2.a AAP Livelihood Profile 2017.pdf

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 1

Ethiopia Livelihood Baseline Profile: Afar Region

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone (AAP) March, 20171

Summary: Situated along the escarpment and lower foothills of the Tigray highlands, this zone is defined more by its relationship with the weather and market systems in neighboring Tigray than by its links to other areas within Afar. It depends on runoff from the highlands to irrigate local crops; and on markets in eastern Tigray to purchase local livestock and production. The transportation system is limited in this remote, rugged zone and many areas are inaccessible in the rainy season. Households here fail to meet their minimum food needs in most years and all wealth groups receive a sizeable PSNP food transfer to fill the chronic gap, along with emergency assistance and school feeding. Crop and livestock sales are the two primary sources of cash income for middle and better off households; poorer households rely also on casual labor (construction, local agricultural labor, gold mining, etc.) as well as selling handicrafts. In addition, remittances from family members living and working in Saudi Arabia provide a significant portion of the annual cash for poorer households. Since the last HEA baseline, food income has changed very little; however cash income from crop sales has increased across the board and the value of livestock sales has increased, due both to higher livestock prices and increases in livestock numbers for middle and better off households. Very poor households now earn some cash from local harvesting labor, which was not a source of cash in the previous baseline. Self-employment income has decreased, and especially the income generated from salt mining and trading, which provided a good deal of income a decade ago, but hardly features now. Remittances are a new source of cash income, as well as income from construction labor.

Zone Description

The Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone is found in the northern part of Afar Region. Rather than one contiguous geography, the zone is made up of five pockets of land surrounded by Assale Pastoral Livelihood Zone. It comprises seven of the eleven kebeles in Ab Ala woreda; three of the fourteen kebeles in Dalul woreda; and one out of the seven and eight kebeles of Koneba and Berahle woredas, respectively. Situated along the escarpment and lower foothills of the Tigray highlands, this zone is defined more by its links to Tigray than its connection to other areas of Afar. It depends on runoff from the highlands to irrigate local crops; and on markets in the eastern Tigray highlands to purchase local livestock and production. This is an arid to semi-arid warm zone, rugged and remote, with bush-covered hills and mountains. The higher escarpment is barren rock; lower-lying parts are predominantly sandy soils. Cultivation takes place along seasonal rivers in the fertile soils deposited with the runoff from the highlands. The Assale, Koneba and Dulal mountains are main features and the Dessa

1 Fieldwork for the current profile was undertaken in January/February of 2017. The information presented in this profile refers to the reference year, which was the consumption year that covered the period September 2014-August 2015, which corresponds to September 2007-August 2008 in the Ethiopian calendar. Provided there are no fundamental and rapid shifts in the economy, the information in this profile is expected to remain valid for approximately five to ten years (i.e. until 2020-2025). All prices referred to in the document are for the reference year.

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 2

Forest is found in the highland parts of Dalul woreda, bordering Berahle and Koneba woredas. Natural resources include salt deposits; potash, found around BadaEdmrug; gold, found around the Koneba watershed; and wild fruits such as kurkura/gaba found throughout the zone. The main local towns are Ab Ala/Shiket, Berahle, Koneba and Adukawa. Two all-weather roads connect this zone to the highlands and other parts of Ethiopia: the Mekele-Ab Ala road extends eastwards to Afdera and Semra, the capital of Afar Region and northwards to join the road from Agulae to Berahle. The Agulae-Berahle road provides access to the salt and potash mining areas in HamedEla, Assale and Bada. The population density is higher here than in the surrounding pastoral zone, averaging 100-150 people per square kilometer.

Annual precipitation averages 305-525 mm2. The main rains (karma) last from July through August. Another rainy season (sugum) occurs in March and April. However, it is not the local rainfall, but rains in the eastern highlands of Tigray (the eastern edges of Saesi-Tsaeda, Emba, Atsbi-Womberta, Didiba-Dergeagen and

Hintalo-Wajirat) that matter for crop production here. A failure of the belg rains in eastern Tigray leads to lower crop production in the AAP livelihood zone, as well as lower levels of drinking water for humans and livestock. The temperatures are hot, ranging from 30-380 C. Soils are coarse, sandy loams with moderate fertility, although soils along the riverbeds and run-off gullies are more fertile.

The household economy in this zone depends on livestock production, limited crop production and various casual labor and self-employment opportunities. Crops are grown along seasonal rivers with runoff from the highlands providing a source of water. Maize, sorghum/millet, barley and teff are the main crops grown.

Arable land along river banks is privately owned while the remainder of land is communally owned. Ox-plows are used to cultivate the land; all other activities are done by hand. Share-cropping is common; poorer households typically rent out their land to better off households with oxen and the financial resources to cultivate, receiving a part of the harvest in return for their land. Flooding and gully erosion are frequent problems.

