Transcript No Slide Title

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT FOR MOZAMBIQUE
1997/1998
An Initial Analysis of Current Vulnerability to Food and
Nutritional Insecurity
Inter-sectoral Vulnerability Assessment and Mapping Group
MAF, MPF, MOH, FEWS, WFP
Maputo, February 1998
Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping
Domestic Resource
Capacity
Risk Analysis
1) Droughts
2) Floods
3) Pests
4) Landmines
5) Physical access
6) Price changes
Assessment of District Level
Food Production
VULNERABILITY
Targeting Vulnerable districts
1) Livestock
2) Fisheries
3) Other sources of Income
4) Food Systems
5) Land use
C. Initiatives for a Collaborative Vulnerability Analysis
· identify areas and population groups most vulnerable to food insecurity
and specific nutritional deficiencies and problems;
· promote inter-sectoral discussion on vulnerability in Mozambique, its
causes and identify important interventions to mitigate and alleviate
hronic and transitory food insecurity;
· establish links between vulnerability analysis, policy formulation and
planning interventions; and
· ensure that there is a capacity within Mozambican institutions to
periodically
update the vulnerability assessment on a regular basis.
D. A Framework of Analysis
Vulnerability:
¨ the probability of an acute decline in food access, or consumption levels,
below some critical value. According to Chambers, vulnerability
represents "defencelessness, insecurity and exposure to risks, shocks and
stress ... and difficulty in coping with them."
Vulnerability to food and nutritional insecurity comprises two components:
· the risk of an event occurring (e.g. drought, cyclone, floods, and
pest outbreaks); and
· the coping ability of households to deal with that event
(such as income, asset ownership and other sources).
An assessment of risk and coping ability should encompass a
time frame both for short and medium-term perspective. Levels
of income and assets (domestic resource capacity) are important in
assuring food security of the population in the short-term along with
availability and accessibility to health, nutrition and education services
in the medium and long-term. In the sum:
. Assessment of Risks: Conditions for Food production
A: Historical Drought-risk Areas.
C. Flood Risk/Prone Areas
· First degree risk consists of 1.7 million hectares within
an elevation of less than 20 metres above sea level
(masl)
and within 10 km. distance from major river basins,
· Second degree flood risk is defined by an elevation of
20-50 meters above sea level (masl) and comprises of
2.7 million hectares (an estimated 9.6%) of national land
cover.
· Third degree flood risk is defined by an elevation class
of 50 -100 metres asl. and within 10 km of major rivers
consists of nearly 4 million hectares;
· Fourth degree flood risk is less endemic to flood risk
than the other three types and it can only have an effect
in
some years as flood risk associated with dam water
and/or regional floods.
D: Pest Infestation and their Occurrence
· Red Locust affects principally maize and attacks are more common after floods. This pest is endemic in Buzi District,
Sofala Province, Dondo, Nhamatanda and Gorongoza, Gondola, Manica and Sussundenga in Manica Province.
· Green Locust is prevalent in the coastal zone in the central and northern provinces of the country, attacking rice and millet
crops during the germination and early growth stages of plant development in rice and millet.
· The spiny locust is endemic in Changara District in Tete, and its effect is limited to this area.
· Army-worm is found principally in the Central Provinces of Sofala and Manica affecting maize, sorghum, rice and beans in
the districts of Dondo, Nhamatanda and Gondola.
· The emergence of this pest coincides generally with dry years or low humidity, and destroys plants in the vegetative growth
stage.
· Quellea birds are endemic in Gaza province, and are found principally in Chokwe District. particularly active in Cabo
Delgado Province where they eat grain, which has been seeded.
· Rats also have a heavy impact on maize production in some districts in the south, mainly after inundation or dry periods.
Rats destroy the ears, and can destroy 100% of the harvest of a field. In all the country, rats are the source of large losses of
grain from granaries.
