Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment. CARE.

Transcription

1 DePaul University From the SelectedWorks of John Mazzeo, Ph.D Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment. CARE. John Mazzeo, DePaul University Available at:

2 LESOTHO VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT DECEMBER 2002 FINAL DRAFT REPORT Prepared by: John Mazzeo Kris Luther TANGO International Tucson, Arizona USA January 31, 2003

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS... vii II. ACRONYMS... viii III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 i. Context & Current Situation... 1 ii. Highlights... 1 IV. PURPOSE AND METHODOLOGY OF THE ASSESSMENT... 3 i. Purpose... 3 ii. Methodology of the Assessment... 3 V. EMERGENCY FOOD SECURITY OVERVIEW... 7 A. Food Insecurity at the National Level... 7 B. Food Security, HIV/AIDS and Basic Needs... 9 i. Chronic Illness... 9 ii. Water ii. Sanitation C. Effects of Food Security i. Shocks and Stresses ii. Coping strategies iii. Gender issues D. Future Food Security Prospects i. Received and Planned Imports ii. Agricultural Production Prospects E. Other Factors Influencing Production Prospects i. Availability of Inputs ii. Prices of Inputs iii. Implications for Future Food Security Situation iv. Past, Present and Future Climatic Conditions v. Availability and Accessibility of Agricultural Inputs vi. Government Policies VI. NATIONAL LEVEL FOOD SECURITY A Harvest Outcomes i. Main Season Crop Production Levels ii. Winter Crop Production B. Levels of Food Imports as Compared with Estimated Requirements i. Estimated Requirements from National Food Balance Sheet ii. Import Progress and Plans C. Food Aid Progress i. Community Level Responses to Food Aid Progress ii. Other Problems Related to Food Aid VII. SUB-NATIONAL FOOD SECURITY A. Availability of Food across the Country i. Maize ii

4 ii. Sorghum iii. Wheat iv. Wild Foods v. Cereal Prices vi. Non-Cereal Foods vii. Food Gap / Need for Food Aid B. Household level Access to Cereals i. Household Purchasing Power ii. Social Issues and the Effects of Food Crisis VIII. TARGETING i. Recommendations for Future Food Aid IX. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FOOD INSECURITY AND OTHER SECTORS A. Nutritional Situation i. Surveillance Indicators ii. Levels and Diversity iii. Incidence of Key Diseases iv. Education X. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS i. Specific Recommendations on Mitigating the Impact of HIV/AIDS on Rural Households in Lesotho iii

5 FIGURES AND TABLES Table 4.1 Vulnerability Assessment Village Sample Framework... 3 Table 5.1 Changes in National and Sub-National Food Security from August to December... 7 Table 5.2 Food Insecurity and HIV/AIDS... 9 Table 5.3 Number of Stresses or Shocks Experienced by a Household Table 5.4 Types of Shocks and Stresses Table 5.5 Types of Livestock Theft Table 5.6 Household Coping Strategies Table 5.7 Number of Coping Strategies Employed by Socio-Economic Group Table 5.8 Household Coping Strategies by Socio-Economic Rank Table 5.9 Household Coping Strategies by Food Economy Zone Table 5.10 Household Coping Strategies by Age of Household Head Table 5.11 Coping Strategies by Sex of Household Head Table 5.12 Household Coping Strategies by Sex of Household Head Table 5.13 Received and Planned Food Imports Table 5.14 Prospects for the Current Agricultural Season at District Level (2002/2003) Table 5.15 Prices for Agricultural Inputs, 2001/02 and 2002/03 Agricultural Year Figure 6.1 Household Grain Production (Maize, Wheat, and Sorghum) for the Main Season by District Table 6.2 Household Grain Production (Maize, Wheat, and Sorghum) for the Main Season by Food Economy Zone Table 6.3 Household Winder Crop Production by Food Economy Zone Table 6.4 Estimated Planted Areas for Cereals, Legumes, Roots and Tubers Table 6.5 Land Cultivated by Crop and Season by District Table 6.6 Land Cultivated by Crop and Season by Food Economy Zone iv

6 Table 6.7 Cereal Gap (Metric Tonnes) Table 6.8 Cereal Imports, Progress and Plans Table 6.9 Summary of Food Aid Plans and Deliveries as of September Table 7.1 Wild Foods Consumption by Socio-Economic Group Table 7.2 Maize Meal Prices at District Level Table 7.3 Prices of Commodities by Food Economy Zone and District Table 7.4 District and Running Out of Cereal Stocks Table 7.5 Food Economy Zone and Running Out of Cereal Stocks Table 7.6 Household Socio-Economic Rank and Running Out of Cereal Stocks Table 7.7 Age of household Head and Running Out of Cereal Stocks Table 7.8 Mean Food Availability (Kg per Capita) and Percent Households in a Food Gap Deficit Table 7.9 Percent of Households Engaged in an Income Generating Livelihood Activity and the Mean Income from all Activities by Sex of Household Head Table 7.10 Percent of Households Engaged in an Income Generating Livelihood Activity and the Mean Income from all Activities by Food Economy Zone Table 7.11 Percent of Households Engaged in an Income Generating Livelihood Activity and the Mean Income from all Activities by District Table 7.12 Primary Income Generating Livelihood Activities by Food Economy Zone Table 7.13 Primary Income Generating Livelihood Activities by Sex of Household Head. 37 Table 7.14 Percent of Households Owning Livestock and the Mean Number of Animals by Food Economy Zone and Sex of Household Head Table 7.15 Percent of Households Holding land and the Mean Land Holding (Acres) by District Table 7.16 Percent of Households Holding land and the Mean Land Holding (Acres) by Food Economy Zone Table 7.17 Percent of Households Holding land and the Mean Land Holding (Acres) by Sex of Household Head v

