IPC-based Food Security Phase Classification
Experiences from Nepal
Hem Raj Regmi
Under Secretary(Head; food security monitoring unit)
Ministry of Agriculture Development Nepal
Peshawar, Pakistan
March 2014
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
1. General Background of the Country:
2. Methodology Adopted by MOAD on measuring food security
3. New Interventions on food security IPC; Acute vs Chronic
4. Data Generation, Management, Analysis and Products Details
5. Lesson Learned and Way Forward:
2
Nepal: General Background
• A country of 27.5 million between India and China, with
high ethnic and cultural diversity
• Share of agriculture in total GDP is about 35% with 66%
of the population having Agriculture as main occupation
• Sluggish economic growth ranging from 3-5%
• Physically divided into Mountains , hills and Terai (low
land).
• The elevation ranges from 80 m to 8848 m( highest peak
of the world; the mount Everest)
• Politically divided into 5 development regions, 14 zones
and 75 districts.
• Major Agriculture commodities are paddy, maize, wheat
as cereal, sugarcane, cardamom, ginger, tea as cash and
fruits and vegetables as well as livestock.
Food security: constitutional provision
• The Interim Constitution 2007 has given
recognition to food-security, as a basic
human right
5
Few years ago; in Nepal
• Food security meant
– Food availability through own production
So MoAD started to calculate Food Balance Sheet (FBS)
First Component was the Availability
• Production Estimate of 5/6 major Cereal Crops
–
–
–
–
–
–
Paddy
Maize
Wheat
Millet
Barley
Buckwheat;
Balance over the years
1000000
886307
800000
600000
443057
408442
200000
213027
162843
132179
83051
80022
75646
68496
22367
0
-9424
-21553
19
89
/9
19 0
90
/
19 91
91
/9
19 2
92
/
19 93
93
/9
19 4
94
/
19 95
95
/
19 96
96
/9
19 7
97
/
19 98
98
/9
19 9
99
/
20 00
00
/0
20 1
01
/
20 02
02
/0
20 3
03
/
20 04
04
/0
20 5
05
/
20 06
06
/
20 07
07
/0
20 8
08
/
20 09
09
/1
20 0
10
/
20 11
11
/1
20 2
12
/1
3
M ton
400000
-200000
-400000
-34351
-138610
-188390
-106548
-150728
-181879
-132910
-179910
-329972
-341598
-485155
-600000
year
Food Self Sufficiency by districts
Figure 15: Edible cereal balance at regional level and food self-sufficiency at district level. (Source: MoAD)
Now: food security is
When all people at all times have both physical
and economic access to sufficient food to
meet their dietary needs for a productive and
healthy life.
UN FAO
• Four Dimensions
–
–
–
–
Food availability
Food Access
Food Utilization and
Stability
The four dimensions of food security
Adaptation of IPC
An adapted version of IPC was used for
Nepal for analyzing and presenting food
security.
This was necessary because the food
balance sheet approach focused only on
Availability and did not consider other
dimensions of Food Security

Five Phase
 Generally food secure
 Moderately food
insecure
 Highly food insecure
 Severely food
insecure
 Humanitarian
emergency/ famine

Threshold for each
indicators for respective
five FS phases

12 Indicators
FS Phase Classification
Reference Table
Twelve Indicators for Acute food security analysis
1.
2.
3.
4.
Crop production/situation
HHs food stocks
Stock of staples in market
wage employment opportunities within district or
neighboring VDC
5. Sale of NTFP, cash crops, other agr. Products,
livestock
6. Market price of rice
7. Natural disasters
8. Out-migration
9. Coping
10. Acute child malnutrition status
11. Disease
12. Civil security
Current Institutional Framework
National Planning Commission
Nepal Food Security and Nutrition Coordination Committee
(NeKSAP)
Nepal Food Security Monitoring Unit
Key Stakeholders
MoAD
CBS
Monitoring of
Key surveys
•
•

