number of independent weather, environmental
and scientific services.
The NOAA positions itself as an international leader on scientific and environmental
matters. Its services are primarily focused on the United States through the National
Weather Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Ocean Service and Oceanic &
Atmospheric Research.
The NOAA Satellite and Information Service, which includes a large data centre for
climate, geophysics, oceans and coasts, provides a large number of climate, weather and
environmental products, of which those originating from the Polar Orbiting Satellites
support a broad range of global environmental monitoring applications, including weather
analysis and forecasting, climate research and prediction, sea surface temperature
measurements, global vegetation analysis, volcanic eruption monitoring, etc. Some of
these are used in Early Warning for Food Security, including El Niño-Southern Oscillation
(ENSO), which is commonly known as El Niño/La Niña, and the Normalised Difference
Vegetation Index (NDVI).
The NOAA website in itself is easy accessible, but when visiting the first time, due to the
large amount of data and services, not easy to find what one is looking for. The site
consists furthermore of a number of old version pages, which does not make the look
consistent. Thus, it takes a bit of time to find the applications of direct interest for food
security in developing countries. See: www.noaa.gov
65
8. US Geological Survey (USGS)
The US Geological Survey is an agency of the United States Department of Interior. USGS
positions itself as an unbiased, multi-disciplinary science organization that focuses on
biology, geography, geology, geospatial information, and water. It aims at providing timely
and relevant analysis of the landscape, natural resources, and natural hazards, like
Earthquakes, Floods, Hurricanes, Landslides, Tsunamis, Volcanoes and Wildfires. Its
website includes information that goes beyond these domains, like Avian Flu and Human
Health.
Like NOAA, the services of USGS are focused on the USA, but do include very useful global
information through the Crop Explorer web portal, which is managed by the United States
Department of Agriculture. The portal (Global Food Supply Monitoring) features near-real-
time crop condition information based on satellite imagery and weather data. Thematic
maps of major crop growing regions are updated every 10 days to depict the latest
statistics pertaining to Vegetation Index, Precipitation, Temperature, and Soil Moisture.
These maps are available by region.
It is not that easy to find one’s way around on the site, due to the large variety of topics.
It actually pays to go directly to www.pecad.fas.usda.gov/, which is the Crop Explorer Web Portal: www.usgs.gov
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
66
ANNEX 3: FOOD SECURITY MONITORING SYSTEM COUNTRY FACT SHEETS
Country: AFGHANISTAN
Reporting Product: Food Security Monitoring Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 6. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: December 2008. Regularity:
Quarterly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangement: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit in collaboration with the Vulnerability
Analysis Unit, Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation, and the Central Statistics Office.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of primary data from household surveys (e.g. the National
Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 2007/2008), covering food consumption score, calorie intake,
food expenditure, etc. Secondary data on rainfall and snowfall, inflation, wheat and wheat flour
prices, and terms of trade.
Indicators:
Food Availability
Food Access
Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Daily Calorie Requirement
Food Consumption Score
Food Expenditure
National Cereal Availability
Cereal Production
Market Prices
Coping Strategies
Asset Ownership
Rainfall
Terms of Trade
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports44
• WFP, Market Watch Bulletin, December 2008
• WFP, Wheat Price Increase and Urban Programming, January 2008
Ministry of Rehabilitation & Development and Central Statistics Office, National Risk and
Vulnerability Assessment 2005, June 2007
44 / The reference does not include Crops & Food Security Assessments Missions (CFSAM), Emergency Food Security
Assessments (EFSA), Flood Impact Assessments and other types of food security emergency assessments.
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
67
Country: NEPAL
Reporting Product: Food Security Bulletin; Crop Situation Update; Emergency Alert
Periodicity: i) Food Security Bulletin - Number of Issues: 22. First Issue: 2002. Last Issue:
January 2009. Regularity: Quarterly. ii) Crop Situation Update – Number of Issues: 9. First Issue:
N/A. Last Issue: February 2009. Regularity: Twice a year. Emergency Alert – Number of Issues: 5.
First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: April 2009. Regularity: As required.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Nepal.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: DFID
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from the WFP Food Security Monitoring and
Analysis System. The field surveillance system covers 35 to 40 districts. Household data for the
Bulletin are from about 1,100 households, from whom data are collected by WFP Field Monitors.
These also collect crop data. The food security analysis is presented in the form of classification
maps, based on a modified IPC system, and also includes an outlook for three months.