7 II. ACRONYMS AIDS : Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome BOS : Bureau of Statistics CFG : Community Focus Groups CFSA : Crop & Food Supply CFSAM : Crop & Food Supply Assessment Mission CI : Confidence Interval CSB : Corn-Soya-Blend DFID : Department for International Development DMA : Disaster Management Authority DPPA : Department of Planning & Policy Analysis EMICS : End-Decade Multi-indicator Cluster Survey EMOP : Emergency Operations FANR : Food, Agriculture & Natural Resources Department FNCO : Food and Nutrition Coordinating Office FAO : Food and Agriculture Organization FEZ : Food Economy Zones GoL : Government of Lesotho HH : Households HIV : Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus Kcal : Kilo Calories LVAC : Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment Committee KG : Kilograms MML : Maize meal MOA : Ministry of Agriculture MOHSW : Ministry of Health & Social Welfare MP : Member of Parliament MT : Metric tons NEWU : National Early Warning Unit NGO : Non-government organization NVAC : National Vulnerability Assessment Committee SADC : Southern African Development Community SCN : Standing Committee on Nutrition SD : Standard Deviation SEG : Socio-Economic Groups UNAIDS : Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS UNICEF : United Nations Children s Fund VAC : Vulnerability Assessment Committee WFP : World Food Program WHO : World Health Organization viii

8 III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i. Context & Current Situation One of the poorest countries in the world, Lesotho is a largely mountainous country of four agro-ecological zones lowlands, foothills, mountains and the Senqu River Valley surrounded by South Africa. Erratic weather, including heavy rainfall, frost, hailstorms, and even a tornado have severely affected agricultural production and food security at the household, community, district and national levels in Lesotho during the past two years. Sharply declining employment opportunities and rising staple food prices have adversely affected household resilience to cope with the shock of declining food availability and access. Households already experiencing or extremely vulnerable to livelihood insecurity are now routinely employing what used to be coping strategies, such as beer brewing, as their livelihood strategies. Like other Southern African nations, recent food security shocks must be understood in the context of the longerterm deterioration of agriculture combined with the HIV/AIDS pandemic, (the country has the world s fourth highest prevalence rate) which has particularly impacted Lesotho households. This year, Lesotho households are paying much more for staple food products, including oil, maize, and maize meal, than last year. The poorest households, who are forced to spend disproportionately more for food, have been particularly affected by the price increases. ii. Highlights Declining food access and availability shortfalls are already affecting vulnerable rural households. More than three-quarters (78%) of surveyed households have run out of cereal stocks. 91% did not harvest any cereals this winter. Availability of cereals and other foodstuffs in local markets varies. Most food commodities are however unaffordable according to the surveyed community residents. Approximately 818,200 people, or 45% of the rural population, will require emergency food assistance from December 2002 through March This figure has jumped considerably from the July/August 02 projection of 650,000 people as stocks quickly 1

9 depleted, most households did not harvest any winter cereals and the purchasing power of households continue to deteriorate Total emergency cereal needs for Lesotho for the period December 1st 2002 March 31st 2003 is 32,000 MTs. This updates the figure of 36,000 MT (covering the period September 1 st 2002 to March 31 st 2003) put forward by the July/August 02 VA. The districts most in need of assistance include Mokhotlong, Thaba Tseka, Qacha s Nek, and Quthing. The largest food cereal gaps are found in the mountains, followed by the foothills and the lowlands. The Senqu River Valley falls close behind. Links between HIV/AIDS and food insecurity are strong. HIV/AIDS prevalence amongst adults is now 31%, the fourth highest in the world. The impact of chronic illness (a proxy for HIV/AIDS) is cutting across all livelihood categories and aspects of life at the household, community and national level. 23% of all households reported to have a member who is chronically ill, with the highest in the poorest socio-economic groups 28%. Casual Labour, Brewing and selling beer, selling livestock, selling firewood and relying on friends and relatives are the most frequently mentioned ways of trying to boost income to cope with the food shortages. Permanent migration in search of food most commonly to RSA or Maseru was mentioned by 26% of surveyed households. Reductions on health and education expenditures are common also, and reductions are highest among poor and very poor households. 46% of households said they have skipped an entire day without eating, which is a clear sign of distress at this time of the season. Of female-headed households interviewed 72% are classified as poor or very poor. Female-headed households were found to have a higher cereal gap on average than male-headed households. Female-headed households in the mountains and the Senqu river valley appear particularly at risk. The assessment did not cover urban or peri-urban areas. It is known, however, that food problems also exist in these areas. It is necessary therefore to undertake assessments to establish the extent of need. 2