•
Crop
Market and
Price
Livestock


NLSS
Labour force
Census
MoCS
NFC


Stocks
Subsidized
rice provision
Mo Env.
DHM

Weather
reports
MoHP
HMIS



Growth
monitoring
Disease
Epidemics
NDHS
NRB
Monitoring of

Economics
and financial
indicators
District Food Security Network
(DAO, DADO, DDC,DHO, DLSO, WCO, NGOs, CCI, FECOFUN)
District FS Network
Seventy Two among 75 (except Kathmandu Valley
district) DFSNs trained on FS Monitoring
 DFSN consist development agencies working in the
districts
 GON line agencies - Agriculture, Livestock,
Forestry, District Development Committee,
Infrastructure, District Health Office, District
Administration office, Women and Child Office
 CBOs/NGOs/INGOs
 Networks – FECOFUN, FNCCI
Products – Food Security Bulletin
Products: District Food Security Bulletins
Products: Crop Situation
Products: Market Watch
Field Monitors’ De-briefing Meeting
Highly Food
insecure
Population; Total PoP = 366848.
Population at Risk=
48300 (13%)
Name
of
Distri
ct
Phase I
VDCs
Phase
II
VDCs
Phase
III
VDCs
Affected
Populatio
n
Dolp
a
3
20
0
0
Juml
a
23
7
0
0
Huml
a
9
7
11
22146
100%
Kalik
ot
21
7
2
10100
100%
Mugu
7
12
13
16446
100%
Total
VDCs
63
53
26
48692
100%
OutLook