Occasionally, there is use data from other reports, e.g. WFP post-flood assessments and FAO
Locusts Early Warning. Crop conditions in the Crop Situation Update are presented in maps and
classified as Normal or Good, Moderate, Poor and Very Poor.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Rainfall
Threats to crop production
Crop production prospects
Crop Production
Household Food Stocks
Market Stocks (main staples)
Sources of Income
Market Prices
Sale of Cash Crops and Other Agricultural Produce
Coping Strategies
Diseases
Global Acute Malnutrition
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• WFP/MoAC/FNCCI/CIPF, Market Watch No. 12, April 2009
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
68
• WFP, Struck Out: The Everyday Economic and Livelihood Impact of Bandhs and Strikes, No.
1, March 2009
• WFP, 2008 Staple Food Market Review and Outlook for 2009, February 2009
• WFP/Nepal Development Research Institute, Passage to India: Migration as a Coping
Strategy in Times of Crisis in Nepal, December 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
69
Country: INDONESIA
Reporting Product: Report on Pilot Monitoring of High Food Price Impact at Household Level in
Selected Vulnerable Areas.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 1 (pilot monitoring).
Dissemination: WFP website.
Institutional Arrangement: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit in collaboration with National Statistics
Agency.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: UNICEF.
Methodology/Data Collection: Pilot household survey (960 households) in selected urban and rural areas of four regions (Greater Jakarta, East Java, Nusa Tenggara Barat and Nusa Tenggara
Timur). Multistage cluster sampling method with selection of 80 villages (clusters) in four regions.
Three rounds of data collection undertaken over a four-month period.
Indicators:
Food Availability
Food Access
Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Housing, water and cooking fuel
Market stocks of staple food items
Household assets
Market Prices
Income sources
Food and non-food expenditure
Household Food Stocks
Food Consumption Score
Food Consumption Pattern
Coping Strategy Index
School Absenteeism
Acute Child Malnutrition
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
70
Country: SRI LANKA
Reporting Product: Food Security Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: September 2008. Regularity: N/A.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangement: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit in collaboration with ILO and FAO.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of secondary data from various Government and UN
sources, covering agricultural production, yields, area, livestock population, milk production, fish
catch, food prices, food aid, nutrition, number of IDPs ). The bulletin covers Jaffna District only.
Indicators:
Food Availability
Food Access
Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Food Production (cereal, livestock, milk and fish)
Food Production Prospects
Food Aid
Market Stocks
Market Prices
Sources of Income
Sources of Income
Acute Child Malnutrition
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMC
71
Country: PALESTINE
Reporting Product: Food Security and Market Monitoring Report.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 19. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: July 2008. Regularity: Quarterly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Palestine in collaboration with the
Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), FAO, OCHA and UNWRA.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of primary data from PCBS (labour force data, household
survey data, retail prices) and rapid surveys undertaken in collaboration with other UN Agencies
(FAO, UNWRA). Reports on food aid with data from UNWRA and WFP. Report includes
recommended actions.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative National Cereal Availability
Market Prices
Threats to crop/ livestock production
Food Aid
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• WFP, Regional Market Survey: Food Markets and Food Insecurity in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan,
Iraq, Yemen and Palestine, August 2008
• WFP/FAO, Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment, January 2007
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMC
72
Country: TAJIKISTAN
Reporting Product: Food Security Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 2. First Issue: November 2008. Last Issue: February 2009.
Regularity: Quarterly
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Tajikistan. Data collection is
undertaken by CSR Zerkalo (NGO), National Institute of Statistics and Republican Centre for
Nutrition. Food security issues are coordinated by the Food Security Cluster, which is co-lead by
FAO and WFP. Other members include OCHA, UNICEF, WHO, EC, ECHO, DFID and a number of
international NGOs.
Annual Budget: USD 60,000-80,000 (USD 20,000 per survey round)
External Funding: DFID
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from the WFP FSMS surveys of households (95
sentinel sites or villages with total of 665 households; villages are randomly selected from list used
by EFSA 2008) and 475 key informants in all rural areas of Tajikistan. Secondary data on
agricultural production, livestock ownership/sale and pests (locusts) are presented as well.