10 IV. PURPOSE AND METHODOLOGY OF THE ASSESSMENT i. Purpose This Emergency Food Needs Assessment seeks to update food security related findings and underlying assumptions from the July/August 02 Vulnerability Assessment Committee report (VAC) in order to inform critical decision making. The assessment will also attempt to investigate linkages between food security and underlying root causes and consequences with a focus on HIV/AIDS, but also including nutrition, health, education, water and sanitation. ii. Methodology of the Assessment a. Secondary Data Review In preparation for writing this report, the Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment Committee (LVAC) reviewed the analysis and estimates that were presented in the July/August 02 VA report. In addition to discussion with government leadership, it reviewed the latest monthly reports of the Government of Lesotho (GoL) National Early Warning Unit (NEWU) in the Disaster Management Agency (DMA), government emergency response plans, UNICEF and FNCO studies, and reports of studies of the food security situation by NGOs. b. Sampling Twenty-four villages participated in community focus group discussions across each of Lesotho s 10 districts. Four Food Economy Zones (FEZ) were represented within the sample. During the July/August 02 VA (vulnerability assessment), thirty villages were studied with 3 villages from each of Lesotho s 10 districts representing the four Food Economy Zones (FEZ). During this assessment, only a sub-sample of the July/August assessment was surveyed in order to update the previous study. Consequently, the village sample was reduced by 6 resulting in twenty-four villages. Villages were selected from all the 10 districts according to the following criteria: Village should be rural and be within the 4 Food Economy Zones (FEZ). Table 1 below outlines the village sampling framework. Table 4.1 Vulnerability Assessment Village Sample Framework District Food Economy Zones (Number of Villages) Total villages per team Lowlands Foothills Mountains Senqu River Valley (SRV) Butha-Buthe Leribe Berea Maseru Mafeteng Mohale s Hoek Qacha s Nek 2 2 Quthing Thaba-Tseka 2 2 Mokhotlong 2 2 TOTAL

11 Purposive sampling was employed based on the FEZ within the districts. Villages were further purposefully selected using the following criteria: Different villages studied from the previous assessment Accessible (by vehicle) within reasonable time frame as demanded by the duration of the study Have a representation of: - Proximity to urban areas - Proximity to agricultural development projects - Remote from services or project areas Prone to climatic/weather anomalies such as: hail, early frost and drought Associated with severe land degradation Productive agricultural areas The above characteristics were identified to assist in capturing a representative picture of both food secure and insecure areas across the country in order to determine the impact of the food crisis. c. Key Informant Interviews Assessment team members led discussions with district-based staff from each of the ten districts. The district key informant interviews allowed the assessment teams to gain a district-level perspective of the food security situation. 140 district-based staff took part in the discussions representing 10 government departments per district. Key informant interviews were also held with community members to gain knowledge on issues such as commodity prices, illness, water and sanitation, and to gather specific quantitative information about villages demographics. d. Community Focus Groups & Wealth Ranking Exercise At the selected villages, interviews were conducted with both men and women separately, in order to allow for different gender perspectives. The focus group discussions allowed the assessment teams to gain a village level overview of the food security situation, and included a checklist of topics for exploration. CARE team members facilitated wealth-ranking exercises in order to stratify households by wealth categories and select households in proportion to their population in the village for household interviews. e. Household Questionnaires After conducting community key informant, focus group interviews and facilitating the wealth ranking exercises, assessment team members interviewed 20 households. The primary objective of the household questionnaire was to understand the extent to which households will be able to access their cereal requirements from the time of the survey to March-April next year, and to make a comparison between the requirements projected in the July/August and November/December surveys. Data has been collected on 8 key variables used to determine the cereal food gap, through the Household Questionnaire. These are as follows: 1. Household demographics 2. Livestock ownership 3. Cereal crops from own production 4. Other direct sources of cereals 5. Food aid assistance 6. Cereal and cereal products purchases (Purchasing power) 4

12 7. Consumption and food efficiency 8. Shocks to the household and coping mechanisms Household Questionnaire Data was analyzed using SPSS, along with a detailed analysis of qualitative data. f. Survey Challenges and Areas for Improvement The major weakness of the study was in the logistics. The study did not commence on schedule because the funds were not ready, delaying both the training and the fieldwork. Funding for the transport for the national consultants was only released during the last week of the fieldwork and this limited their participation in the field. The size of the teams was reduced from 6 members to 4 members per team due to financial constraints. Although the number of villages studied had also been reduced, the arrangement meant extremely long days for the enumerators. There was a clear indication in the completion of the questionnaires that the work was done in hurry. The timing coincided with the distribution of food aid and farming inputs in some villages and that affected the response of communities to the planned gatherings. This led to activities such as wealth ranking being left out in some villages or a situation where attendance was so poor that for the household interviews all the participants had to be interviewed without need to sample. The household questionnaire consisted of questions that were interpreted differently by the enumerators. The wealth ranking exercise posed serious methodological challenges. Quite often, it seems the communities reserve the truth about their livelihood categories. This has to be accepted since it is rare for anyone to be completely open about their socio-economic status to strangers. As a result, during the completion of the household questionnaire, there was some conflicting information with the livelihood categories that some participants were categorized into. Furthermore, the well-off category was in most cases not represented in the focus groups as individuals belonging to the category probably did not regard the gatherings as important for them. Although there are biases in the collection of wealth ranking data, this report includes some analysis of these data. The bias in the wealth ranking data is greatest at the district level. No analysis of this variable was done by district. Rather than eliminate this potentially interesting variable, this analysis sought to minimize the effects of bias. The biases introduced by data collection can be randomized when using crosscutting variables such as gender of household head. In this type of analysis, the bias has less of an influence on the data, because it is randomly distributed between male and female-headed households. However, when weighing the results from these crosscutting variables, it is always important to consider that a minimized bias is present. Most of the communities associated the survey teams with food aid, also heavily biasing the Wealth Ranking exercise. It is recommended for future assessments that Wealth Ranking exercises be excluded from the survey methods. Socio-economic categories could be generated based on key indicators (such as household assets, income, production, etc) from the household questionnaire data set. It would be more appropriate and useful to include detailed discussion at village level of the differences in livelihoods, socio-economic groups 5