Livestock are central to the local economy, providing milk, meat, and a form of savings that can be drawn down on to fund any number of normal seasonal and unpredictable expenditures. The main livestock raised are camels, cattle, sheep, goats and donkeys. There are permanent settlements within the zone, but one or two male household members move with the majority of livestock in search of pasture, browse and water. In a normal year livestock movements follow a regular seasonal pattern within this zone and to adjacent areas in Tigray. Milking cows, camels and oxen stay behind with the rest of the household, feeding on husks and crop residues. During a bad year, the pattern of movement changes depending on the type and severity of the hazards.

In addition to crop and livestock production, poorer households also rely on a range of food assistance, including food transfers from the PSNP, emergency food and school feeding. They earn extra cash through a variety of means. The salt mining industry was a major source of cash for households in this zone a decade ago, but this stream of income has declined dramatically. In its place, casual labor in construction, on roads and railways and in urban centers has expanded. Some people continue to work in salt mining areas, hiring out camels, or acting as daily laborers; others engage in traditional gold mining. Some cash is also generated from handicrafts and petty trading. A very small amount of income is earned from local agricultural labor.

Strong communal and social support systems bind people together in this region. Better off household provide gifts of milk and grain to poorer relatives and clan members. Remittances from relatives working in

Saudi Arabia also provide a major source of cash for local households.

Services in this zone are minimal. Water for human consumption and washing comes from deep boreholes, hand-dug wells and seasonal rivers. Sanitation facilities are non-existent. Households do not have latrines and defecate in the open bush. Health posts are found in kebele centers, but lack adequate supplies of

2 Based on 36-year time series of rainfall data (1981-2016). Source: Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS) USGS/FEWS NET.

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 3 medicines and sufficient numbers of qualified health staff. There is no electric service and households use kerosene, firewood, and battery-operated torches for lighting and cooking. Mobile phone service and use has increased dramatically since the last baseline and the upper wealth groups now have at least one mobile phone, but cell coverage is not very good and most poorer households do not own cell phones. Households have access to primary schools at kebele level, and there are secondary schools located at the woreda centers.

All households typically send their children through 10th grade, but it becomes more expensive to send children to high school and beyond, and only middle and better off households can afford to do so. There are no credit facilities in the zone, and savings schemes are not common. There is limited International UN/NGO presence in this zone; however, PSNP transfers and emergency relief provide households with critical assistance along with school feeding; in addition, the Pastoral Community Development Programme (PCDP) operates here, as well as GOAL Ethiopia and Save the Children.

Markets

The transportation infrastructure in this zone is not very good, especially in Dalul and Koneba woredas. There are only two all-weather roads: the Mekele-Ab Ala road extends eastwards to Afdera and Semra, the capital of Afar Region and northwards to join the road from Agulae to Berahle. The Agulae-Berahle road provides access to the salt and potash mining areas in HamedEla, Assale and Bada. All other roads are rough dirt tracks.

The landscape is mountainous and rocky and there are no formal bridges, which makes the rainy season especially treacherous for road traffic. During the rainy season only light duty vehicles are able to reach Koneba and Adukawa Dalul woreda center from Tigray. People take their livestock to and from market by walking along well-worn footpaths, using donkeys and camels to transport goods. The main markets generating demand for commodities in this zone are found outside the region, in neighboring Tigray. Mekelle, the capital of Tigray, is a terminal and source market for many of the goods and products bought and sold here. Important intermediary markets include Adequa, Kuneba and Baada.

The main crops sold are maize, sorghum, teff and barley. The main livestock sold are camels, cattle, goats and sheep. The terminal market for crops is Mekelle, Tigray. Households in this livelihood zone sell to traders in the woreda centers, such as Abaala and Behrale; from there, crops are transported up the escarpment for sale in the highlands. Maize and sorghum are sold in November and December; teff and barley are sold from February to August.

Livestock are sold throughout the year, but peak periods correspond to festival months in the highlands, and also to the months leading up the agricultural season associated with the kiremt rains in Tigray (which start in June). Animals are bought up by traders in woreda markets and then transported to Tigray along the Abaala- Mekelle road. Bringing livestock to market requires a long two- to three-day trek to the main livestock markets. Men and older boys are responsible for making this journey and for negotiating prices and the terms of sale for livestock.

A very small local labor market exists, with some people hired during the harvest period on local farms, and some hired in local towns for construction or other daily labor. There is also a small amount of work to be found in the salt mining areas. However, most work is found outside the zone, increasingly in Saudi Arabia.

Many households have at least one member working overseas, sending back remittances once or twice a year.

Timeline and Reference Year

The baseline assessment refers to a very specific time period called the reference year. In the Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone the reference year covered the consumption period from September 2014 –

August 2015. This corresponds to the production year of 2014 (sugum and karma seasons, highlighted in light

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 4 grey on the table below). The harvest in September 2014 begins the reference year, which lasts until August of the next year (2015). During community leader interviews, informants were asked to rank the last five years

(10 seasons) in terms of seasonal performance with ‘1’ indicating a poor season and ‘5’ an excellent season.