Conclusions include estimates of number of food insecure people classified as Food Secure,
Moderately Food Insecure and Severely Food Insecure. Bulletin includes an outlook for three
months as well as recommendations on actions to be taken.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Rainfall
Threats to crop/ livestock production
Crop/livestock production prospects
Market Prices
Food Aid
Coping Strategy Index
Food Consumption Score
Food Expenditure
Crop Production
Water Access
Acute Child Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition
Maternal Health and Nutrition (BMI)
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMC
73
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• WFP, Regional Market Survey: Food Markets and Food Insecurity in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan,
Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, August 2008 • JRC, Central Asia – Crop Monitoring, January 2009
• Government of Tajikistan/WFP, A Food Security, Livelihoods, Agriculture and Nutrition
Assessment in Urban Areas, July 2008
• Government of Tajikistan/FAO/UNICEF/WFP, A Food Security, Livelihoods, Agriculture and
Nutrition Assessment in Rural Areas, May 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
74
Country: CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC (CAR)
Reporting Product: Food Security and Early Warning Bulletin (bulletin de sécurité alimentaire et
d’alerte précoce).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 1. First Issue: September 2006. Last Issue: September 2006.
Regularity: Quarterly (planned).
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, CAR in collaboration with FAO and the
Ministry of Rural Development.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: DFID
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from surveys undertaken by the Directorate of
Agricultural Statistics, Ministry of Rural Development. The surveys cover nine (four) departments,
which have been prioritized on the basis of the WFP Vulnerability Map of 2004. Secondary data on
rainfall and agricultural production for country as a whole, which provide the basis for a Risk and
Vulnerability Map with three classes (Severe, Moderate and No Risk).
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Rainfall
Crop/livestock production prospects
Area of land used to grow cereals
Household Food Stocks
Market Prices
Frequency of Meals
Coping Strategies
Agricultural Production
Rainfall
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FEWS NET/FAO/WFP, West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security, Issue 3,
October 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
75
Country: CHAD
Reporting Product: Food Situation in Zones with a Food Insecurity Risk in January 2008 (Situation alimentaire dans les zones à risqué d’insécurité alimentaira en janvier 2008).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 1. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: January 2008. Regularity: Quarterly
(planned).
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Chad. Collaborates with the Ministry of
Agriculture (Directorate of Production and Agricultural Statistics) and the Ministry of Health
(National Centre for Nutrition and Food Technology).
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from survey undertaken by the Directorate of
Production and Agricultural Statistics. The survey covers 804 households in 11 departments (of a
total 50), with largely have been selected on the basis of sentinel sites identified in 2005. Report
Includes recommendations on WFP actions.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Food Consumption Score
Household Food Stocks
Dietary Diversity
Child Mortality
Diseases
Acute Child Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition
Diseases
Market Prices
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FEWS NET/FAO/WFP, West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security, Issue 3,
October 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
76
Country: CÔTE D’IVOIRE
Reporting Product: Food Security Monitoring System – Summary Note (Système de suivi de la
sécurité alimentaire. Note de synthèse).
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: August 2008. Regularity:
Quarterly (planned).
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Côte d’Ivoire in collaboration with the
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Animal Production and FAO. .
Annual Budget:
External Funding: FAO
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from survey undertaken by Ministry of Agriculture.
The survey covers 200 households in two regions (of a total of 19), with largely have been selected
on the basis of sentinel sites identified in 2005. Report includes recommendations on WFP actions.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Household Wealth Index
Household Food Stocks
Number of livestock
Food Consumption Score
Sources of Food
Sources of Income
Food and Non Food Expenditure
Coping Strategy Index
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FEWS NET/FAO/WFP, West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security, Issue 3,
October 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
77
Country: GUINEA-BISSAU
Reporting Product: Monitoring of Food Security – Summary Note (Système de suivi de la sécurité
alimentaire – Note de synthèse).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 6. First Issue: March 2007. Last Issue: October 2008. Regularity:
Quarterly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development (MADR),
with technical and financial support from WFP.
Annual Budget:
Funding: WFP
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from surveys undertaken by the Directorate of
Agricultural Statistics, MNDR. The surveys cover 38 sentinel sites (570 households) in all
departments of the country, with the exception of Bissau and Bolama. The report includes a food
security and vulnerability map, based on four classes (severe, moderate, risk of food insecurity and
food secure). The report includes recommendations on actions for Government, FAO and WFP.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Water Access
Sanitation
Household Wealth
Food Aid
Coping Strategies
Household Food Stocks
Frequency of Meals
Food Expenditure
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FEWS NET/FAO/WFP, West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security, Issue 3,
October 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
78
Country: MALI
Reporting Product: Suivi de la Sécurité Alimentaire a Travers les Sites Sentinelles - Résultats du
premier passage des Enquêtes.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: June 2005. Last Issue: December 2005.
Regularity: Semi-Annually (planned).
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by VAM group in WFP with collaboration from Early
Warning System (SAP), Ministry of Health and Action Against Hunger (Action Contre La Faim).