13 and how these households cope with stresses such as the ongoing food crisis. Changes in coping strategies over time (trends analysis) in relation to the escalating food crisis (and other related stresses) would yield more useful information for designing appropriate responses; both emergency and long term related. 6

14 V. EMERGENCY FOOD SECURITY OVERVIEW A. Food Insecurity at the National level Since the August 2002 assessment, the food insecurity situation has worsened in terms of coverage with more areas drifting into food insecurity. Food insecurity is invariably considered as severe across all districts and all food economy zones. This is irrespective of some areas traditionally being known as having high agricultural productivity, for example, the northern lowlands. Food security has declined throughout the different parts of all 10 districts. Badly affected areas include even those that in the previous August 02 assessment were described as food secure. For example, in Thaba Tseka district officials indicated that unlike the previous August assessment whereby only three areas (Semenanyane, Mohlanapeng and Sehonghong) were identified as experiencing a food crisis, the problem is currently district-wide. In Mafeteng, food security at the household level was also described as having deteriorated since the last assessment. Table 5.1 shows that since the July/August 02 VA, there has been a decline in food security. National food insecurity has increased. The number of households in need of food aid has increased by 26%. At the sub-national district level, the food security picture is varied. Half of the districts have experienced a significant decrease in food security. The most dramatic change in food aid need have been in Mafeteng (37% change) and Maseru (17% change). Those districts where food security has actually improved, the improvement is not significant. The most positive change in food aid need has been in Mokhotlong (-17% change). Table 5.1 Changes in National and Sub-National Food Security from August to December District Rural Population August Assessment December Assessment Food Need Change % Need # People in % Need # People in % Need Population Need Need Mafeteng 208,454 9% 18,761 46% 94,847 37% 76,086 Maseru 293,122 30% 87,937 47% 138,060 17% 50,123 Butha Buthe 118,495 23% 27,254 37% 43,547 14% 16,293 Berea 234,451 23% 53,924 32% 74,555 9% 20,631 Mohale's Hoek 205,210 28% 57,459 30% 61,891 2% 4,432 Quthing 143,988 68% 97,912 64% 91,576-4% -6,336 Leribe 296,510 28% 83,023 23% 66,952-5% -16,071 Qacha's Nek 73,793 64% 47,228 56% 41,509-8% -5,719 Thaba Tseka 132,076 75% 99,057 65% 85,849-10% -13,208 Mokhotlong 102,573 75% 76,930 58% 59,492-17% -17,438 Total 1,808,672 36% 649,483 42% 758,278 6% 108,795 The total population in need of food aid for the December assessment is 758,278 this number has increased by 108,795 since the July/August VA 02 assessment. Although all districts are wholly affected, there are differences in terms of the severity and intensity of the problem across different areas within districts. In Qacha s Nek, for example, places such as Lebakeng are reported as severely affected. Similar regional differences were reported in Quthing and Berea whereby lower altitude areas were relatively more secure than mountain and foothills, respectively. 7

15 Though some cereal and non-cereal food were reported to be readily available on the market, factors limiting household access to these commodities are undermining food security at the household level. It was consistently reported that market prices for food cereals has increased. This phenomenon is illustrated by the quantities now commonly purchased by households - namely 1 kg (babatone) and 12.5 kg of maize meal; purchasing larger packages of maize meal is no longer common despite the needs. The prevailing economic environment has also contributed to household food insecurity. It was indicated that in 1992 most households still had access to migrant labourers remittances and could access needed food through the market. Households now face low-income levels coupled with high levels of unemployment resulting in the reduced capacity to purchase cereal food. Unfavorable climatic conditions drought in particular, was stated by district-based officials as one of the major factors responsible for the current food crisis. In all ten districts, early frost was also cited as responsible for crop failure. Both drought and frost are considered responsible for the unavailability of non-cereal crops, especially backyard vegetable gardens. Long dry spells have affected production from last summer s crops and current winter harvests. Dry spells experienced during the summer cropping season in 2001 reduced cereal yields substantially. It was also indicated that green peas (normally available in November/December) failed due to dry spells. It was indicated in all district-based discussions that both cereal and non-cereal food, especially staple maize meal, are always available in various urban centers, though very expensive to purchase. The increased severity of food insecurity was also confirmed through community focus group discussions. Communities stated that circumstances have made households more vulnerable to famine than they were during previous drought episodes. Climatic conditions such as drought, early frost, uneven rainfall distribution, and water logging have seriously undermined the availability of food in rural communities. In some areas, multiple attacks of frost destroyed early maize crops and garden vegetables. The 2001 harvest levels for many households were stated to be much lower than 1991 harvests. This has been attributed to the occurrence of drought both prior to planting and during the growing season. The economic factors are also perceived to be responsible for low or declined agricultural production at the household level since it has become extremely difficult to purchase inputs such as seeds and fertilizers. In addition, due to reduced livestock numbers, many households are lacking draught power. Lack of livestock, in particular draught power, results in a serious resource deficiency for some farming households; hence the popularity of sharecropping. However, low yields were also cited as negatively affecting the benefits of sharecropping, where households have less harvest to share than before. Livestock theft and retrenchment were cited as having reduced the capacity of households to access food cereal through their own production, and have led to chronic deficiencies in household resources, also negatively affecting other production strategies such as sharecropping. In the past many households had the option of tractor hire, made possible by mine remittances. The steady retrenchment of miners has greatly reduced this farming strategy. 8