Main influencing Indicators;HHs Food Stock.
Lean period of crop harvest.
stock of main staples in the main
market.
Market price (coarse rice 20% 40%)
sale of NTFP, cash crops, other
agr. Products.
acute child (<5 years) malnutrition (
10% to 19%)
Overall Food Situation is
moderately food insecure and
outlook will remain same.
% of
Affected
PoP.
2008
Jan-Mar
2009
2010
2011
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
Oct-Dec
Neksap Review
Expected outputs:
• Revision of Indicators and Methodology towards greater relevance,
based on consultations with stakeholders at community, district,
regional, and central levels;
• Streamlining of NeKSAP Food Security Phase Classification and IPC
version 2.0;
• Synchronization of Monitoring/Reporting with the GoN reporting
system;
Recommended Indicators
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Food Consumption food and dietary diversity, food groups)
Acute child malnutrition (6-59m), wasting as per the prevalence of
Global Acute Malnutrition (GAM)
Crop production situation
Food stock at household level
Stock of main staples in key markets (food availabiltiy in the market)
Employment opportunities within and neighboring districts
Income through sales: NTFP, cash/high value crops, and small
enterprise
Income: meat, milk, egg, fish, honey
Market price of main staple like rice, wheat flour, and others.
Remittances
Human disease incidence, and epidemics
Water supply for drinking, sanitation (ODF)
Climatic hazards: floods, landslides, dry spell, snowfall, hailstorm , and
strong wind
Disaster: Earthquake, fire
Out-migration (stress induced)
Coping strategies
Civil security (social violance, and bandh/blockade)
Minimal Food
Insecure
Households with
secure food and
non-food needs
without shifting
or changing
livelihood
strategies . These
households are
capable of
adjusting small
scale stresses
caused by
hazards, disasters,
shocks, epidemics
and conflicts or
violence by
means of existing
social, natural and
economic capital.
Moderately
Highly Food
Food
Insecure
Insecure
(or Crisis)
(or Stressed)
Severely Food
insecure
(or Emergency)
Households
meet minimal
food with
traditional
coping, but are
unable to
afford some
essential nonfood
expenditures
without
engaging in
irreversible
coping
strategies.
Households unable to
meet food and non-food
needs without losing
livelihood assets. This
induces very high acute
malnutrition leading to
high morbidity, mortality
and shortened life
expectancy. Probable
high level of violence
and movement
restriction due to
conflict. Some
immediate interventions
and assistance required.
Households with
food consumption
gaps high or
above usual acute
malnutrition. Or
meet minimal
food needs only
with accelerated
depletion of
livelihood assets lead to food
consumption
gaps.
Humanitarian
Emergency,
(or Declared
famine)
Almost all households
have an extreme lack of
food and other basic
needs where starvation,
destitutions, irreversible
loss of capital resources
and loss of lives are
evident. Households of
the whole areas are
challenged by acute
shortage of food and
other basic needs hazards, disasters,
epidemics or destruction
of infrastructure,
disturbances of services.
Immediate humanitarian
assistance required.
Institutional Arrangements and Flow of Information
National-level Strategic Plan; Programming; Budget
Allocation
NPC Nutrition and Food Security
Steering Committee
Secretariat
Support
Reporting
- Situation
Update
Recommendatio
Nutrition
and
n
NPC
Food
Security Coordination
Committee
NPC Five Year/Interim Plan;
Annual Budget Allocation
NPC Nutrition
and Food
Security
Secretariat
Reporting
National Technical Coord
Committee
Programm
eRequest
Reporting
Regional Directorates/Agencies
NeKSAP District Food
Security Network
• Chair: CDO; Vice Chair: LDO
• Secretariat: DADO
• Members
Reporting
- Situation Update
Recommendations
• Food Security Technical
Donor Coordination Group
(e.g. USAID, EU, ECHO,
WB, ADB, FAO, WFP,
UNICEF)
• Nepal Nutrition Group,
“NNG” (non-Government
nutrition stakeholders)
• Food Security Cluster
• Nutrition Cluster
• Poverty Alleviation Fund
Budget
Allocation
Verification
/Feedback
Reporting
MoAD Food Security
Monitoring Unit
Government Offices including District
Livestock Office; District Health Office;
Meteorological Office; District
Administration Office; District
Development Office; District Office of
Small Cottage and Industries; NFC,
District Education Office; NRCs; District
Forest Office; District Soil Conservation
Office; Statistics Office
UN/I/NGOs/Donors;
Civil Society including District Chamber
of Commerce; Farmers’ Association
Other agencies as relevant and decided
by the DFSNs
• Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local
Development;
• Ministry of Agriculture and Development
• Ministry of Health and Population;
• Ministry of Commerce and Supplies;
• Ministry of Irrigation;
• Ministry of Physical Planning ,Woks; and
Transport
• Ministry of Women and Social Welfare
• Ministry of Home Affairs
Secretariat Support
Technical
Backstopping/
Coordination
Programme Implementation
Ministries
Annual Plan / Budget Allocation
Programme
Implementation/
Coordination
Agencies
District Council/District
Development Committee (DDC)
District Periodic Plan; Annual
Plan; Budget Allocation
Legend
Central (policy) Structure
Central (technical)
Structure
District-level Structure
(dotted line) Proposed
structure
Chronic Food
Insecurity
Chronic food insecurity
“Conditions of persistent inability to
meet minimum quality and quantity
of food consumption requirements
as is evident even in the absence of a
shock/hazard” IPC V2
Piloting
Response
Analysis
FSRA Framework
Activities indicated in Red text are not required for immediate FS
Response Analysis
Deciding Type of FS Response Analysis
Lessons Learned
• Capacity building at the local level is key to generate
commitments for the effectiveness of the FSM system
• Stakeholders benefited by the information for decision
making–
• FS monitoring needs multi-sectoral coordination and
support at the national and local level
• Time taking process
• FS concept not fully understood (only food sufficiency)
• Importance of build agencies’ awareness and have them
engaged in the process (more than a nice reference table!),
• They want to keep monitoring at a “technical level” and have an
inclusive structure to do that
Any Questions, Comments, Suggestions?
Thank You