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Survey taken in October 2004 which covered 96 villages in the five regions to measure the impact of food security. The FSMS uses a classification system to
classify groups as Severe Moderate and Secure.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Threats to crop/ livestock production
Food Consumption Score
Household Food Stocks
Coping Strategies
Market Prices
Terms of Trade
Rainfall
Frequency of Meals
Acute Child Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition
Wasting
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FEWS NET/FAO/WFP, West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security, Issue 3,
October 2008
• Commissariat a la Sécurité Alimentaire, Rapport sur l’évolution de l´hivernage au Mali au
titre du mois de septembre 2008, Octuber 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
79
Country: MAURITANIA
Reporting Product: Rapport Final: Enquête sur la sécurité alimentaire des ménages en
Mauritanie.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: February 2009. Regularity: Semi-
Annually.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by the Food Security Commission (CSA) in collaboration
with WFP VAM Unit.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Household survey based on multistage cluster sampling,
covering 215 localities randomly selected on the basis of the 6,000 population census enumerations
areas and with 12 households randomly selected from each locality. A total of 2,815 households
were interviewed. The report also uses secondary data from the Ministry of Health Nutrition
Information System. The prevalence of food insecurity is calculated (rural areas only) and
compared with results from previous surveys. Food insecurity is analysed by livelihood group,
income/expenditure and characteristics of household head. The report concludes with
recommendations on intervention and monitoring.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Livelihood/Income Sources
Household Food Stocks
Livestock Ownership
Milk Production
Food Expenditure
Food Consumption Score
Acute Child Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition
Wasting
Child Mortality
Coping Strategies
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FEWS NET/FAO/WFP, West Africa: Markets, Hazards and Food Security, Issue 3,
October 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
80
Country: NIGER
Reporting Product: i) Bulletin Mensuel d’Information sur la Sécurité Alimentaire et nutritionnelle
du Niger ; ii) Suivi Conjoint de la Situation Alimentaire et Nutritionnelle dans les Sites Sentinelles
Vulnérables - Résultats préliminaires du premier passage.
Periodicity: i) Number of issues: 2. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: May 2009. Regularity: Monthly;
ii) Number of issues: N/A, First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: August 2008. Regularity: N/A.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Monthly bulletin prepared by the National System (Committee) for
Prevention and Management of Food Crises (DNPGCA), in collaboration with other Government
Agencies, FEWS NET and WFP. Joint Monitoring Report prepared by the Coordination Unit of the
Early Warning System, in collaboration with WFP, FAO, UNICEF, FEWS NET, CILSS and CARE.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Monthly Bulletin: Secondary data on market prices, acute
malnutrition, food aid, estimates of food insecure households and recommendations on
intervention. Joint Monitoring: Survey undertaken in August 2008 covered sentinel sites in 67
districts (communes) and 6,156 households. The FSMS uses a classification system to classify
population groups as Severely Food Insecure, Moderately Food Insecure and Food Secure.
Indicators (text in bold indicates data from Monthly Bulletin):
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Market supply
Input supply
Purchase for Strategic Reserve
Market Prices (grain and livestock)
Food Consumption Score
Coping Strategies
Income Sources
Global Acute Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition (stunting)
Wasting
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CILSS/FAO/FEWS NET/SIMA/WFP, Markets, Prices, Food Situation and Prospects for Benin,
Niger and Nigeria, April 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
81
Country: BURUNDI
Reporting Product: Monitoring of Food Security (Suivi de la sécurité alimentaire).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 14. First Issue: 2004. Last Issue: February 2009. Regularity: Quarterly (soon to be changed to a bi-annual survey).
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Burundi, in collaboration with FAO and
NGO partners.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from surveys undertaken by the Directorate of
Agricultural Statistics, MNDR. The sampling frame within each zone includes all villages with 70% or
more households characterized as vulnerable in five agro-ecological zones. The sample includes 50
villages (sentinel sites) and about 500 households. The sampling frame will be adjusted in
accordance with the results of the Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerable Assessment 2008.