E. Limitation of Physical Access to Roads
F. Market Price Changes
White maize prices have risen sharply since the 1996/7 harvest, with an average increase between June and November 1997
of 92% in the 25 SIMA markets.
Sharp price rises in the Centre and Centre North of the country:
· Specifically the towns of Beira, Manica, Chimoio, Tete, Quelimane and Mocuba.
· The rise in this area of the country reflects primarily the heavy export trade that emerged this year to Malawi as well as
probably withholding of stocks in anticipation of poor harvest next season.
· Angoche, Nampula Province has also seen a sharp rise, likely associated with its switching from surplus during the harvest
to deficit currently (relatively little maize is produced in and around the city of Angoche).
In contrast rice prices have been generally stable this year, with an average increase of only 3% in the 25 SIMA markets.
· Quelimane (35%), Montepuez (29%) and Chokwe (26%) have shown the largest price increases.
Cassava is a crucial crop for food security, being more drought resistant than maize and with a harvest period that falls during
the hungry season. Analysis of cassava prices, however is problematical for several reasons: only a small proportion of
production is marketed; and trade in this product is more localised than for maize and rice.
· Prices in individual markets can rise and fall sharply, and at any point in time there may be large price differentials between
different markets where prices range from less than 800 mts/kg to over 5,400 mts/kg.
· And price changes from June to November range from negative 40% to positive 197%. The only general conclusion that
can be drawn from the cassava data is that local cassava prices should be monitored closely in areas considered vulnerable.
Table ---.
National cash market price behaviour of maize, rice and manioc during marketing year 1997/98
Location
White Maize
Price 11/97
Maputo
Xai-Xai
Cassava
Rice
% change since
6/97
3,166
3,041
Price 11/97
% Change since
6/97
Price 11/97
% Change
since 6/97
65
4,753
0
--
--
--
5,504
--
5,275
--
Chokwe
3,391
54
6,954
26
--
--
Inhambane
2,906
80
5,618
5
1,725
(21)
Maxixe
2,603
84
5,712
(7)
2,118
57
Massinga
2,694
58
5,155
1
760
14
Vilanculos
2,713
49
5,769
(3)
2,472
9
Homoine
3,265
92
5,815
(1)
5,401
197
Beira
2,675
150
6,680
11
1,483
9
Caia
1,554
37
5,067
(20)
--
--
Sena
--
--
--
--
--
--
Manica
2,374
139
9,248
1
3,214
--
Chimoio
2,374
161
7,886
(4)
1,928
(3)
Tete
1,978
112
8,201
1
--
--
Mutarara
1,714
78
8,613
20
--
--
Quelimane
2,614
167
6,181
35
2,575
(40)
Mocuba
1,695
185
5,961
16
--
--
Nampula
1,526
82
7,855
7
907
(19)
965
57
8,432
(18)
--
--
Monapo
1,130
73
5,427
(13)
1,978
55
Nacala
1,130
6
5,146
(3)
--
--
Angoche
2,720
188
7,093
(4)
1,154
37
Pemba
1,831
59
8,328
(10)
--
--
Montepuez
1,143
28
8,145
29
1,978
11
Lichinga
1,813
100
9,643
2
--
--
2,209
91
6,799
3
2,355
26
Ribaue
Mean
Source: Sistema Nacional de Informacao de Mercados Agricolas (SIMA, MAP/DE
G. Conditions of Health and Nutrition
Principal causes of morbidity (1993 - 1996):
· Malaria,
· malnutrition,
· measles,
anaemia
pneumonia
TB
Meningitis
H: Landmine Risk
· Landmine, a formidable threat to
human lives, has a long history in
Mozambique --- some were planted
during the struggle for liberation and
others during the civil war.
· Two types of land mines were
planted: the anti-personnel and antitank.
· Official estimates indicate about 2
million mines throughout the country.
The locations are mostly related to
military defence positions along
roads, military bases, and strategic
locations such as bridges, factories,
dams and some villages.