The table below, which summarizes the response of the community leaders, shows the quality of production condition by season. Sugum refers to the March-April rains; karma refers to the June-September rains. Crop production from the 2014 sugum and karma seasons (an average season) generated the crop results for the reference year; a below average 2015 sugum season may have reduced the milk that households received during the second part of the consumption year. It is notable that the reference year was followed by two very bad seasons. 2015 was the third-worst in the past 36 years, preceded only by 1984 and 1991.

Consumption

Year

Season &

Year Rank Rainfall data cross-check

2016-17

(ET 2008-2009)

Karma (2016)

Good rain, good runoff; rains benefitted crop and pasture, but high winds damaged some crops

2015-2016

(ET 2007-2008)

Sugum (2016)

Above average rainfall and good flooding; planted high-yielding long-cycle crops, sorghum and maize

Karma (2015)

Drought and limited flooding; crop failure; forage and water availability was extremely poor; livestock migrated

2014-2015

(ET 2006-2007)

-reference year

Sugum (2015)

Drought and limited flooding; crop failure; forage and water availability was extremely poor; livestock migrated

Karma (2014)

3 Average rainfall and runoff; good crop production and good forage availability

2013-2014

(ET 2005-2006)

Sugum

(2014)

Below average rainfall and runoff; shifted sorghum planting to short maturing maize; forage availability overall was good

Karma

(2013) 3 Average rainfall and runoff; good crop and livestock production

2012-2013

(ET 2004-2005)

Sugum (2013)

2 Below average rainfall and runoff; good crop and livestock production

Karma

(2012) 3 Average rainfall and runoff; good crop and livestock production

(ET 2004)

Sugum (2012)

2 Below average rainfall and runoff; good crop and livestock production

5 = an excellent season for household food security (e.g. due to good rains, good prices, good crop yields, etc.)

4 = a good season or above average season for household food security 3 = an average season in terms of household food security 2 = a below average season for household food security

1 = a poor season (e.g. due to drought, flooding, livestock disease, pest attack) for household food security

Seasonal Calendar for Reference Year

There are two main rainy seasons in this livelihood zone, along with a very short minor rainy season. The main rains occur from June/July through August and are locally referred to as the karma rains. In the southern part of the zone karma rains begin at the end of June and stop at the beginning of September; in the northern part of the zone these rains are shorter, beginning during the first week of July and stopping at the beginning of September. The karma rains are important for pasture and browse regeneration and they replenish water sources like rivers, ponds and springs. It is also when some short cycle crops (like barley, wheat and teff) are planted. The second rains occur in April/May, locally referred to as the sugum. Long-cycle crops like sorghum, maize and millet are planted at this time. The cool, dry period following the karma season is called gilaal; this

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 5 stretches from September through March and is often broken up by a very short five to ten-day period of rains in December/January, referred to as the deda season. These rains are important for replenishing browse. A hot dry period between sugum and karma, called hagai, occurs during late May and

June.

On average, only around 220 mm of precipitation falls during the karma season, and around 90 mm during the sugum season3. Annual rainfall here is not enough on its own to support agricultural production, Division of labor by gender

Women’s tasks Men’s tasks

Weeding Land preparation/plowing

Harvesting Planting

Market sales of crops Weeding

Milking goats/sheep & (in female-headed households) cows

Harvesting/Threshing

Herding goats & sheep Transporting to market & selling crops

Goat/sheep sales Milking camels and cows

Collecting water for domestic use Herding camels & cattle

Preparing meals Care for sick animals

Collecting firewood for domestic use & sale

Marketing of all livestock

Handicraft production & sales Charcoal production

Salt mining

3 Based on 36-year time series of rainfall data (1981-2016). Source: Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS) USGS/FEWS NET.

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 6 which depends on runoff from the highlands of Tigray; but it allows households to start preparing their land, and it helps pastures and water sources regenerate.

The rainy seasons also function as the main signal for timing around livestock production. Camel conceptions peak just after the deda rains, when the availability of green browse is higher and camel births peak around 12-13 months later. Camels lactate for 12 months, or until they conceive again. Cattle conceptions are highest at this time as well, timed to allow for birthing in August and September, when pasture and water resources are plentiful, following the karma rains. Cattle are milked for around 7 months; goats and sheep, which also lamb/kid during the karma rains, provide milk for around 2 ½ months. Livestock are sold in the highest numbers from November through February. Livestock sales in this zone are linked strongly to the highland market in

Tigray. Demand for animals is highest in the December-February period due to festivals in the highlands.

The lean season occurs from June through August, a period when food prices are household food stocks are lowest. June is an especially difficult month because it is also when water scarcity is highest and people are busy planting short-cycle crops. Human diseases, especially malaria, are highest during the rainy seasons, leading to both increased medical bills and decreased intra-household labor availability.