The report includes a map showing the tendency towards improvement/deterioration of food
security as compared with the previous survey.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Rainfall
Threats to Crop/livestock production
Food Availability
Migration
Sources of Food
Food Expenditure
Coping Strategy
Prevalence of Malnutrition
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
WFP, Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment (CFSVA), December 2008
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
82
Country: DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO (DR CONGO)
Reporting Product: Enquête de Suivi de la Sécurité Alimentaire dans les Districts de Kolwezi,
Haut Lomani, Lualaba et Tanganika.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 1. First Issue: 2008 (data collection June-July 2008). Last Issue:
2008. Regularity: N/A.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, DR Congo, in collaboration with FAO,
National Institute of Statistics, National Service of Agricultural Statistics and NGO partners.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary data from surveys undertaken by field staff of
collaborating organisations. The surveys cover sentinel sites (360 households) in the Districts of
Kolwezi, Haut Lomani, Lualaba and Tanganika. The sentinel sites are located in areas with high
percentage of severe food insecurity or severe/high Global Acute Malnutrition.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Economic Activities
Use of seeds
Main crops
Household Food Stocks
Terms of Trade
Income Sources
Household Expenditure
Food Consumption Score
Coping Strategies
Food Aid
Education
Access to Water
Sanitation
Acute Child Malnutrition (MUAC)
Maternal Health and Nutrition (BMI)
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
83
Country: ETHIOPIA
Reporting Product: Food Security Update.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: May 2009. Regularity: Monthly.
Dissemination: FEWS NET and WFP websites.
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by FEWS NET and WFP/VAM Unit, Ethiopia.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: USAID and WFP
Methodology/Data Collection: Reports are largely based on the interpretation of secondary data on rainfall, grain production and crop production forecast. Presentation of climate, rainfall and
outlook data/maps. Market data includes inflation rates, retail prices and Terms of Trade. Also
includes update of chronically food insecure and people required emergency food assistance (by
region). Estimated food security conditions are shown for three months, using the original five-
phase IPC classification. Malnutrition is illustrated through admissions to Outpatient Therapeutic
Programmes and Stabilisation Centres, while Malaria is reported through number of clinical cases.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Rainfall
Threats to crop/ livestock production
National Cereal Availability
Sources of Food
Market Prices
Terms of Trade
Acute Child Malnutrition
Diseases (Malaria)
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development, Disaster Management and Food Security
Sector, Food Supply Prospects 2009, February 2009
• DPPA, Fortnightly Bulletin, 31 January 2009
• WFP, Market Report, July 2008
• DPPA, Emergency Nutrition Quarterly Bulletin, June 2008
• DPPA, Ethiopian Early Warning System, Monthly Report, March 2007.
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
84
Country: KENYA
Reporting Product: Food Security Update.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: March 2009. Regularity: Monthly.
Dissemination: KFSSG, FEWS NET and WFP websites.
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared the Arid Lands Resources Management Programme
(ALRMP), Ministry of Agriculture, FEWS NET and WFP/VAM Unit, Kenya. Edited by FEWS NET and
issued by the Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG)
Annual Budget: The ALRMP monitoring system, which covers arid and semi-arid lands, has an
annual budget of about USD 750,000.
External Funding: World Bank (ALRMP), USAID and others.
Methodology/Data Collection: Uses a range of data sources, including the ALRMP monitoring
system, Long Rains and the Short Rains Assessments, Ministry of Agriculture, FEWS NET, Kenya
National Bureau of Statistics and rapid assessments undertaken by KFSSG. Provides an update of
the food security situation, using an IPC classification map, estimates the number of people that are
extremely or highly food insecure, and proposes types of food assistance intervention.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Acute Child Malnutrition
Rainfall
Market Prices
National Cereal Availability
Terms of Trade
Market Stocks
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• Kenya National Bureau of Statistics/FAO, Food Insecurity Assessment in Kenya, March 2008
• Eastern Africa Grain Council, East Africa Food & Trade Bulletin, No. 52, February 2009
• KFSSG, The 2008/09 Short-Rains Season Assessment Report, March 2009
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
85
Countries: LESOTHO, MALAWI, MOZAMBIQUE, SWAZILAND, ZAMBIA AND ZIMBABWE
Reporting Product: Community and Household Surveillance Fact Sheet (Lesotho: Community and
Household Surveillance Findings).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 11. First Issue: October 2003. Last Issue: November 2008.
Regularity: Semi-Annually.
Dissemination: Fact Sheets and WFP website.
Institutional Arrangements: CHS is a WFP sub-regional initiative, which has been in operation
since 2003. Reports are prepared by the WFP VAM Country Units, with support from the WFP
Regional Office and other country specific partners such as ANSA, WVI, BADES in Mozambique, etc.
Annual Budget: Estimated at USD 50,000-70,000 (USD 25,000-35,000 per round) plus 40-50%
of two WFP VAM Unit staff time (for CHS and VAC National Assessment).