· While agricultural land was not
specifically targeted for landmine in
terms of risk to food security, the fear
of mines can have as great an impact
as their physical existence.
II. Analysis and Results: Domestic Resource Capacity
1. Resources: Land Use
B: Food Systems of Mozambique
· The planalto (highlands) and midlands food system:
· The lowland plains and coastal food system:
· Major river basin food system:
· The drylands and semi-arid food system:
Land Area for Different Food System of Mozambique
Major food systems
Total Area in km2
Total Area (%)
River basins
Coastal lowlands
Dry-land/semi-arid
Planalto/midlands
Planalto/highlands
Total
308,065
131,684
145,728
355,486
35,826
976,789
31.5
13.4
14.9
36.4
3.7
100.0
 Livestock
Areas with high animal production potential include the
provinces of Tete, Gaza, Maputo and Inhambane consisting
of 65% of cattle, 89% of swines, 96% of goats and a high
percentage of poultry.
A large portion of animal production is held as an
alternative source of revenues to meet specific needs
especially in the hungry season. An average of 4 to 5
chickens is sold per rural family, though variable by season
and location. A family sector livestock map would indicate
greater concentration of animals in ‘dry areas’ for crop
production, including south of Tete and Manica and mot of
Gaza and Maputo.
Distribution of Cattle ownership by District
Province
Tete
Tete
Tete
Tete
Tete
Gaza
Gaza
Gaza
Gaza
Gaza
Gaza
Manica
Zambezia
Sofala
Maputo
Inhambane
All other
districts
Major Livestock
Producing
Districts
Changara
Moatize
Cahora-Bassa
Angonia
Tsangano
Manajacaze
Xai-Xai
Chokwe
Mabalane
Chicualacuala
Chibuto
Manica
Nicoadala
Buzi - Sofala
Moamba
Zavala
Remaining
Districts
TOTAL
Cattle (No)
39,915
9,812
4,567
15,019
7,882
7,833
21,247
14,883
9,968
10,356
12,259
17,825
9,978
5,748
8,297
8,376
158,199
352,164
%
Distribu
tion
11.8%
2.69%
2.47%
4.69%
2.05%
2.23%
5.33%
4.40%
3.06%
2.51%
2.77%
4.54%
4.43%
2.8%
2.58%
2.16%
45.02%
100,00%
Cows Per Thousand Families
Red: Less than 100
Yellow: 100-500
Green: 500-1000
Pink: > 1000
Fisheries Resources
Registered contribution of the fishery sectors in metric tons 1991 – 1996.
Sector
Industrial
SemiIndustrial
Artesian
Total
1991
Mt
19,050
941
%
74.6
3.7
1993
Mt
12,522
2,834
%
65.2
14.7
1995
Mt
17,2 17
4,181
%
69.1
16.8
1996
Mt
16,281
7,123
%
46.6
20.4
5,544
25,535
21.7
100.0
3,839
19,195
20.0 3,512
100.0 24,913
14.1
100.
11,511
34,915
32.9
100.0
No. Of boats & labour engagement in fish catch by province
Province No. %
Perma %
Tempor %
Boat
nent
ary
s
worker
workers
s
Niassa
962 7.55
3085
5.83
1438
17.74
Cabo
2035 15.97 6624
12.51 2781
34.30
delgado
Nampula 3176 24.93 19229
36.33 1961
24.19
Zambézia 1946 15.27 5460
10.32 380
4.69
Tete
901 7.07
1287
2.43
109
1.34
Manica
0
0.00
0
0
0
0
Sofala
1501 11.78 7873
14.87 SI
SI
Inhamba 1085 8.52
5043
9.53
993
12.25
ne
Gaza
651 5.11
2492
4.71
47
0.58
Maputo
483 3.79
1838
3.47
399
4.92
Total
1274 100.0 52931
100.0 8108
100.0
0
0
0
0
Fisherm
en
without
boat
2046
8073
%
2289
552
46
0
SI
5222
10.96
2.64
0.22
0
SI
25.01
325
2323
20876
1.56
11.13
100.00
9.80
38.67
Gender and Fish Collection
Province
No. Men
Niassa
100
Cabo Delgado 3854
Nampula
2048
Zambezia
5
Tete
0
Manica
0
Sofala
209
Inhambane
1844
Gaza
20
Maputo
2183
Total
10263
No. Women
0
4532
4331
36
0
0
100
3002
9
450
12460
% Women
0
54.04
67.89
87.80
0
0
32.36
61.95
31.03
17.09
Red indicates high numbers
of centers while Blue indicates
low numbers of centers
Other Sources Of Income:

Petty trading
Is one of the more important sources of income for poor
families, with on average 34% of income being obtained
from this source. This category includes sale of
manufactured goods (cigarettes, soap, fuel etc.) locally
produced alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks and crafts.

