Food Insecurity, and It’s determinants and Consequences in Tanzania Disaster Risk Reduction on Food security Food insecurity is one of the major risk that make people vulnerable from natural disaster and man-made disaster from house level to the national level; if its determinants will not be considered as a threat to well being of human kind, resilient of disaster will be impossible to achieve from house level to the national level.

2012

Gudat Paul Lehada Pragely Company Ltd

7/6/2012

2

FOOD INSECURITY, AND ITS DETERMINANTS AND CONSEQUENCE IN TANZANIA

1.1: Introduction.

Food insecurity describes the instability of national or regional food supplies over time

(Frongillo, 2001; Rose, Basiotis, and Klein, 1995). It include a lack of secure provisions at the

household and individual levels

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hunger and undernutrition. A major factor

contributing to this international problem is food insecurity. This condition exists when people

lack sustainable physical or economic access to enough safe, nutritious, and socially acceptable

food for a healthy and productive life. Food insecurity may be chronic, seasonal, or temporary,

and it may occur at the household, regional, or national level.

The United Nations estimates there are 840 million undernourished people in the world. The

majority of undernourished people (799 million) reside in developing countries, most of which

are on the continents of Africa and Asia. This figure also includes 11 million people located in

developed countries and 30 million people located in countries in transition (e.g., the former

Soviet Union).

Food security according to the LSRO definition means access to enough food for an active,

healthy life. It includes at a minimum (a) the ready availability of nutritionally adequate and

safe foods and (b) an assured ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways

(e.g., without resorting to emergency food supplies, scavenging, stealing, or other coping

strategies). Food insecurity exists whenever the availability of nutritionally adequate and safe

foods or the ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways is limited or

uncertain

Broadly, the concept of food security is built on three pillars: i) Food availability: sufficient

quantities of food are available to people on a consistent basis; ii) Food access: people have

sufficient resources to obtain appropriate foods for a nutritious diet; iii) Food utilization:

people have sufficient knowledge of nutrition and care practices and access to adequate water

and sanitation to derive sustenance food. There is a direct and cyclical relationship between

poverty and food insecurity, whereby poverty contributes to food insecurity, which contributes

to poor nutrition, health, and cognitive development, which in turn contribute to poverty.

The World Food Summit (WFS) in 1996 and, more recently, the Millennium Development Goals

(MDG) in 2000 set target for hunger reduction by using indicators of food deprivation, such as

MDG indicator 1.9, which reflects the proportion of a population below the minimum level of

dietary energy consumption, and the number of people suffering from food deprivation. The

MDG target aims to reduce hunger by half in terms of the population proportion (MDG 1.9),

3

whereas the WFS target calls for halving the number of hungry people. The MDG targets for

hunger reduction also include MDG indicator 1.8, which reflects the prevalence of underweight

children under 5 years of age. These MDG and WFS indicators reflect the magnitude and trends

of hunger at national, regional, and global levels.

Since 1990, developing regions have made some progress towards the MDG target of halving

the proportion of people suffering from hunger. The share of undernourished populations

decreased from 20 per cent in 1990-1992 to 16 per cent in 2005-2007, the latest period with

available data. However, progress has stalled since 2000-2002. Overall progress in reducing the

prevalence of hunger has not been sufficient to reduce the number of undernourished people. In

2005-2007, the last period assessed, 830 million people were still undernourished, an increase

from 817 million in 1990-1992. (MDG Report 2010

The international food crisis in 2007 and 2008 showed that poor countries are the most affected

by such crises, since poor people tend to spend a higher proportion of their incomes on

agricultural products. Tanzania is one of the poorest countries in the world, ranking 151st in the

Human Development Report, with 90 per cent of the population living on less than a dollar a

day. However, stable economic growth at around 4 per cent during the last decade has fuelled

hopes that Tanzania has finally found itself back on the path of sustainable economic growth

and poverty reduction. Skyrocketing international food prices in 2007 and 2008, though, caused

a devastating blow to many economies. For instance, it is estimated that up to 26 million people,

especially those in poor countries, were driven into extreme poverty (IMF, 2008). Hence, as a

poor country, one would expect Tanzania to be among those most affected by the crisis. (Kiratu