Wealth Breakdown and Productive Assets

The table to the right summarizes the types and numbers of productive assets that typical households within each wealth group own and/or manage. The graph below the table shows the percent of households within the zone that falls into each wealth group, including the percent of female-headed households in each wealth group.

Two factors determine wealth in this agro-pastoral zone: the amount of land cultivated, and the size and composition of a household’s herd.

How much land a household cultivates is, in turn, influenced by the amount of land owned; access to irrigated land; ownership of plow oxen; availability of intra-household labor; and the capacity of the household to rent in land, hire labor and invest in inputs.

Very poor households are those with no oxen, limited intra-household labor and very little cash for purchasing inputs. Very poor and poor households typically rent out their land to better off households, lacking the resources to plow and manage it themselves. In exchange, they receive one-third of the total harvest. The household renting in the land (the better off household) takes

Very poor

Poor male-headed Middle Better off

Poor female-headed

Land area cultivated (ha) 0.7 0.8 1.5 2 0.6

Camels 0 1 2 6 0

Oxen 0 0 1.5 2 0

Cattle 1 3 5 12 2

Goats 7 7 12 30 7

Sheep 3 4 7 16 5

Donkeys 0 0.5 1 1 0.5

Mobile phones 0.5 1 1 1.5 0.5

Number of wives per husband 1 1 1 2 0

HH size 7 7.5 9 11 6.5

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35% very poor poor middle better off poor fhh o f h o u se h o ld s male-headed female-headed

Wealth

Breakdown

Productive

Assets

Note: All results are the mid-point of a range

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 7 on all the costs of production, but receives in exchange two-thirds of the harvest as well as all of the crop residues for their livestock.

Very poor households own around 5-10 goats and 0-5 sheep. Poor male-headed households might own 0-5 cattle, but poor female-headed households would own a few less. Poorer households have smaller household sizes, averaging around 7-8 people, with one wife.

On the other hand, better off households own at least 1 pair of oxen and cultivate 1-3 hectares and they have money to invest in irrigation infrastructure. These households own, on average, 6 camels, which are used for milking and for transport; 6-20 cattle; 15-45 goats and 10-20 sheep; as well as a donkey. Camels are high value animals, used for transporting goods and for milk. They have the highest market price and typically only middle and better off households own them, although it is possible for poor male-headed households to also own a camel.

The chart within the graphic above shows the proportion of households falling into each wealth group. The bottom two wealth groups make up around 50-75% of households and the top two groups make up 30-45% of households, with very poor households representing the largest category. It is important to note, however, that, given their larger household sizes, the percentage of the population falling into the upper wealth groups is actually larger than the percentage of households falling into these groups; this is shown in the table to the right.

Female-headed households make up a portion of all wealth groups, with higher proportions found in the lower three groups. Poor female-headed households cultivate less land than even very poor male-headed households, but their productive asset profiles fall somewhere between very poor households and poor male-headed households. They also tend to be smaller in size than male-headed households in the same wealth group.

It is difficult to make comparisons with the last HEA baseline, because the population was divided into only three wealth groups (instead of four) at that time. However, as a general statement, it appears that the number of camels and cattle owned by better off households has increased, although the number of oxen owned by this wealth group has decreased. The number of sheep owned by all households has increased, and goat numbers increased for very poor and poor households, but not for middle and better off households.

Cell phones are a new asset owned by almost all households in the three upper wealth groups.

% of households % of population

Very Poor 32% 27%

Poor 31% 28%

Middle 23% 25%

Better off 14% 19%

Sources of Food

The graphs below present sources of food for households in different wealth groups in the livelihood zone for the period September 2014 - August 2015. September represents the start of the consumption year because it is when the main harvest of maize begins, thereby marking the end of the hunger period. Food is presented as a percentage of 2100 kcal per person per day for the 12-month period. This was considered an average year.

There are four main sources of food and two minor sources of food in this livelihood zone. The main sources of food are own crop production, purchased food, own milk/meat and PSNP food distributions. The two minor sources are school feeding and gifts. In agropastoral areas, the more of a household’s own food it can generate, the less it is obligated to purchase; and because livestock sales generally fund crop purchases, growing one’s own food helps to protect and build one’s herd. In the reference year, those at the upper end of the wealth spectrum produced significantly more than those at the lower end (see table below). The lower groups, because they produce less, both in terms of crops and milk, rely more heavily on PSNP food distributions and benefit from gifts from better off households.

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 8

In the reference year, all wealth groups met 25-35% of their minimum calorie needs with their own crop production. Households here grow mostly maize, along with smaller quantities of sorghum, millet and barley.