Ganho-ganho
Is a form of exchange of labour for food or cash. This
exchange normally takes place between kin or neighbours.
On average poor households obtain 18% of their cash
income from ganho-ganho. Ganho-ganho as a source of
income is most important in Cabo Delgado, Tete and
Maputo Provinces. In these areas ganho-ganho is also
important as a source of food. Ganho-ganho is normally
used for agricultural tasks, therefore if there is a reduction
in agricultural activities (e.g. through drought) then income
from ganho-ganho would also be reduced. Thus the
districts in the south and Tete would be most affected in
this way.

Sale of food and or cash crops
Is not an important source of income for poor families. On
average 14% of income is received from this source. As
would be expected, the areas with greater productive
potential are the ones where poor families obtain income
from the sale of crops.

Firewood collection and charcoal production
Poor households receive 9% of their income from Firewood
and charcoal sales are more important for poor families
close to cities: Maputo, Pemba and Tete; the Beira
Corridor; and in districts bordering neighbouring countries:
e.g. Mutarara, and Mechanelas. While this source of
income may not be affected by drought, an increased
dependence on it (through existing families intensifying the
activity or additional families engaging in the activity)
could provoke environmental problems.

Remittance and other sources of transfer
Include gifts, donations, begging, and remittances. It
Represents 7% of income for poor households. It is
interesting to note that this data from the profiles appears to
indicate that even in the southern parts of the country which
historically been involved in migrant labour; this source
does not represent more than 25% of income for poor
families. This may reflect lower participation in migrant
labour practices among poorer households.
 Employment
On average 6% of income is obtained from formal
employment. Even in districts close to cities, poor families
appear not to rely heavily on this source.
3. Assessment of Food Access: District Level staple Food Production.
A. Analysis of District Food Production
Month of selfprovisioning
capacity
< 6 months
6 – 9 months
9 – 12 months
> 12 months
No. & % distribution
of districts
Contribution of own
production
20 (15.5%)
20 (15.5%)
14 (11.0%)
75 (58.0%)
Very poor
Poor
Low to average
High (Surplus)
(i)
Districts with very poor food production (less than 6 months)
Table --- Districts with very low staple food production (less than 6 months)
No.
Regional
Districts
Months of
Explanatory Factors
Location
selfLocation in Risk factors
provisioning food system
Chokwe
GAZA
1
1.90 Dry land
Flood effect
food system
Mutarara
TETE
2
2.13 River basin Flood effect
Massangena
GAZA
3
3.41 Dry lands
Moisture stress
Massangir
GAZA
4
3.85 Dry land
Moisture stress
Magoe
TETE
5
3.89 Dry land/
Moisture stress +
river basin
flood effect
Boane
MAPUTO
6
3.93 Coastal
Flood effect
Chemba
SOFALA
7
4.00 Coastal
Flood effect
Mabalane
GAZA
8
4.01 Dry land
Moisture stress
Xai-Xai
GAZA
9
4.09 Coastal
Moisture stress +
flood
Chigubo
GAZA
10
4.21 Dry land
Moisture stress
Ibo
CABO
11
4.34 Island???
DELGADO
(Coastal)
GAZA
12
4.53 Dry land
Moisture stress
Chicualacuala
Mabote
13
14
INHAMBANE
MAPUTO
15
16
17
MAPUTO
INHAMBANE
SOFALA
Moamba
Cheringoma
5.43 Dry land
5.52 Dry land
5.74 Coastal
18
TETE
Changara
5.76 Dry land
19
20
SOFALA
GAZA
Maringue
5.92 ????