S, et.al 2011)

In Tanzania 2009, about 280,000 people (5 percent of the total population) are food insecure;

with most parts of the country being classified as overall food secure (FEWSNET 2009). Regions

facing food shortages include Arusha, Dodoma, Kagera, Kigoma, Kilimanjaro, Lindi, Mara, and

parts of Mbeya, Morogoro, Mtwara, Shinyanga, and Tanga. (Arusha Times, 2009). However,

failure of rainfall in the bimodal northern, northeastern, and northern coastal areas, and

continuous increases in maize, rice, and bean prices to 40-60 percent above their five year

averages has resulted in food shortages. (FEWS NET 2009)

However, the population growth rate (red line), the food production growth rate (blue line) and

the absolute change in the FPI (dotted line) over the period 1960–2000, and its linear trend

(green line) showing that food production increased on average only linearly, as is indicated by

the almost horizontal trend line, whereas population increased exponentially at a stable rate

between 2.5 and 3.5 per cent. From this point of view, the crucial policy challenge has been to

overcome this Malthusian dynamic by introducing structural reforms that increase

productivity, and the recent spike in the agricultural growth rate seems promising in this

regard. (Kiratu, S. 2011)

4

Figure 1.1 : Population and production growth, 1961–2007 (%)

Source: Authors’ calculations based on World Bank (n.d.)

Food security situation in majority of the households in the assessed villages are continuing to

deteriorate in terms of availability, access and utilization despite the overall fairly adequate

2010/2011-food crop production in the country. Deterioration of food situation was due to little

contribution of vuli harvest (8 to 20%) compared to normal of 30 to 40 percent of annual

production. At the time of assessment, food commodities were available in the markets and

households were accessing the commodities in the markets. The assessment further revealed

that, food crop supplies in the market have generally been steady; however, prices have been

rising thus affecting the purchasing power of most households particularly the resource weak

households. It should further be noted that during the period of assessment (March, 2012) some

areas were receiving food assistance in terms of free food and subsidized food. (FSNA REPORT

2012)

District with acute food shortage-National Summary 2012

5

Region District Total Population Acute Food Insecure population

%Acute Food Insecure Population.

Ausha Arusha DC 382,932 15,708 4

Karatu 248,963 19,240 8

Longido 68,881 8,073 12

Ngorongoro 172,859 17,352 10

Total

873,635 60,373 3

Iringa Iringa ® 277,937 22,338 8

Total

277,937 22,338 1

Kagera Chato 564,274 50,636 9

Muleba 509,794 17,459 3

Total

1,074,068 68,095 2

Kilimanjaro Moshi ® 476,992 22,015 5

Mwanga 143,397 7,915 6

Total

620,289 29,930 2

Manyara Mbulu 343,124 6,984 2

Total

343,124 6,984 0.5

Mwanza Kwimba 397,598 52,831 13

Magu 531,219 86,079 16

Misungwi 325,088 77,306 24

Total

1,253,905 216,216 6

Pwani Kibaha DC 177,424 2,433 1

Total

177,424 2,433 0.2

Shinyanga Bariadi 889,677 60,962 7

Bukomba 591,129 10,209 2

Kahama 883,649 123,042 14

Kishapu 353,671 71,444 20

Maswa 452,362 57,527 13

Maetu 367,432 17,379 5

Shinyanga ( R) 401,903 15,066 4

Shinyanga (U) 221,269 12,802 6

Total

4,161,092 368,431 9

Tanga Kilindi 181,503 3,644 2

Lushoto 517,305 6,327 1

Mkinga 132,475 3,953 3

Total

831,283 13,924 1

Tabora Igunga 452,282 70,085 15

Nzega 582,583 86,715 15

Total

1,034,865 156,800 6

GrandTotal

10,647,622 945,524 9

6

Source; Muchali-FSNA Report 2012.

Fig 1.2Source; FSNA 2012

7

2; Food Insecurity and its determinants and consequences;

Fig 1; Food Insecurity, and its determinants and consequences

2.1; Food Insecurity Determinants

Food insecurity determinants are managerial strategies, livelihood strategies, economic factors,

social and functional limitation, and physical environment and personal factors.