Middle and better off households also grow small amounts of teff. Better off households produced, on average, 3 times more than very poor households and 3 ½ times more than poor female-headed households. In part this is due to the fact that better off households cultivated more land (around 2.8 times more land than very poor households) in the reference year, but in part it is also because they obtain higher yields (kg per ha) than poorer households. Because they have oxen and cash resources, they can prepare their land in a timely manner, plowing and weeding at the right times. Middle and better off households produced enough cereals to cover (if they sold none of their crops) 65-70% of their annual calorie needs in the reference year. Very poor and poor households could have covered only around 35-40% of minimum calorie needs with what they grew (if they had not sold any of their crops). Thus, all households in this zone are deficit producers, needing to fill a production gap through other means. Given that the reference year was an average year, the gap faced by these households in bad years would be even larger.Milk provides substantial additional calories for middle and better off households, and is an important source of protein. The upper two wealth groups own camels and cattle; camels generate higher milk yields (averaging 3 liters/day in the rainy season) compared to cows (which average 1-2 liters/day in the rainy season4) and they milk for a longer period of the year (potentially year-round compared to around 210 days for cows).

Thus, owning camels brings with it advantages not just in terms of transport and income from live-animal sales, but also a

In the graph, food access is expressed as a percentage of minimum food requirements, taken as an average food energy intake of 2100 kcals per person per day.

The graph provides a gender-based division showing who within the household generates what proportion of food that is produced by the household.

Typical household production in the reference year - AAP very poor poor middle better off poor-fhh

Milk (ltr) 229 707 1472 3806 174

Cereals (kg) 550 640 1280 1650 470

Pulses (kg) 0 0 0 0 0

Veg. (kg) 0 0 0 0 0 steady, year-round supply of calories and nutrients for the household. Better off households typically had 1-2 camels milking for much of the reference year and middle households had 0-1 camels milking. Taking the year as a whole, they generated an average of 1,380 liters (better off households) and 460 liters (middle households) of milk from their camels. Milking cows are owned in larger numbers, and, as an aggregate, 4 Milk yields are lower in the dry season: 2 liters/day for camels and 0.5-1 liter/day for cows.

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 9 generated more milk over the year, even if daily yields and lactation periods are shorter. A typical middle household had 2 milking cows in the reference year; better off households had 4-5, and poor households had

1. Annual total production of cows’ milk in the reference year was around 1,823 liters, 770 liters and 274 liters for better off, middle and poor households, respectively. Very poor households owned neither milking cows nor camels. Sheep and goats are also milked, but yields are much lower (typically around 0.4-0.5 liters/day) and lactation periods are only around 75-80 days. Very poor households typically had around 1-2 sheep and 4 goats milking in the reference year; poor households had 2 sheep and 4 goats milking; middle and better off households had 2-5 sheep and 6-15 goats milking. The additional milk from these animals totaled around 184 liters for very poor households and up to 605 liters for better off households. A small amount of cows’ milk was sold in the form of ghee by poor, middle and better off households, but most of the milk was consumed.

In calorie terms, the annual milk consumed was equivalent to 13-23% of annual food needs for middle and better off households, but only around 3% for very poor households and 9% for poor households. It is very common for better off households to share a portion of their milk with very poor households; this accounts for part of the ‘gifts’ category in the graph above. In addition, a very small (almost insignificant) amount also comes from meat for better off households. Animals are slaughtered during festivals, births, when guests are received, or eaten when animals die from natural causes.

Purchased food (staple cereals and non-staple foods combined) accounted for 25-35% of the calories consumed by all households in the reference year. Wheat and maize were the main staple grains purchased.

(Maize averaged around 5.5 ETB/kg; wheat sold at 6 ETB/kg). Beans, sugar and oil were also purchased in varying quantities by all wealth groups. The two upper wealth groups also purchased small amounts of mixed vegetables. These non-staple foods accounted for around 9-14% of annual food needs for households in the reference year.

All households received PSNP and emergency relief food distributions for approximately 6 months of the reference year. Very poor, poor and middle households typically received 90-95 kg of grain/month; better off households received 50 kg of grain/month during the distribution period. The two poorer groups also received a ration of pulses and oil. In total, PSNP and emergency food together accounted for around 25-40% of minimum calories for the bottom three wealth groups and 12% of minimum annual calorie requirements better off households. In addition, all children who attended school received a meal every day during the school term; this provided 3-4% of households’ food needs for all wealth groups during the reference year.

Very poor and poor households also received a small amount of milk and grain (less than 5% of annual calories) as gifts from wealthier neighbors or relatives.

As shown in the lower set of graphs above, all household members (men, women and children) share in many food-related production tasks in this zone. Men are in charge of land clearing; both women and men take part in weeding and harvesting, although women are more involved in weeding and men are more involved in harvesting. Men are responsible for milking camels and cows, and slaughtering animals, which accounts for their higher contribution in the top two wealth groups; women are responsible for milking sheep and goats.

There is no particular gender division with respect to PSNP, purchased food, gifts and school feeding.

