IPC analysis, terms of trade and response choice in a pastoral area

IPC rule: an area is classified in the most severe phase that affects at least 20% of its population.

Pastoral zone: 2,400 people (2%) in phase 5 (Catastrophe): the area is not in famine (that would require 20% in phase 5, with malnutrition and mortality thresholds), but these households face an immediate risk to life. GAM of 18.4% (above 15%), sale of breeding females (an emergency strategy that destroys future capital) and a third dry season confirm the severity. Immediate assistance is needed to save lives and protect the remaining herd, in conjunction with nutrition.

Average: 5,500 / 45 = 122.2 kg of maize per goat. This year: 3,300 / 72 = 45.8 kg. Change: (45.8 − 122.2) / 122.2 = −62.5%. Maize price +60%, goat price −40%.

Meaning: a household must sell almost three times as many animals to buy the same quantity of cereals. Distress sales accelerate decapitalisation and the fall in prices, which feeds the vicious circle. The response must support purchasing power without forcing sales, and support the value of animals (organised commercial destocking while animals still have value, feed for the core breeding herd).

Households: phase 4+: 24,000 / 6 = 4,000; phase 3: 48,000 / 6 = 8,000.

Phase 4+, full package (save lives and the core breeding herd): transfer 280 + fees 14 + feed 60 + animal health 8 = 362 USD. 4,000 × 362 = 1,448,000.

Phase 3, livelihood protection for all: animal health and destocking, 33 USD × 8,000 = 264,000.

Phase 3, transfers to the most vulnerable: remaining 2,400,000 − 1,448,000 − 264,000 = 688,000; 688,000 / 294 = 2,340 households; cost 2,340 × 294 = 687,960. Total: 2,399,960 USD.

Justification: cash is feasible (markets supplied, roads open); it avoids distress sales. Households in phases 4 and 5 are the priority. Destocking must be launched quickly, while animals still have value. Points to flag: the value of 70 USD must be checked against the expenditure basket with maize at +60%; community-based targeting with verification; 5,660 households in phase 3 remain without transfers, to be reported to the cluster; link with nutrition and water trucking programmes.

Example: "Food security alert, Marsabit County, December to March. After three failed rainy seasons, 115,000 people (46% of the population analysed) are projected in IPC phase 3 or above, including 34,750 in phase 4 or above. The northern pastoral zone is classified in phase 4 (Emergency); 2,400 people there are in phase 5 (Catastrophe). Global acute malnutrition reaches 18.4%. A goat now buys only 46 kg of maize against 122 kg on average (−62.5%); 30% of households have sold their last breeding females. Without assistance, preventable deaths and the permanent loss of livelihoods are to be feared. Our response (2.4 million USD) will cover 4,000 households in phases 4 and 5 with transfers, feed and animal health, and 8,000 households in phase 3 with animal health and destocking, including 2,340 with transfers. 5,660 households in phase 3 remain without transfers in this zone and no coverage is planned in the agropastoral and urban zones. We request additional funding and urgent scale-up of nutrition and water."

Community sharing is a common solidarity practice in pastoral societies; it is not illegitimate in itself, but it dilutes the assistance intended for households in phases 4 and 5. (1) I listen to the elders to understand: sense of exclusion, poorly explained targeting, social pressure. (2) I publicly re-explain the criteria and the budget limit, and check the targeting. (3) I look for a compromise: targeting committees including women and young people, direct information to households on their entitlement, individual payment by mobile phone in the name of the woman in the household if that is the local choice. (4) I track the phenomenon through post-distribution monitoring (amount actually kept). (5) I report to the cluster for a common position among partners, and advocate for wider coverage. No sanction against households that share voluntarily.