5.99 Dry land +
river basin
Marracuene
Govuro
Guija
4.68 Dry land
5.06 Coastal
Moisture
Moisture
flood
Moisture
Moisture
Moisture
???
Moisture
pest
Pests
Moisture
stress
stress +
stress
stress
stress +
stress +
stress
(ii). Districts with poor staple food production (6 to 9 months)
Table --- Districts with low food production (6 to 9 months)
No.
Regional
Location
Districts
Months of
selfprovisioning
6.00
6.27
1
2
MAPUTO
ZAMBEZIA
Manhica
Chinde
3
4
SOFALA
SOFALA
Muanza
Chibabava
6.29
6.38
5
6
SOFALA
MAPUTO
Caia
Matutuine
6.48
6.51
7
SOFALA
Buzi
6.72
8
9
10
11
SOFALA
MAPUTO
NAMPULA
GAZA
12
Marromeu
Namaacha
Nacala
Chibuto
6.75
6.80
7.04
7.07
INHAMBANE
Inhassoro
7.14
13
INHAMBANE
Vilankulo
7.43
14
GAZA
15
MAPUTO
16
SOFALA
Gorongosa
17
18
INHAMBANE
SOFALA
Funhalouro
Machanga
19
TETE
20
SOFALA
Bilene Macia
Magude
CahoraBassa
Nhamatanda
7.43
Explanatory Factors
Location in
Risk Factors
Food System
Coastal
Flood
Coastal + river Flood
basin
Coastal
???
Dry land
Moisture
stress
River basin
Flood
Coastal + dry ???
land
Coastal + river Flood, pest
basin
Coastal
???
???
??
Coastal
Flood
River basin + ??
dry land
Coastal + dry ???
land
Coastal + dry ???
land
Coastal
7.45 Dry land
Moisture
stress
7.68 River basin +
planalto
8.10 Dry land
8.20 Coastal + river
basin
8.80 Dry land
Flood
8.80 Coastal
(iii). Districts with low to average staple food production (9 to 12 months)
Table --- Districts with low to average food production (9 to 12 months)
No. Regional Location Districts
1
2
3
TETE
Zumbu
ZAMBEZIA
Nicoadala
ZAMBEZIA
Inhassunge
4
GAZA
Mandlakazi
5
6
7
INHAMBANE
Massinga
ZAMBEZIA
Mopeia
CABO DELGADO
Muidumbe
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
TETE
Moatize
CABO DELGADO
Palma
INHAMBANE
Panda
MANICA
Tambara
SOFALA
Dondo
ZAMBEZIA
Gurue
ZAMBEZIA
Mocuba
Months of
selfprovisioning
9.03
9.12
9.50
Explanatory Factors
Location in Food
System
Planalto
Coastal
Coastal
9.59 Coastal
9.80 Coastal + dry land
9.94 River basin
9.95 Coastal + planalto +
river basin
9.95 Dry land
10.23 Coastal + river basin
10.94 ???
11.21 ??
11.51 River basin + ???
11.61 ???
11.68 ??
Risk Factors
Pests
Pests
Flood + moisture
stress
Flood + moisture
stress
Flood
Moisture stress + pests
Pests
Flood + pest
Pests
???
(iv). Districts with high staple food production (more than 12
months)
All the rest of the districts, that is 75 districts, obtained an average
production that sustains self-provisioning for more than 12 months .