Comparing the current sources of food to the patterns from ten years ago, there is very little change with respect to the contribution of own crops to annual food income. Total crop production, while lower for very poor and poor households in the more recent baseline, is around the same for middle and better off households. Households sold more of their crops in the new baseline than in the old. The contribution from milk and meat has not changed substantially. There is a change in the distribution of PSNP, with a notable increase for poor households, who met around 30% of their food needs with PSNP in the old baseline, but covered 40% with PSNP in the new baseline.

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 10

Sources of Cash Income

Crop sales and livestock-related sales are the two primary sources of cash income for those at the upper end of the wealth spectrum;

added to these sources are local agricultural labor, construction labor, handicrafts and remittances for households at the bottom end of the wealth spectrum.

Better off households stand apart from the other three wealth groups in that they generate all of their cash from on-farm sources; very poor and poor households, on the other hand, generated more than half of their cash income from off-farm sources in the reference year. On-farm sources of income are related to the household’s livelihood capital, such as land, livestock and labor. By definition, the upper two wealth groups have more of this capital than the lower two groups. Poorer households have smaller plots of land, less livestock and fewer productive assets and cannot meet all of their needs without turning to casual labor and self-employment options.

Better off households generated, on average, around 4 times more cash income than very poor households in the reference year. In fact, the annual cash income that better off households generated from

The graph provides a breakdown of total annual cash income in Ethiopian birr according to income source.

The graph provides a breakdown of total annual cash income as a percent of annual cash income cattle sales alone was equivalent to more than the annual cash income (all sources combined) of a typical very poor household.

Crop sales accounted for 10-20% of annual cash income for households in this livelihood zone in the reference year. Maize was sold by all households, and most also sold sorghum and millet as well. Poor female-headed households, however, did not have enough land to cultivate anything other than maize. Male-headed poor, middle and better off households also sold small amounts of barley; and middle and better off households grew

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 11 a bit of teff for sale as well. At 13 ETB/kg, teff was over twice as valuable a crop as maize, so that even though better off households sold only around 90 kg of teff (compared to around 200 kg of maize), they generated more cash from teff than maize. Livestock sales are, by far, the more important source of cash for middle and better off households.These upper two wealth groups obtained 70-85% of their annual cash income from livestock-related sales (camels, cattle, goats, sheep and milk/ghee). Camels were sold at the highest price (at around 7,600 ETB per head in the reference year), followed by cattle (4,700-5,000/head), goats

(750-760/head) and sheep (680/head). Better off households typically sold one camel in the reference year along with, on average, 2 cattle, 8 goats and 4 sheep. Very poor and poor households, on the other hand, sold only 3 goats and 1-2 sheep. Pooer households typically receive lower prices for their livestock since they tend to be in worse condition. As a result, very poor households derived only 30-35% of their annual cash income from livestock sales in the reference year.

Local agricultural labor, construction labor and handicrafts provided addition cash for poorer households, making up around 20-25% of their annual cash in the reference year.

Daily labor is found on road construction, railways and in local towns. Some men and boys also find work on the salt mines in Afar from Deecember through March, or mining gold. Women engage in handicraft sales, weaving mats or mattresses year round. Both men and women engage in local agricultural labor (mainly harvest labor) on the farms of households with larger areas of land.

Remittances are another significant sources of cash income for many households in this livelihood zone.

Cash is sent a few times a year by relatives working outside the zone, often in Saudi Arabia, providing as much as a third of the cash income of poorer households.

The amount of cash generated according to gender/age group is presented in the graph above, supported by the list of gender-specific income generating activities in the table. Men’s responsibility for selling camles and cattle is reflected in the large portion of income they generate for households in the top two wealth groups. Women’s role in relation to selling milk/ghee is apparent in the cash income attributed to them in the

INCOME SUMMARY TABLE (Ethiopian birr)

Wealth group Very poor

Poor -

MHH

Poor - FHH Middle Better off

Annual income per household 5

6,500 –

10,500

8,500 –

13,500

8,600 – 14,000 13,500 –

27,000

27,000 –

38,000

Gender-specific income generating activities

Women’s tasks Men’s tasks

Milk sales Camel sales

Goat and sheep sales Cattle sales

Agricultural labor – weeding Goat and sheep sales

Handicraft sales Construction labor

5 The average exchange rate from September 2014 - August 2015 was 1 USD = 20.20

The graph shows the amount of cash generated according to gender/age

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000 very poor poor middle better off men women children all

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 12 better off wealth group. Women are responsible for handicrats, which is seen in the profile of poor households.

The rest of cash income (mainly crop sales and goat/sheep sales) is not necessarily gender-specific.

Since the last baseline, income from crop sales has increased across the board. The value of livestock sales has increased, due to higher livestock prices. Very poor households now earn some cash from local weeding labor, which was not a source of cash in the previous baseline. Self-employment income has decreased, and especially the income generated from salt mining and trading, which provided a good deal of income a decade ago, but hardly features now. Remittances are a new source of cash income, as well as income from construction labor.