External Funding: DFID, SIDA
Methodology/Data Collection: Bi-annual surveys are undertaken for sentinel sites in all districts with WFP activities, with a stratified (beneficiary/non-beneficiary) sample of households. Number of
households surveyed will vary from country, but normally reach some 600-700. In addition to
standard food security monitoring indicators (coping strategies index, food consumption score,
sources of food, malnutrition, livelihood strategies, etc.), the reports provide information on the
effects of food assistance and targeting efficiency.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Coping Strategy Index
Food Consumption Score
Sources of Food
Household Food Stocks
Livelihoods and Income Sources
Household Wealth and Income
Detailed Household Expenditure
Cereal Availability
Market Prices
Acute Child Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition
Wasting
Maternal Health and Nutrition (BMI)
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
86
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• Lesotho: VAC/WFP, Vulnerability and Food Insecurity in Urban Areas – Assessing the
Impact of High Prices on Vulnerable Households in Ten Major Cities, August 2008
• Lesotho: VAC, Food Security and Vulnerability Monitoring Report
• Malawi: Malawi Integrated Nutrition and Food Security Surveillance System, November
2007 Data Report
• Malawi: VAC, Malawi´s 2007 Bumper Harvest: Is everyone food secure? June 2007 Brief
• Mozambique: Secretariado Técnico de Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional, Relatório da
Monitoria da Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional em Moçambique, May 2008
• Swaziland: VAC/WFP, Vulnerability and Food Insecurity in Urban Areas of Swaziland,
December 2008
• Swaziland: VAC, Annual Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis, July 2008
• Zambia: VAC, Multi-Sectoral In-Depth Vulnerability and Needs Assessment, June 2008
• Zambia: Agricultural Consultative Forum, The Zambia Food Security Monitor, 1/2008
• Zimbabwe: Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanization and Irrigation Development, First Round
Crop and Livestock Assessment Report, February 2009
• Zimbabwe: VAC, Urban Food Security Assessment, January 2009.
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
87
Countries: NAMIBIA
Reporting Product: Community and Household Surveillance Findings.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: December 2007. Regularity:
Annually.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by the Ministry of Gender Equality & Child Welfare
(MGECW) and WFP.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: DFID
Methodology/Data Collection: Designed to monitor food security trends and programme
outcomes of MGECW and WFP programmes in support of orphans and vulnerable children. The
survey covers about 650 households in the six northern regions of Namibia, both beneficiary and
non-beneficiary. In addition to standard food security monitoring indicators (coping capacity, food
consumption, health and nutrition, livelihood strategies, etc.), the reports provide information on
beneficiary selection, effects of food assistance and targeting efficiency.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Asset Wealth by Beneficiary Type
Dietary Diversity and Food Frequency
Coping Strategy Index
Food Aid Outcomes
Food Consumption Score and Sources of Food Consumed
Household Food Stocks
Household Wealth and Income
Food Expenditure
Cereal Availability
Market Prices
Acute Child Malnutrition
Chronic Child Malnutrition
Wasting
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMS
88
Country: SUDAN (SOUTHERN)
Reporting Product: Food Security Update.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: April 2008. Regularity: Quarterly
(Planned).
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by the Food Security Technical Secretariat of the Southern Sudan Commission for Census, Statistics and Evaluation (SSCCSE), with technical support
by FAO. Collaborating Southern Sudan Government institutions include Ministry of Agriculture &
Forestry, Ministry of Animal Resources & Fisheries, Ministry of Health and the Relief and
Rehabilitation Commission. WFP and FEWS NET are external partners.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: EU STABEX Funds.
Methodology/Data Collection: Uses a number of data sources, including FAO, OCHA, WFP,
Relief and Rehabilitation Commission, United States Geological Service, as well as information from
UN Organizations and NGOs operating in the States of Southern Sudan. The bulletin includes policy
and development recommendations as well as estimates on required food assistance, input supply
and relief items.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Rainfall
Market Prices
Terms of Trade
Threats to crop/ livestock production
Crop/livestock production prospects
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• Southern Sudan: Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment (CFSVA),
December 2007
FSMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMP
89
Country: HAITI
Reporting Product: Early Warning System for Food Security (Système d’Alerte Précoce sure la
Sécurité Alimentaire - SAPSAP).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 10. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: June 2008. Regularity: Quarterly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Haiti in collaboration the National
Coordination for Food Security (CNSA), PLAN, FEWS NET and NGOs. SAPSAP is considered part of
the National Observatory for Food Security (ONSA).
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Collection of primary data (food access) from eight sentinel sites
in North and North Eastern Haiti (rainfall, retail prices). Partners participate in data collection for
agricultural production from 13 sentinel sites. VAM Unit considers the number of sentinel sites to be
limited.