16 B. Food Security, HIV/AIDS and Basic Needs i. Chronic Illness According to the latest Report on the global HIV/AIDS epidemic (UNAIDS, July 2002), HIV/AIDS prevalence among adults (aged 15-49) is now 31%, fourth highest in the world. Prevalence rates are estimated to be 42% in Maseru district, which is higher than in Botswana, where prevalence rates are currently the highest in the world (estimated at 38%). UNAIDS estimates that prevalence rates among young year-old Basotho women are somewhere between 25 and 51 percent, the highest prevalence rate for young women in the world. Approximately 73,000 Basotho children were orphaned in 2001, a result of 25,000 AIDS deaths. HIV/AIDS is clearly a gravely serious problem facing Lesotho households. Given all the sensitivity associated with HIV/AIDS, as well as a general reluctance on part of Basotho in general to discuss it, the research team decided not to mention the term HIV/AIDS during the fieldwork. It was felt more appropriate to discuss issues related to chronic illnesses, taking care to ask the people to explain the symptoms of the chronic sickness. Chronic illness, used as a proxy for HIV/AIDS, is related to household food insecurity. 23% of all households interviewed have a member who is chronically ill. Table 5.2 shows the relationship between HIV/AIDS and food insecurity by district. Berea and Quthing and Maseru are to be doubly afflicted with food insecurity and HIV/AIDS. Table 5.2 Food Insecurity and HIV/AIDS Relationship Between Food Insecurity and HIV/AIDS 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% % HH with a chronically ill member (AIDS) % Food Need (Negative Food Gap) 10% 0% Berea Quthing Maseru Butha-Buthe Mafeteng Leribe Mokhotlong Thaba-Tseka Qacha's Nek Mohale's Hoek Additionally, households with a chronically ill member have a mean food gap of +33 kg per capita. This is significantly lower, a difference of 140 kg per capita, than +173 kg per capita for households that do not have a chronically ill member (p=0.01, t-test). 9

17 Results from the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) support the household questionnaire findings. The majority of communities indicated that there are more households caring for chronically ill members than was the case last year. It was also indicated that there are more people falling ill than previous years. The majority of communities also stated that there have been more deaths occurring because of illness than in previous years. The following highlights the most commonly cited illnesses across communities: Chronic chest pains (ntho ka sefubeng) which was in some cases used interchangeably with pneumonia Diarrhea Tuberculosis HIV/AIDS Hypertension Stroke During FGDs virtually every community identified young people (mainly in the 20s, but up to 50 years of age) as the most affected by chronic illness, although in some cases people aged 18 were also stated to be affected by illness. Specific groups identified as affected by chronic illness include current migrant labourers and those who have been retrenched, women who once worked in the RSA, those working in the textile industries in Lesotho (Maseru and Maputsoe), and married couples who in most cases are parents and youth. Income sources such as migrant remittances may therefore not only be affected by retrenchments, but also by the prevalence of chronic illnesses. The high number of households with orphans also predisposes such households to food insecurity. This is in part due to the increased dependency ratios of children who may not be contributing (or contributing significantly) to household economies. This is particularly true for households that are headed by young children, as their participation in food production will be less effective than for adults. Furthermore, children s coping strategies may not be as resilient as those adopted by adult household heads due to a limited or non-existent asset base on which to cushion on-going stresses or shocks. In most communities, there are no mechanisms in place to assist households affected by chronic illness; care-giving responsibilities lie solely with the affected household members or kin in the community. Only friends, relatives and family members were stated to assist the sick. In some communities, health workers and community members do pay visits to affected households and assist sick people with the preparation and serving of food, drawing water and ensuring that medication is taken accordingly. However, it was stated that these are uncommon strategies. In most communities, it was indicated that home-based care is becoming predominant. Outpatients are treated at nearby hospitals and health centers, while at the same time there are also people who are initially admitted to hospitals but later released. These include young TB patients, those suffering from diarrhea and chest pains and those infected by HIV/AIDS. The prominence of home-based care has implications for food security, particularly at the household level, since caregivers become less mobile and inactive in economic activities. Patients, on the other hand, have nutritional requirements that may be met while in hospital, but may not be afforded at home. 10