The spread of cash income between very poor and better off has also increased. Now the average cash income of typical better off households is around 4 times higher than very poor households; ten years ago better off households’ cash income was 2.7 times higher.

Expenditure Patterns

The graph presents expenditure patterns for the reference year

September 2014 - August 2015.

While absolute expenditure increases with wealth in line with total cash income, the expenditure breakdown by percent in this graph shows the relative amount of income spent on different categories.

As in other parts of Ethiopia, households here need to cover a range of essential expenditures over the year. These include: staple food, non-staple food, household items (like salt, soap, tea, lighting, grinding services, etc.), productive inputs, social services (which include school and health), clothes and other miscellaneous items.

The spending on non-staple foods is notable. Beans, sugar and oil were

The graph provides a breakdown of total annual cash expenditure according to category of expenditure the main items purchased in this category. (Better off households also bought meat and vegetables.) All households spent a large portion of their annual cash income on non-staple foods in the reference year, making up around a fifth to a third of annual spending. This is not because households bought large quantities of these foods, but because in relation to their very limited annual income, all of these foods are expensive. For example, at 26 ETB/kg, very poor households could afford to buy only around 15-20 kg of beans for their households over the entire year; even this small amount accounted for around 6% of their annual cash.

Similarly, cooking oil and sugar, at 29 ETB/liter and 20 ETB/kg were far more expensive than the cheapest staple, maize, which was 5.5 ETB/kg in the reference year. Thus, households had to severely stretch their budgets in order to diversify their diets.

Another major category of spending was on household items (‘HH items’), which comprised around 20% of annual expenditure during the reference year, increasing, in absolute terms, with wealth. Included here is spending on coffee, tea, salt, red pepper, soap, lighting, grinding and utensils. Of these, coffee and tea made

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 13 up 35-45% of the household items budget for all groups. Salt/red pepper and grinding and were next, comprising 12-23% and 9-22% of the ‘HH items’ spending, respectively. Soap (10-13% of the ‘HH items’ budget) and lighting (6-10% of the ‘HH items’ budget) made up the rest.

Households only spent around 1-5% of their total cash income on productive inputs, which included mainly animal drugs and some seeds/tools. Better off households also spent a small amount of money on labor.

The remaining cash was spent on social services (health and education), clothes and other miscellaneous items.

Social services accounted for 8-12% of annual expenditure for all wealth groups. In absolute terms (keeping household size constant) better off households spent around 2 times more than very poor households on health and education. Clothing made up 10-15% of annual expenditure across the board in the reference year. ‘Other’ items included non-essential commodities and services, like beer, tobacco, festivals, gifts and other discretionary expenditure that can be reduced or eliminated in a bad year. This category accounted for 7-14% of very poor and poor households’ expenditure in the reference year, and around 18-22% of middle and better off households’ spending. Given that the reference year was an average year, this figure provides a sense of the upper limits to the buffer households have for investments or savings; in a bad year, this is likely to disappear entirely.

Female-headed Households

Female-headed households are found in each of the wealth groups, as shown in the wealth breakdown. In-depth interviews were conducted with poor female-headed households to detail their food, cash income, and expenditure patterns. This is a group that faces similar constraints and characteristics with male-headed households in the same wealth group, but they are further disadvantaged by a smaller pool of productive intra-household labor. Women in this livelihood zone do not have the right to inherit land, but their male relatives own land and can allocate sections to them, and they can also rent land in exchange for part of the harvest.

They do have the right to inherit and buy livestock, but they face constraints when it comes to selling camels and cattle, which must be done by male relatives or clan members.

Sources of food: poor female headed households vs poor male-headed households

Proporiton of annual minimum calories produced by household according to gender and age

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 14

The graphs above show that poor female-headed households share similar pattern of food access with poor male-headed households. They produce less (both in terms of crops and milk) because they cultivate smaller plots of land and have fewer numbers of livestock. Their crop production is constrained by a lack of access to oxen and a smaller pool of intra-household labor. Crop production does not have a gender-specific division of labor in this livelihood zone. All crop production is generated by a combination of women and men (young or older boys) within the household; men are responsible for land clearing and plowing, and women tend to be more responsible for weeding. Both help with harvesting. Poor male-headed households may also have access to camels, either through loans or inheritance; this is almost unheard of for poor female-headed households.

In male-headed households, men take care of milking camels and cows; women milk goats and sheep. In female-headed households where cows are owned, women milk the cows along with the goats and sheep, but women almost never milk camels.