2.1.1; Management Strategy

2.1.1.1; Agriculture policy

The existing Agricultural (and Livestock) Policy was established with the goal of improving the

well being of the people whose principal occupation and way of life were based on agriculture,

that is commercializing agriculture so as to increase income levels. (ESRF)

FOOD INSECURITY

Uncertainty, insufficient or

unacceptable availability, access or

utilization of food.

Social and

Functional

limitation

Economic factor Livelihood

strategies

Poor

Dietary

intake

Hunger Distress & Adverse, Family &

Social Interactions

Management

Strategies

Poor health

status, ie,

malnutritio

n

Lack of well-being

Worry &

Anxiety

Deprivation &

alienation

Physical

Environment and

personal factors

8

Agriculture has four important roles to play: provider of food security; earner of foreign

exchange; major GDP contributor; and the vehicle for inter-sectoral backward and forward

linkages. To enable farmers to access these opportunities, agriculture needs well-functioning

markets with a coherent marketing policy environment. In Tanzania, agricultural marketing is

one of the major impediments to agricultural growth and overall prosperity of the farming

communities around the country, as has been particularly evident during the post- trade

liberalization regime.

Since Independence, Tanzania has experimented with different policy regimes, starting from

unregulated markets, to cooperative based marketing, to centralized crop authorities and back

to unregulated markets (Amani et al 1983; ERB 2001). Agricultural marketing in the country has

evolved through three major regimes, namely: the pre-Arusha Declaration unregulated

marketing system (1961 to 1967), the post-Arusha Declaration centrally controlled marketing

system (1967 to 1980) and the current liberalized marketing structure. (ESRF ) all this policy was

not successful to increase production level in Tanzania

Agricultural policies in Tanzania are aimed at increasing income from agriculture rather than at

positive human development. Such agricultural policies are usually focused on external

markets and ignore the needs of the local market. This focus is probably due to a lack of

awareness of the needs of local people by programme implementers, where policy is geared

towards the achievement of revenue goals without regard for the population, resources

allocated for human development. The existing Agricultural and Livestock Policy was

established with the goal of improving the well being of the people whose principal occupation

and way of life were based on agriculture, that is commercializing agriculture so as to increase

income levels.goals worldwide will be insufficient. (Kiratu, S. et. 20110)

2.1.1.2: Agriculture development;

Agriculture is the foundation of the Tanzania economy, underpinning employment, food

production and export. As in the previous reports, the agriculture sector, which comprises

crops, animal husbandry, fishery and hunting sub-sectors, has remained the dominant sector: it

employs about 80% of the population, accounts for about 49.1 percent of GDP in 1999 and

slightly dropped to about 46.8 percent in 2003, 46.3 percent in 2004 and now about 45.6 percent

in 2005. Food crop production dominates the agricultural economy totaling 36.5% of total GDP,

and livestock accounting for 6.1%. The scope for immediate faster growth in production is

highest in this sector. Basic data indicates that there has been a major contribution of food

production, due partly to recent reforms that favored food crops, which induced a shift of

resources away from export crops to domestic food production. More important, it is the main

source of food supply and raw materials for the industrial sector. The country has a diverse

9

ecology and ample land resources to sustain high levels of agriculture growth. (MFTS 2007-

2010).

In recent years, however, the contribution of the sector to GDP has dropped to less than 25 per

cent and the fraction of employees fell to 75 per cent in 2006. A number of reasons account for

this trend, but the recent growth of mining, tourism and other services seems to the most

apparent one. (Runyoro, 2006)

The country is well endowed with a high potential base for agriculture development, yet

productivity remains very low. Agriculture is predominantly characterized as a smallholder

business, with farm sizes ranging in size from 0.9 to 3 hectares, dedicated to subsistence with

limited marketable surpluses. On the other hand, the few bigger enterprises have been

responsible for more than 80 per cent of Tanzania’s exports (especially cash crops such as coffee,

tea, cashew nuts, tobacco and sisal), albeit with a declining share since the late 1990s due to the

increasing importance of minerals and ores.