18 Although there was no reported fallowed fields as a result of illness, sharecropping a common practice to alleviate problems such as lack of draught power, fields, inputs and labour, does not guarantee food security. Participating households are obliged to share their produce, which most of the time does not last until the next harvest. ii. Water The Department of Rural Water Supply (DRWS) currently covers about 60% of the rural population, which means that approximately 40% of the population does not have access to safe water supplies. In Mohales Hoek, Taung village is extremely vulnerable, the western part of Mafeteng and some parts of Berea such as Ha Ntabejane. Two possible reasons were cited by the DRWS for the disruption of water supply: Drought: Drought affects all water sources in both rural and urban areas. In the rural areas, especially in the southern districts (Quthing, Mohales Hoek and Mafeteng), low water levels in springs and hand pump sources result in inconsistent water availability. The same is true for Maseru, Berea and Leribe where water is rationed during drought periods. Vandalism: Nearly a quarter of RWS systems have been vandalized, resulting in disruption and a reliance on unsafe water by affected communities. The past season s dry spell has negatively impacted sanitation conditions. During the month of October, Maseru urban and peri-urban areas experienced a consistent water shortage due to the dry spell. This water disruption affected the availability of water for various household purposes. In particular it negatively affected people who use running water bathrooms. Specifically: People started utilizing untreated water sources, thus resulting in gastro-intestinal problems. There has been a failure to meet effluent standards due to absence of dilution effect of water. Blockages rendered by backlogging waste materials caused stagnation and ponding. Ponds create a conducive environment for flies and mosquito breeding, vectors of disease. The DRWS highlights the following emergency interventions required to ensure access to safe water and adequate sanitation. Installation of emergency boreholes either as hand-pumps, diesel, electricity or solar powered pumps. River bed water extraction Roof water harvesting (through home-made or commercial tanks) Collection of water from dams and springs followed by treatment Tankering (i.e. supply of water through tankers) Insufficient water supply was reported in all of the sampled areas. Interestingly, even the mountain areas, which are normally well endowed with water, indicated that some water sources have been drying up due to drought conditions. 11

19 In almost all the sampled communities, the main source of potable water was reported to be piped water (64%), boreholes (13%), protected springs (4.5%) and unprotected springs (14%). Regions using unprotected springs were located in the foothills with basalt bedrock zones. The major problems being faced by the communities are: Lack of maintenance due to high cots is resulting in taps breaking down Water sources are located to far away in Leribe and Berea Lowlands Water sources are now muddy and salty, is some villages because of overflooding iii. Sanitation As with lack of potable water, inadequate sanitation also increases the risk of disease, subsequent illness and loss of productivity. This holds true for both food secure and insecure people and households. Varying levels of latrine ownership were reported during the assessment. For instance, the highest percentages of ownership were recorded in Matsatsaneng, Butha-Buthe district (93%); Morifi, M. Hoek (88%); and Mapotu, Mafeteng (82%). Households with the lowest ownership levels were reported in Tlokoeng, Mokhotlong (9%), Mpharane, Mohale s Hoek (4.5%), Mtjanyane, Quthing (8%) and Ramosuoe, Quthing (11%). Households that do not own latrines indicated that they use bushes, dongas or neighbours latrines and soil pits. In places where there are few dongas people use open spaces located outside of the village. Unfortunately, dongas are part of the drainage system in Lesotho and the possibility of contaminating water through the usage of dongas is high. Similarly, the likelihood of under ground water contamination by pit latrines cannot be ignored; recognizing that this depends on other factors such as the soil type, the concentration of toilets in an area and the water table level. C. Effects of Food Security i. Shocks and Stresses The majority (71%) of households did not experience a health or economic shock event in Of note are the 8% of households that experienced multiple shocks. Table 5.3 Number of Stresses or Shocks Experienced by a Household % (n) None 71% (338) One 21% (103) Multiple 8% (35) The most common kind of stresses/shocks to affect households was chronic illness (HIV/AIDS), as discussed previously. 12

20 Table 5.4 Types of Shocks and Stresses Health Chronic Illness (HIV/AIDS) Death Economic Funeral/Marriage Expenses Livestock Theft 23% (108) 6% (26) 8% (38) 5% (22) Of those who reported livestock thefts, cattle (42%) was the most common animal stolen. Most thefts were reported in three districts, namely Thaba Tseka (13%), Quthing (10%), and Berea (8%). Table 5.5 Types of Livestock Theft % (n) Cattle 42% 22 Donkeys 29% 15 Goats 12% 6 Sheep 8% 4 Chicken 6% 3 Horse 4% 2 ii. Coping strategies Table 5.6 indicates that the majority (95%) of all households practice at least one coping strategy. Most strategies aim at reducing or reallocating consumption and expenditure. The most common coping strategies are reducing household needs (71%), limiting food portions (60%), and reserving food for children (59%). 46% mentioned skipping whole days without eating, however, this is not supported by the number of meals eaten by adults and children the day before the interview. Only 1% of households reported not eating anything, 8% had one meal, 50% two meals and 41% three meals. The fact that 38% of the households interviewed are receiving food aid, can explain why households are not yet resorting to skipping whole days without having a meal as a coping strategy. The frequencies of income coping strategies below may appear low in general. However, of those who own those livestock, 17% of those who own poultry are selling, 41% for goats and sheep, and 12% for cattle. Of those who own land, 7% are selling. 13