Indicators:
Food Availability Food Access Food Utilization (Nutrition)
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Rainfall
Market Prices
Crop/livestock production prospects
Sale of Livestock
Food Expenditure
Sources of Food
Food Consumption Score
Recent Food Security Information Systems Reports:
• CNSA/FEWS NET, Food Security Update, February 2009
• CNSA/FEWS NET, Food Security Outlook Through June 2009, January 2009
• CNSA/WFP, Analyse Compréhensive de la Sécurité Alimentaire et de la Vulnérabilité
(CFSVA) en Milieu Rural Haïtien, February 2009
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
90
ANNEX 4: MARKET MONITORING SYSTEM COUNTRY FACT SHEETS
Country: AFGHANISTAN
Reporting Product: Market Watch Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: 2008. Last Issue: January 2009. Regularity:
Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangement: Prepared by WFP/VAM.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of secondary data from the Central Statistics Office (CSO)
Indicators:
Price
Purchasing Power
International/ Cross Border Trade
Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Consumer
Price Index
(CPI)
Retail price of wheat
Price of Wheat in the International Market
Terms of Trade (TOT) between Casual Labour and Wheat and between Sheep and Wheat
Retail prices of imported wheat flour
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
91
Country: NEPAL
Reporting Product: Market Watch Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 10. First Issue: 2008. Last Issue: January 2009. Regularity:
Monthly Bulletin.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Nepal with collaboration from
Agribusiness Promotion and Marketing Development Directorate (ABPMDD), Federation of Nepalese
Chamber of Commerce and Industries (FNCCI) and Consumer Interest Protection Forum (CIPF).
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on secondary data analysis.
Indicators:
Price
Purchasing Power
International/ Cross Border Trade
Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Nominal Retail
prices of key
commodities
(Rice, wheat
flour, soyabean
oil, chicken,
mustard oil,
musuro, potato
– red)
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMB
92
Country: PAKISTAN
Reporting Product: Food Security and Market Monitoring Report.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 6. First Issue: 2008. Last Issue: January 2009. Regularity: Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Pakistan.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of secondary data. Analysis done with the use of coloured maps that show vulnerability of each region.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Retail price of (wheat flour and rice and other food commodities)
Wholesale price of Wheat
Terms of Trade (TOT) Casual Labour and Wheat flour
International wheat prices
Level of cross border trade
Import Parity Prices (IPP)
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
93
Country: BENIN
Reporting Product: Market Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: November 2008. Regularity:
Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Benin.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Uses Secondary data and sources from ONASA and FAO.
Indicators:
Price
Purchasing Power
International/Cross Border Trade
Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Real retail prices of maize and beans
Terms of Trade (TOT) between cotton and maize, between flour and cassava,
Import Parity Prices (IPP)
Contribution of price changes on the cost of the food basket
International
prices of
maize
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
94
Country: BURKINA FASO
Reporting Product: Bulletin Hebdomadaire d’Information sur le Marché Agricole au Burkina Faso.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: January 2009. Regularity:
Weekly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by Societe Nationale de Gestion du Stock De Securite Alimentaire (SONAGESS) in Collaboration with Ministère de L’Hydraulique et des Ressources
Halieutiques (MAHRH)
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of primary data.
Indicators:
Price
Purchasing Power
International Trade/cross border
Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Retail prices of maize, millet and sorghum
Level of market availability
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
95
Country: MAURITANIA
Reporting Product: Bulletin de Suivi des Marchés des Produit Alimentaires en Mauritanie.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 1. First Issue: March 2009. Last Issue: March 2009. Regularity: Bi-
monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared FEWS NET, WFP and Commissariat à la Sécurité
Alimentaire (CSA).
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on primary and secondary data. Primary data collected
from 41 markets.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power
International Trade/cross border
Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Retail prices of key commodities (Rice, Wheat Flour, Millet and Sorghum)
Import of Cereal Products
Terms of Trade between Sheep and Ewes
Import Parity Prices of Rice and Wheat Flour
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
96
Country: NIGER
Reporting Product: Bulletin Mensuel – Système d’Information sur les Marchés Agricoles (Volet
Céréales/Volet Produits de Rente).