Further, the agricultural sector is characterized by traditional farming methods with low levels

of technology, low utilization of modern inputs and inefficient resource allocation

(Mashindano & Kaino, 2009; Runyoro, 2006). It has poor linkages to other domestic sectors,

with a poorly developed marketing system in general and under-developed infrastructure that

affects access to both domestic and international markets

In management strategies there is lack of Involvement of the private sector in efforts to enhance

agricultural growth and development, and hence the income of the farmers is crucial. The

Ministry must develop mechanisms to involve the private sector in agricultural extension

including creation of a local input dealer cadre, promotion of medium and large-scale

investment, building capacities for research and diversifying export crops. Yet, the Ministry like

other Government institutions is faced with financial constraints that demands prioritization.

Hence, with regard to research initiatives, respondents felt that research should focus on yield

improvements, supporting year-round farming and reduction of input cost to the farmer. As for

the dissemination of the research findings, it was felt that the ideal platforms are agricultural

extension staff, farmer organizations and the media. (MTSP 2007-2010)

The agricultural sector’s weakness resonates with an unsatisfactory level of food security and

consequent widespread poverty and poor quality of life (URT, 2005; Mashindano & Kaino,

2009). Food production has remained low, failing to meet household and national requirements

(Runyoro, 2006). Furthermore, the dependency on agriculture as the mainstay of the economy

has made the Tanzanian economy more vulnerable to both external and internal shocks, given

the lack of other important productive sectors such as manufacturing. As a result, the food

security situation in Tanzania varies from one region to another and from one season to

10

another. There are some perennial pockets of food shortages, particularly the coastal regions of

Pwani, Lindi, Mtwara and Tanga, together with the semi-arid central regions of Dodoma and

Singida and some parts of Shinyanga, Morogoro, Kigoma and Mara (Ashimogo, 1995).

2.1.2: Livelihood Strategy

Livelihood strategies are composed of the various activities undertaken by the household to

generate a living. They are the patterns of behaviour adopted by the household as a result of the

mediation processes on the household assets. As an intrinsic part of the assets-activities-

outcomes cycle, livelihood strategies are generally adaptive over time, responding to both

opportunities and changing constraints.

Livelihood strategy is one of the reasons that can lead to food insecurity. Although many

researchers and agencies have developed their own definitions of livelihoods and related

concepts, most of these definitions share common characteristics, including a focus on various

categories of assets (rather than income, the standard focus of poverty analysis) and the

institutions that influence individual or household access to these assets. Some definitions

include an explicit focus on livelihood strategies (‘how the poor make a living’) such as

agricultural intensification, livelihood diversification, or migration (Scoones 1998).

A good working definition of livelihoods is provided by Frank Ellis (2000:10): ‚the assets

(natural, physical, human, financial and social capital), the activities, and the access to these

(mediated by institutions and social relations) that together determine the living gained by

individual or household‛. Later work indicates that it might be useful to add political capital as

this can be a key asset defining livelihood activities, access to resources and opportunities.

Livelihoods approaches reflect the diverse and complex realities faced by poor people in

specific contexts. Unlike many ‘conventional’ approaches to poverty assessment and project

design, a focus on livelihoods requires incorporating an understanding of the ways in which

various contextual factors – political, institutional, environmental as well as macroeconomic –

either constrain or support the efforts of poor and vulnerable people to pursue a viable living.

The ‘sustainable livelihoods approach’ (SLA) also emphasizes the ability of people to maintain a

viable livelihood over time, whereas conventional poverty analysts tend to measure income or

consumption at a point in time. Another virtue of livelihoods approaches is that they attempt to

build on the strengths already present in people’s existing assets, strategies and objectives,

rather than ‘importing’ blueprint development models that often ignore or even undermine

these positive features. For instance if certain livelihood groups are identified as being at above

average risk of food insecurity, the explanation frequently lies in the low returns or high

vulnerability of the livelihood activity being pursued, which in turn suggests appropriate policy

11

interventions to address this group’s food insecurity – raising returns, reducing vulnerability, or

encouraging diversification away from that source of livelihood. ( Devereux, S. et al. 2004)

Livelihood strategies here in Tanzania in which various contextual factors such as political,

institutional, environmental as well as macroeconomic constrain the efforts of poor and

vulnerable people to pursue a viable living. In addition to assets and activities, and the factors

that mediate access, livelihood considerations must take account of the outcomes of the

interaction of these components. Livelihood outcomes would ideally be what people seek and

strategize to achieve through their activities, albeit in practice the means or the choice of

activities may be restricted or absent and the ends will not always be realized.