21 Table 5.6 Household Coping Strategies HH Coping Strategies Strategy Income Strategy % of HH interviewed Sell Poutry 9 Sell Sheep/Goats 6 Sell Cattle 3 Sell/give land 5 Sell Other Assets 4 Consumption Strategy Rely on less preffered food 39 Borrow Food 33 Receive food from relatives 36 Purchase food on credit 51 Limit portions 60 Skip whole days without eating 46 Eat wild food 40 Reserve food for Children 59 Pregnant or lactacting 26 Expenditure Strategies Reduce Expenditure on Health 46 Take Children out of school 29 Reduce HH needs 71 Sent Children away 28 Migrate for Food/Work 26 Permanent Migration 26 Only 5% of all households are not engaged in some form of coping strategy. Table 5.7 shows that the poorest socio-economic group is practicing the greatest number of coping strategies. These households practice, on average, 6.3 strategies, compared to 3.2 strategies practiced by the well-off group. Table 5.7 Number of Coping Strategies Employed by Socio-Economic Group Well-Off 3.2 Middle 4.9 Poor 6.2 Poorest 6.3 (p=0.000, Pearson s Correlation) Table shows those coping strategies by socio-economic group, food economy zone, and age of household head that vary significantly in the percentage of households that practice them. Table 5.8 illustrates that the majority of households that practice coping strategies are from the poor and poorest socio-economic groups. 14

22 Table 5.8 Household Coping Strategies by Socio-Economic Rank Receive food from a relative Limit food portions Skip whole days without eating Children drop out of school Reduce household needs Permanent migration Well-Off 15% 33% 22% 11% 48% 7% Middle 29% 54% 30% 19% 66% 20% Poor 43% 63% 54% 33% 74% 29% Poorest 38% 70% 57% 41% 77% 35% p (Pearson's R) The frequency of coping strategies varies by food economy zone (table 5.9). Of note is that 41% of SRV households are resorting to permanent migration as a coping strategy. Table 5.9 Household Coping Strategies by Food Economy Zone Rely on less preferred foods Borrow food Receive food from a relative Children drop out of school Reduce Household Needs Send children to a relative or friend Permanent Migration Lowland 50% 42% 47% 20% 67% 14% 7% Foothill 31% 20% 25% 39% 78% 36% 27% Mountain 39% 32% 38% 31% 72% 32% 34% SRV 31% 46% 28% 18% 54% 31% 41% p (Pearson's Chi- Square) Age of household head was a significant independent variable for types of household coping strategies (table 5.10). A higher frequency of younger headed households (30 and younger) seem to be resorting to coping strategies, especially limiting food portions (70%) and skipping an entire day without eating (67%). Table 5.10 Household Coping Strategies by Age of Household Head Limit food portion Skip eating the whole day Eat wild foods Permanent migration 30 and younger 70% 67% 52% 30% % 52% 53% 41% % 45% 41% 29% % 36% 32% 22% % 45% 38% 18% 71 and older 41% 43% 29% 14% p (pearson's R) The following analysis examines the various coping strategies identified by both district officials and people from the sampled communities in the context of the prevailing food insecurity situation. These coping strategies are largely a reflection of resources available in the different areas. Some of the options identified by the district officials are available to people in different districts because of the varying economic endowments, including livestock, craft grasses and the vicinity to urban areas. 15

23 Coping Strategies by FEZ Mountains Mainly Livestock related coping strategies, however prices are depressed because of forced sales Purchasing food in smaller quantities Bartering of HH needs such as Paraffin, Maize Meal and groceries Lowlands Internal and cross-border migration to South Africa in search of work in o Informal Sector (street vending) o Domestic employment (Women) o Formal Sector (Textile industry) Beer brewing on the increase In other areas (Ha Rankakala, Qacha s Nek) it was emphasized that the food crisis is so severe that some individuals have actually resorted to washing and eating subsidized seeds. In cases such as this food is being shared amongst villagers. The sharing of food aid among villagers highlights possible support networks outside of relations, this practice will result in less food overall for qualifying households. Food for Work activities may alleviate this problem to some extent, but does not guarantee sufficient quantities of food to meet household needs. iii. Gender issues Table 5.12 summarizes differences in coping strategies by gender and FEZ as obtained from community focus group discussions. There are differences between current coping strategies and those identified during the previous assessment. For example, apart from being common across the studied communities, collecting water for other people was reported by both men and women. Other common but atypical activities indicated for men are brewing joala and the sale of foodstuffs such as fat cakes. Both men and women also reported selling and eating wild vegetables as important strategies in response to food shortages. The exchange of services such as doing laundry, smearing/plastering houses, and the exchange of goods such as poultry for maize meal were identified as an important way through which households access this commodity. Since bartering is normally a rare practice in Lesotho and cash a standard practice in the exchange of goods and services, this regression into bartering can be associated with shrinkage in household incomes. Similarly, the exchange of personal clothes for food was also seen as an innovative but desperate measure. 16