The pattern of cash income for poor female-headed households is also similar to poor male-headed households in this livelihood zone. In poor male-headed households, the income from construction labor and crop sales is generally higher, whereas income from handicrafts is higher for poor female-headed households. while it is not uncommon for women to sell sheep and goats, even in male-headed households, for cultural and religious reasons, women generally do not sell cattle, nor do they sell camels. It would not be acceptable for women to bargain with men at large market places where hundreds or thousands of people are gathered to do business;

and the markets for camels and cattle are usually some distance from the homestead, requiring a journey that would not be possible for a woman to take on her own. Therefore, a male adult from the household or a close male relative or clan member takes charge of selling cattle and camels for female-headed households. These men are entrusted with the responsibility for setting the price, bargaining and making the final decision on the sale. Poor female-headed houseohlds also rely on male clan members/relatives to help with land preparation and younger male household members help out with other productive activities, such as construction labor, harvesting and livestock herding.

Sources of cash: poor female headed households vs poor male-headed households

Amount of annual cash generated according to gender and age

Hazards

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 15

The chronic hazards affecting crop and livestock production in this zone are annual flooding and uncontrolled runoff, and livestock diseases. The main livestock diseases are trypanosomiasis and mange, which are common during the dry seasons. Peste de petits ruminants (PPR) and contagious caprine pleuropneumonia (CCPP), which affect goats and sheep; and foot and mouth disease (FMD) also threaten livestock. Flooding and uncontrolled runoff occurs on a yearly basis. More severe floods can wipe out a season of crops, and inundate grazing areas.

Floods can also cause increased disease incidence, damage to homes, loss of livestock and loss of other financial resources.

Intermittent hazards affecting crop production include droughts, heavy winds, and crop pests and disease outbreaks. Drought occurs once every five years, putting at risk all productive activities and creating severe hardships for all local residents. Heavy winds, which damage crops and homes, occur once every five years. The main crop diseases are stalk borer, affecting maize and rust, affecting sorghum. These outbreaks occur once every five years or so.

Malaria and other water-borne diseases are the major human health hazard in this zone, but upper respiratory diseases are also common.

Response Strategies

In response to hazards and years with bad production, households attempt to meet their minimum food needs and cash requirements through a number of strategies. These strategies are detailed for this livelihood zone below:

• All households try to reduce expenditure on non-essential or more expensive items first, buying less sugar and oil, for instance, and using that money to buy the cheaper staple – maize – instead; or cutting down on festivals, tobacco and beer, or eliminating clothing purchases.

• All wealth groups try to increase their livestock sales, trying to sell more camels, cattle, goats, sheep. This strategy is more effective for better off households. The degree to which poorer households can cope is limited by their smaller herds. It should be kept in mind that the value of livestock tends to drop in bad years as more people try to sell animals, and as animals lose body condition, so this strategy starts to become less effective in very bad years.

• Poorer households attempt to increase the amount of money their relatives are sending from abroad, increasing their reliance on remittances.

• Poorer households migrate in search of labor opportunities, to local towns and to highland areas in Tigray.

• Poorer households attempt to increase their reliance on natural resources, collecting more wild fruits (medera, hida, alay and garsa) for consumption and more firewood/charcoal for sale.

• Poorer households depend more heavily on gifts in bad years. In Afar, there is a strong cultural imperative for sharing, and as long as better off households have sufficient surplus, they share with poorer households.

Sharing is not an option in very bad years, when better off households have nothing to give.

Key Parameters for Monitoring

The key parameters listed in the table below are food and income sources that make a substantial contribution to the household economy in the Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone. These should be monitored to indicate

Assale Agropastoral Livelihood Zone Profile 16 potential losses or gains to local household economies, either through on-going monitoring systems or through periodic assessments.

Item Key Parameter - Quantity Key Parameter – Price

Crops • Maize – karma – amount produced

• Sorghum/millet - karma – amount produced

• Teff – karma – amount produced

• Barley - karma – amount produced

• Maize – producer price

• Sorghum/millet – producer price

• Teff – producer price

Livestock production • Cows’ milk - yields

• Camels – herd size

• Cattle – herd size

• Goats – herd size

• Sheep – herd size

• Cows’ milk – producer price

• Camels – producer price

• Cattle – producer price

• Goats – producer price

• Sheep – producer price

Other food and cash income

• Construction labor – number of jobs

• Remittances – amount sent

• Construction labor – wage rates

• Remittances – number of times sent

Expenditure • Wheat – consumer price

• Maize – consumer price

• Cooking oil – consumer price

Program Implications

The longer-term program implications suggested below, include those that were highlighted by the wealth group interviewees themselves and those made by the assessment team following detailed discussions and observations in the field. All of these suggestions require further detailed feasibility studies.

• Improved water management infrastructure and procedures, including river diversion, gully control, irrigation infrastructure, flood control, dams, runoff containment/water harvesting, etc.

• Access to affordable clean water throughout the year for all households

• Development of commercial agricultural schemes to boost local employment and increase agricultural outputs

• Establishment of trading cooperatives and improved access to markets and support for petty trading

• Job creation/increased employment opportunities, especially for women from female-headed households

• Improved livestock marketing

• Improved veterinary services and access to affordable animal drugs

• Expanded access to seed supply, including fruit…