Desired outcomes might include increases in income (monetary), food and water security,

health, physical security, independence, knowledge, status, or time – the inverse of various

poverty dimensions. The outcomes in turn will usually have a direct effect on the asset base and

activities (and possibly on the access regimes), so in this sense there is a cyclical relationship

between assets, activities and consumption outcomes (see Figure 1.3).

Most livelihood models focus on the household as the most appropriate social group for the

investigation of livelihoods, albeit external measures to manage risk may be social or public in

nature. Household livelihoods are however founded on the aggregation and dynamics of its

individual members, which suggests that to develop understanding of the pervasive features of

rural households some account of the intra-household dynamics (e.g. by gender, age or status)

will be necessary.

12

.

modifying and

contextual factors (e.g

output prices, food aid)

Outcomes enhance,

or erode, assets

Assets are transformed by strategies result in outcomes

modifyi

ng and

context

ual

factors

(e.g.

input

prices,

market

proximi

ty)

modifying and contextual

factors (e.g. land tenure, user

rights, village council)

Fig 2; A generic livelihood model Source; ( Morris M, undated)

The ‘external’ mediating environment (the block arrows in Figure 1.2.2) directly influences the

internal workings of the assets-activities-outcomes relationship. It provides the context within

which household decision-making processes unfold, mediating access to household assets and

the use to which they can be put, influencing the strategies - sets of activities - households adopt

and their potential outcomes. The nature of the diverse constituent factors will be elaborated

later. Their influence however might affect the following:

ASSETS: NR capital,

human and social capital,

physical capital, financial

capital etc

LIVELIHOOD

OUTCOMES Food security, wellbeing,

income,

conservation etc

ACTIVITIES combine to make

Strategies

13

Quality and quantity of assets (e.g. disease reduces human capital, education increases

human capital, soil degradation reduces natural capital, devaluation reduces financial

capital).

Activities and the terms on which they transform assets (e.g. drought leads to coping

activities which may transform productive assets into liquid assets and thus denude the

asset base).

The relationship between activities and consumption outcomes (e.g. the influence of

different types of prices, such as minimum wage rates, income taxes, which may set a

type of floor for the impact of labor on consumption; price stabilization policy which

may affect the rate at which agricultural output increases are related to consumption

outcomes).

All livelihood models acknowledge the role and importance of the mediating environment – the

'modifying and contextual forces' of Figure 1.3 - in translating individual or household assets

into livelihood strategies and outcomes.

The DFID model divides these external forces into 'transforming structures and processes' – or

‘policies, institutions and processes’ - (e.g. levels of government, private sector, laws, policies,

culture, institutions), and the 'vulnerability context', described in terms of shocks (e.g. civil and

climatic), trends (e.g resource stocks, population, technology, politics and economics) and

seasonality (Carney, 1998).

Ellis similarly distinguishes between the modifying influence of 'social relations, institutions

and organizations’, and the contextual 'trends and shocks'. In making this distinction however,

he suggests that the nature of social relations (e.g. gender, class, age, ethnicity), institutions (e.g.

rules and customs, land tenure, markets in practice) and organizations (e.g. associations, NGOs,

local administration and state agencies), will be predominantly endogenous to the society

within which the household operates. While the category of trends (e.g. population, migration,

technological change, relative prices, macro policy, national and global economic trends) and

shocks (e.g. drought, floods, pests, disease, civil war) would principally cover exogenous factors

(Ellis, 2000: 37).

While the distinction between exogenous and endogenous factors may not be as clear cut in

practice, it does however provide a useful axis for identifying and differentiating those factors

that fall within the remit of governments and the potential of pro-poor policies to influence.