24 Table 5.11 Coping Strategies by Sex of Household Head Food Economy Zone Men Women Mountains - Collecting water for other people - Gifts - Laundry - Baby-sitting - Receive gifts from friends, neighbors and relatives - Weaving brooms and traditional mats - Exchange of firewood for maize meal - Smearing walls in exchange for maize meal - Food for work - Barter own clothes for food Foothills Lowlands - Herding other people s livestock - Collecting water for other people - Brewing - Attending funerals and feast - Loading an unloading trucks - Relying on relatives - Selling wild vegetables - Using animals to plough and plant for others - Eat wild vegetables - Barter chicken for maize meal - Accessing food aid through the elderly - Sale of dagga - Eat wild vegetables - Laundry - Smear walls - Handouts - Handicrafts in exchange for food - Gifts from relatives - Borrow food - Laundry - Eat more wild vegetables - Collecting water for others - Relying on relatives - Buying food on credit SRV - Sale of food items (makoenya) - Hair Braiding - Sell food items (liphaphatha) Source: Community Level Focus Group Discussions Table 5.11 indicates, apart from the lowlands, the wide variety of coping strategies that women identified over men. This may be attributed to the fact that women perceive their male counterparts as having neglected their households, while expectations regarding women s responsibilities in the household have not changed significantly; even as a result of the prevailing food crisis. Table 5.12 shows that results from the household questionnaire support FGD when looking at the number of coping strategies women employ compared to men. Table 5.12 Household Coping Strategies by Sex of Household Head Limit food portion Skip eating the whole day Children drop out of school Permanent migration Male 56% 42% 25% 29% Female 67% 53% 36% 20% p (Pearson's chi square)

25 Female-headed households are more likely to limit their food portions or skip meals entirely to cope with food shortages. D. Future Food Security Prospects i. Received and Planned Imports Levels of national food imports will not be adequate through March Table 5.13 shows that total received food, food due in March, and total planned imports combined do not meet national food demand. The National Early Warning Unit projects a national food deficit of 62,770 tons. Table 5.13 Received and Planned Food Imports All numbers in 000 tons Maize Wheat Sorghum Total Total Received Commercial Program Food Aid Target Food Aid Due by the End of March Commercial Program Food Aid Target Food Aid unknown unknown Total Planned Imports Commercial Food Aid Projected Deficit Source: Annual Cereal Balance Sheet, National Early Warning Unit ii. Agricultural Production Prospects It is a result of adverse climatic conditions that district officials and communities anticipate low levels of production for the current agricultural season. Results from community focus group discussions indicate that summer crops are expected be lower this season due to several problems, mainly climatic, complexities. Winter crops, especially wheat, experienced stress during the crop filling stage, as there was insufficient rain at this time. It was recorded in some districts that a series of up to three dry spells during the winter growing season were experienced. As a result, wheat stalks are short even in places where wheat is known to perform well. Additionally, the planting of wheat was late due to excessive rains at the time of planting. In most of the lowland districts, peas did not survive the dry spell. 18

26 Table 5.14 Prospects for the Current Agricultural Season at District Level Main Season and Winter Crop Prospects (2002/2003) Prospects for Winter Crops Availability of Inputs for the Current Agricultural Season Mafeteng Good rains during winter, thus good Fertilizers and seeds are available for harvest expected for wheat and peas. community associations not individuals even Butha- Buthe Thaba- Tseka Qacha s Nek Growing conditions harsh, thus peas did not survive due to drought. No winter cropping. No winter cropping. Maseru Wheat harvest/yields expected to be low due to lack of drought. Mohale s Winter rains were good but were Hoek followed by a dry spell which is likely to reduce the harvest. Quthing Wheat and peas planted but in the SRV harvest might be low due to drought. Leribe In the lowlands and foothills, wheat has been successful but it was planted by very few farmers because of problems encountered last year of delays of combine harvesters. Peas have been destroyed by drought both in the lowlands and foothills. Berea Conditions for winter cropping were good this is likely to result in good wheat harvest but peas dried up due to long dry spells. if they have money. The distribution is very slow and people are still waiting for inputs. Well-off people buy inputs from agric. stores and sell at increased prices. Seed and fertilizer were available but could not reach everybody. Seeds and fertilizers were not available on time, when they arrived the district was already experiencing drought. Supply of inputs does not meet demand only half of the district will be served. Both fertilizers and seeds are available but came late. Potato seed is not yet available for farmers but FAO is giving out seed with food aid. Seeds are available and sufficient but fertilizers not readily available. When seeds were distributed, there was no fertilizer. Inputs arrived late and it was seed only and no fertilizers (govt. subsidy). The inputs were not enough and many farmers did not get them and were not available from traders until very late. The supply of seeds did not meet the demand; many farmers did not receive seeds. Where seeds were available, there were delays in distribution. As highlighted in the above table, district based staff in Mafeteng indicated that a good harvest for both wheat and peas is expected. In Leribe and Berea, on the other hand, although district officials expected a good harvest of wheat, it was stated that only a few farmers actually planted wheat. This was reported to be largely due to the delays experienced during the previous seasons of combine harvesters. Most lowland districts indicated that peas had dried up due to lengthy dry spells. Other lowland districts reported that drought, dry spells and excessive rains were likely to result in low yields resulting in threatened food security for many communities. In particular, this is likely to result in serious food insecurity consequences for small-scale farmers whose total output, even under normal agricultural seasons, is often barely sufficient to meet their household food needs; let alone meet other requirements such as school fees, medical expenses and clothing. 19