Periodicity: Number of issues: 5. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: April 2009. Regularity: Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by the Agricultural Markets Information System (SIMA) of
the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Standardisation, with support from WFP.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: EC
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on primary data collected from markets, particularly in
areas traditionally considered vulnerable to food insecurity, as well as seven markets in
neighbouring countries.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power
International Trade/cross border
Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Retail prices of key commodities (Millet, Sorghum, Maize, Rice and a number Cash Crops)
Retail prices of Millet, Sorghum, Maize and Rice in five markets in Nigeria, one in Burkina Faso and one in Benin
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
97
Country: SENEGAL
Reporting Product: Bulletin Mensuel du Marché Agropastoral.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 249. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: November 2008. Regularity:
Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by Commissariat à la Sécurité Alimentaire.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on primary and secondary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International /Cross Border
Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Level of market availability
Retail and producer prices of key commodities (Sorghum, Maize and Rice)
Retail prices of cereal imports
Evolution of cross border trade
Level of market availability
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMD
98
Country: TOGO
Reporting Product: Markets Bulletin.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: November 2008. Regularity:
Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: WFP in collaboration with Government, NGOs, stakeholders.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of secondary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Real retail prices of maize and beans
International prices of maize
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
99
Country: ETHIOPIA
Reporting Product: Ethiopia Market Watch.
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: 2008. Last Issue: June 2008. Regularity: Monthly
(planned)
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Ethiopia.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Primary and secondary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Import Parity Prices (IPP)
Retail and wholesale prices of key commodities (Maize, Wheat, Sorghum)
General supply rates of major cereals across regions
Terms of Trade (TOT) between livestock(goats and sheep) and cereals(wheat, maize and sorghum)
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
100
Country: SOUTHERN AFRICA
Reporting Product: Informal Cross Border Food Trade in Southern Africa.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 45. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: September 2008. Regularity:
Monthly
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by WFP/VAM Unit, Southern Africa, with support by
FEWSNET and NGO partners.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: USAID
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on primary data and secondary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Retail maize prices in selected border points
Traded volume of maize, rice and beans
Cross border maize trade volume
Volumes of informal cross border rice trade
Rice export trends from neighbouring countries
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
101
Country: UGANDA
Reporting Product: Agricultural MIS Report
Periodicity: Number of issues: N/A. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: October 2008. Regularity:
Quarterly Bulletin.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by INFOTRADE Uganda in partnership with Agricultural Sector Programme Support (ASPS/DANIDA)
Annual Budget:
External Funding: DANIDA.
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of secondary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Retail and
wholesale
prices of key
commodities
(Potatoes,
Cassava,
Beans, maize
flour,
sorghum
flour,
chicken)
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMJ
102
Country: ZAMBIA
Reporting Product: The Monthly.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 63. First Issue: N/A. Last Issue: June 2008. Regularity: Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by the Central Statistical Office.
Annual Budget:
External Funding:
Methodology/Data Collection: Use of primary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Retail prices of key commodities (Maize, sorghum, meat, chicken, milk, eggs etc.)
Export and import trade inflows
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMS
103
Country: SUDAN (Northern)
Reporting Product: Monthly Market Update.
Periodicity: Number of issues: 13. First Issue: January 2008. Last Issue: January 2009.
Regularity: Monthly.
Dissemination:
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in
collaboration with Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and Ministry of Animal Resources and
Fisheries.
Annual Budget:
External Funding: Report preparation funded by FAO (SIFSIA-Northern Sudan).
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on secondary data from the Agricultural and Livestock
Market Information Systems.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power International/Cross Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Export Parity Prices (ExPP)
Nominal and Real Wholesale Prices of Cereals (sorghum, wheat, millet)
Crop Calendar
Relative price changes (CPI)
Terms of Trade (TOT) between sheep and sorghum
MMS COUNTRY FACT SHEET - OMS
104
Country: NICARAGUA
Reporting Product: Reporte Semanal de Precios (Weekly Price Reports)
Periodicity: Number of issues: 712. First Issue: 1995. Last Issue: 15 April 2009. Regularity:
Weekly.
Dissemination: Available from the Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry (MAGFOR) Website.
Institutional Arrangements: Prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry. Consists of four bulletins covering i) wholesale prices of agricultural produce in major markets; ii) average industrial,
wholesale and retail of livestock products; iii) prices of non-traditional agricultural products in the
Miami market; and iv) international prices of agricultural commodities. These constitute the
Information System of Agricultural Prices and Markets (SIPMA). Price data are collected by MAGFOR
staff or obtained from websites (international prices and Miami market prices).
Annual Budget:
External Funding: None
Methodology/Data Collection: Based on primary and secondary data.
Indicators:
Price Purchasing Power InternationalCcross
Border Trade Other
Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative
Nominal wholesale prices of all major agricultural produce (maize, rice, beans, soya, vegetables, fruits sugar)
CIF and FOB price of non-traditional exports
Nominal wholesale and retail prices all livestock products
International agricultural commodity prices
Nominal market prices of livestock (cattle, pigs)