14

2.1.3: Economic Strategies

Macro-economic determinants can affect very fundamentally the constraints and incentives

which individuals face when trying to satisfy their food needs. The macro-economic

environment is determined by certain crucial parameters and rules, often set by government,

which affect the basis on which nation’s trade with one another, and the conditions for longer-

term economic growth within the economy. These parameters can be classified into three broad

areas: those affecting international resource flows, such as exchange rate regulations; those

concerned with the monetary regime, such as the rate of interest; and those set by government

to finance its own operation, fiscal mechanisms such as taxation and public expenditure levels.

These parameters and policy options may well have as much, or more effect, on food security as

policies aimed specifically at the food and agricultural sectors, yet the links between the macro-

economy and food security are often not well understood. Even where they are, the longer term

objectives of achieving more permanent food security for all citizens and the short-term issue of

protecting existing levels of food security often has to take second or third place to what are

seen as more immediate concerns of controlling a balance of payments crisis or tackling high

levels of inflation. However, these different objectives need not always be incompatible.

Governments can make choices between alternative strategies for achieving economic growth in

ways which are sustainable, some of which may be more beneficial to their most vulnerable

citizens than others. If major policy decisions have to be made in ways which have a negative

impact on those who are already food insecure, then there may be ways of offsetting that

damage by implementing specially designed and targeted welfare programmes.

Macro-economic policy and the decision to change certain crucial macro-economic parameters

can have both a direct impact on a country's food supply and an impact on the price incentives

facing domestic producers. Direct effects are most likely to take place through changes in fiscal

policy. Attempts to cut public expenditure may affect various agricultural support services,

such as the provision of extension services, or the financing of public sector research initiatives,

which could lead to improved crop varieties or more effective production techniques. Changes

in the foreign exchange rate, usually devaluation, can also have an effect on the provision of

government services, to the extent that these services use imported goods, such as fuel, or

imported capital equipment. This may be particularly important for the upkeep of state-owned

infrastructure, such as roads and market places, all important in the decision to provide food

products to the market, rather than keep them for household consumption

15

Source; Woodward, D., 1992,

Fig; 2.1.3: Economic determinats, external shocks, internal shocks and monetary expansion

Macro-economic policy will also affect the availability of imported food. When there are tight

balance of payments constraints, then these constrain the country's capacity to import food to

relieve domestic shortages. Devaluation will increase the price of imported food, and if there is

no response from domestic agriculture, then the overall availability of food in the country may

fall. A country's access to concessionary food imports, or food aid, may be improved if it is

perceived to be following a stable and sustainable set of macro-economic policies. This is

particularly true for non-emergency programme food aid.

Individual and household access to food is determined by the prices they have to face in the

market for food and other basic needs, their income from their own labour, either in the labour

market or through selling their own production and services, particularly in the informal sector,

and through entitlement to state benefits and subsidies. The demand for labour and the prices

16

at which labour, goods and services are exchanged are all dependent on the important macro-

economic prices, the wage rate, the interest rate and the foreign exchange rate.

Social factors and physical limitation are all determinants of food insecurity. For example,

income and social status is the most significant determinant of well being — that is, the more

money you have the healthier you will be. Income plays a major role in access to food and has a

significant impact on food security. Just as having enough money is good for your health;

poverty and inequality are very bad for your health. Not having enough to eat and not having

good quality, nutritious food can have short- and long-term effects on mental and physical

health. For example, poor nutrition leads to chronic illnesses such as heart disease and diabetes.

In Tanzania, some of groups of people are more vulnerable to food insecurity than others.

Vulnerable groups include: victims of conflict (e.g., refugees and internally displaced people);

migrant workers; marginal populations (e.g., school dropouts, unemployed people, homeless

people, and orphans); dependent populations (e.g., elderly people, children under five, and

disabled and ill people); women of reproductive age; ethnic minorities; and low literacy

households

To understand the magnitude of food insecurity, one must consider both the continued rapid

growth in world population and the number of individuals below the poverty line. In 1999 the

world population reached 6 billion. The United Nations estimates the world population will

exceed 8 billion by 2025. In terms of poverty, the World Bank estimates that nearly 1.2 billion

people live on less than one dollar a day, which is the internationally recognized standard for

measuring poverty. Another 2.8 billion live on less than two dollars a day.