Those districts with less than 6 months staple food crop production can be further classified as follows:
1. Those where although staple food crop production is low, households are accustomed to relying on
purchasing a significant proportion of their staple food needs. Those districts that have a more diversified
income together with reasonable market access include Chokwe and Boane. Districts, which are dependent
on market purchases but have low non-agricultural income include Marracuene and Moamba. The districts in
this category do not face widespread malnutrition problems.
2. Those where animal production, remittances and fishing play an important role Massangena, Changara,
Chicualacuala, Xai-Xai and Moamba. These districts also have a dependency on coping strategies such as
ganho-ganho, donations, and consumption of wild plants and fruits. These districts do encounter nutritional
problems, in particular in drought years. Cases of vitamin C deficiencies have been reported in Moamba, and
in Changara, pellagra and vitamin A deficiency.
3. Those with extreme market isolation problems Magoe, Chemba, Mabalene, Chicualacuala, Govuro,
Maringue, Massangena, Mabote, Chigubo and Cheringoma. Districts which normally encounter malnutrition
include Magoe, Chemba, Maringue and Cheringoma which has had cases of pellagra and vitamin C
deficiency reported; in drought years problems occur in Chicualacuala, Massangena, Mabote and Chigubo.
4. Those where there is substantial production variation within the district, e.g. Mutuarara, Guija and
Masingir. This implies the need for intra-district targeting. Masingir has reported micro-nutriente
deficiencies; and Mutarara has general problems with malnutrition.
2. An Approach to Targeting
¨ Here we are proposing to introduce an event-driven targeting of scarce resources. Targeting must consider variations
within a given situation as vulnerability generated by different disaster event has different economic, social and
environmental impacts.
Targeting Objectives:
· Allocating food and other resources to populations that face emergency conditions and their survival is threatened;
· Assisting population in absolute poverty and whose livelihood system has been eroded over time through food and
other resources;
· Providing non-food resources to poor populations to improve their food access and utilisation;
· Providing non-food resources for improved national food availability;
Levels of targeting:
· geographic,
· community and
· specific household /gender targeting.
· However, due to limited data availability and the need to conduct an in-depth analysis of vulnerability issues, the
discussion of initial framework for targeting is limited to geographic targeting with limited highlights about group
targeting.
III.
Conclusions, Responses and Interventions
1. Conclusions: Key Features of Food Insecure Districts
The following key issue standout from the analysis:
1. The study acknowledges the fact that agricultural production and other data, in its present
form, does not provide a complete picture of food availability and access. The significance of
second season crop production, livestock, fishery and other sources of income for many districts
in the country cannot be over emphasised. For example, limited assessment of second season
crop suggests that the season provide, on average 20 - 40% of 1st season production. In future
crop sector analysis, the government of Mozambique should seriously consider assessing second
season crop assessment into its national food balance sheet on a regular basis. Also, future VA
analysis should take this into consideration.
2. The analysis also suggests that food crop production is very important for the economy but is
not the only determinant of vulnerability. Fishery, cash crop production, petty trading, livestock
rearing, hunting and labour migration is important. It should, however, be noted that there is a
significant variation of these alternative incomes between households and districts. This is
determined by households' location in a particular food system or location in a particular
geographic areas (access to South African mine industry).
3. Current analysis suggests that large number of districts are vulnerable to both transitory and
chronic food insecurity, even in years of better than average climatic regimes.
Current Vegetation Analysis: Sample Outputs
December 1991
January 1992
December 1997
Areas shaded in red
show MUCH BELOW
NORMAL vegetation
January 1998
Price Changes between Sep 1997 and Dec 1997
Price change in Major Cities (dec-Sep 97)
Cabo Delagado,
Nampula, Niassa,
and Zambezia show
high price changes
Red and Yellow indicate
areas where prices are
greater than 125% of
September prices in
December
Current Flood Risk: Sample output (1996/97)