Environment determinants such as climate change, floods and heavy rainfall may lead to food

insecurity. The consequences of climate change for agriculture and food security in developing

countries are of serious concern. Due to their reliance on rain-fed agriculture both as a source of

income and consumption, many low-income countries are generally considered to be most

vulnerable to climate change. Here, we estimate the impact of climate change on food security

in Tanzania. Representative climate projections are used in calibrated crop models to predict

crop yield changes for 110 districts in Tanzania. These results are in turn imposed on a highly-

disaggregated, dynamic economy-wide model of Tanzania. We find that, relative to a no

climate change baseline and considering domestic agricultural production as the principal

channel of impact, food security in Tanzania appears likely to deteriorate as a consequence of

climate change. The analysis points to a high degree of diversity of outcomes (including some

favorable outcomes) across climate scenarios, sectors, and regions. The economic modeling

indicates that markets have the potential to smooth outcomes on households across regions and

17

income groups, though noteworthy differences in impacts across households persist both by

region and by income category. (FEWS NET, 2009).

3: CONSEQUENCES OF FOOS INSECURITY

Food insecurity can be very stressful. Parents especially can be anxious about having enough

food for their children and being able to give them good food so they grow up strong and

healthy. Some parents even worry that their children might be taken from them if they cannot

feed them enough good food.

Some families can become preoccupied with food—worrying all day about whether there is

enough food for dinner and the next day. This kind of stress can be bad for our relationships

and health. Feeling stressed and insecure can lead to depression, anger, diabetes, and high

blood pressure. It can also make it harder for us to fight off infections like colds and flu.

Parents are right to be concerned about whether their children have enough good food. Poor

nutrition in childhood can affect the development of both the body and mind. Not having

enough good food can make it harder for children to do well at school and even stay in school.

Poor nutrition in childhood has effects that can last a lifetime.

In rural areas many people have been forced to leave their communities because they can no

longer make a living as a farmer or fisher. In cities, food insecurity can lead to crime when

people are driven to steal or sell drugs to avoid hunger or homelessness. Food insecurity can

lead to us feeling that our neighborhood is not a safe, healthy or comfortable place to live.

Individuals need adequate amounts of a variety of quality, safe foods to be healthy and well-

nourished. Undernutrition results from an insufficient intake or an improper balance of protein,

energy, and micronutrients. Nutritional consequences of insufficient food or undernutrition

include protein energy malnutrition, anemia, vitamin A deficiency, iodine deficiency, and iron

deficiency.

Food insecurity and malnutrition result in catastrophic amounts of human suffering. The World

Health Organization estimates that approximately 60 percent of all childhood deaths in the

developing world are associated with chronic hunger and malnutrition. In developing

countries, persistent malnutrition leaves children weak, vulnerable, and less able to fight such

common childhood illnesses as diarrhea, acute respiratory infections, malaria , and measles.

Even the children who are mildly to moderately malnourished are at greater risk of dying from

these common diseases. Malnourished children in the Tanzania suffer from poorer health

status, compromised immune systems, and higher rates of illnesses such as colds, headaches,

and fatigue.

18

The trend for severe acute malnutrition from 2009 to 2012 is shown in Figure 3.1, 2012 being the

reference year. In 2010, Mbulu, Mkinga and Muleba districts were not assessed. In addition

Hanang and Kilindi districts were not assessed in the year 2011, as they were not selected

because the projections showed they did not have any food/livestock production problems. The

food security and nutrition assessment conducted in 2009 showed the highest prevalence of

severe acute malnutrition than all other years, with Mbulu district leading with highest

prevalence. The 2012 nutrition assessment done in Arusha DC, Masasi, Longido, Mkinga and

Muleba districts showed increase in prevalence of Severe Acute Malnutrition compared to

2011.To the contrary, Mbulu district showed the opposite trend. Furthermore, Longido district

has continuously worsened off sevenfold in 2012 compared to 2011

Figure 3.1: Severe Acute Malnutrition Trend

Source: FSNA 2012

The same picture is portrayed for Global Acute Malnutrition. The food security and nutrition

assessment conducted in 2009 showed the highest prevalence of global acute malnutrition than

all other years, with Mbulu and Kilindi districts leading with highest prevalence. Among eight

districts, which had poor nutrition situation, the prevalence of GAM has shown to increase in

2012 when compared to 2011.The GAM rate of Longido district showed to be critical in

nutrition situation compared to the other districts in that the nutrition situation remained

19

relatively steady for all the years. The poor nutrition situation implies food insecurity in the

area. (See Figure 3.2 below).

Figure 3.2: Global Acute Malnutrition Trend

Source; FSNA 2012

Adolescents and adults also suffer adverse consequences of food insecurity and malnutrition.

Malnutrition can lead to decreased energy levels, delayed maturation, growth failure, impaired

cognitive ability, diminished capacity to learn, decreased ability to resist infections and

illnesses, shortened life expectancy, increased maternal mortality, and low birth weight.

Food insecurity may also result in severe social, psychological , and behavioral consequences.

Food-insecure individuals may manifest feelings of alienation, powerlessness, stress , and

anxiety , and they may experience reduced productivity, reduced work and school

performance, and reduced income earnings. Household dynamics may become disrupted

because of a preoccupation with obtaining food, which may lead to anger, pessimism, and

irritability. Adverse consequences for children include: higher levels of aggressive or

destructive behavior, hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty with social interactions (e.g., more

withdrawn or socially disruptive), increased passivity, poorer overall school performance,

increased school absences, and a greater need for mental health care services (e.g., for

depression or suicidal behaviors).

20

4: Disaster Risk Management in food and agriculture

Disasters have the most severe consequences on poor, vulnerable and agriculturally-dependent

populations where by food and agriculture play a key role in increasing community resilience

to threats. Natural disasters are a leading cause of hunger and affect all dimensions of food

security including access to food, availability and stability of supplies, and nutrition. Most food

insecure people live in areas prone to natural hazards and they are the least able to cope with

shocks. Due to their vulnerability and limited capacity to manage risks, poor households are

often trapped in a downward spiral of food insecurity and poverty.

Globally, disaster risk is increasing due to climate change and population growth and disaster

frequently bring with them a food crisis.

4.1: The Disaster Management approach

Disaster management approach seek to build resilience and reduce risk; through activities such

as soil and water conservation, rehabilitating infrastructure and training community members

in disaster risk management and livelihood protection, Mitigate impact of crisis and help

vulnerable people adapt, Reduce vulnerability of people before, during and after disasters,

Continuum covers all phases of the DRM framework from pre-disaster (risk reduction), post-

disaster (response, recovery and rehabilitation) to development, nevertheless management

perspective that combines prevention, mitigation and preparedness with response, recovery

and rehabilitation – moving beyond Disaster Risk Reduction.

FAO has a framework programme built on 4 pillars in food risk reduction:

Institutional strengthening and good governance for DRR in agriculture sectors

Information and early warning systems on food and nutrition security and trans-

boundary threats

Preparedness for effective response and recovery in agriculture, livestock, fisheries and

forestry

Mitigation, prevention and building resilience with technologies, approaches and

practices for food and nutrition security

21

5: Conclusion and Strategies

5.1: Conclusion;

There were various coping strategies deployed by the households to cope with food insecurity

problems. The strategies vary from one area to another. These strategies include excessive sale

of livestock, agricultural labour, sale of charcoal, reduced number and size of meals. However,

there were extreme coping strategies such as stopping children from going to school and

temporal migration which was noted in Kilindi, Muleba and Ngorongoro districts.

It was further noted that, recurring food shortage in some areas mainly due to drought could

have a direct link with climate change. Thus climate change challenges might if not addressed,

continue to limit agricultural labour opportunities hence most resource weak households’

resilience will continue to 19 deplete. Additional households therefore, will continue to rely on

assistance from their neighbours and remittances, which are not adequate to meet basic food

needs; nevertheless agriculture development should be taken as serious issue which needs

urgent measure in order to accommodate the increase number of people in Tanzania.

5.2: Strategies;

In Tanzania, agricultural production and productivity have not been able to attain levels that

ensure sustainable food security and income generation for poverty reduction. There are many

factors that undermine agricultural production and productivity. Among these are investment

in productive and service sectors, weak base for provision of agricultural and cooperative

development services, and weak base of technology development, transfer and utilization.

Others factors include poor access to inputs and inefficient use of agricultural inputs, lack of

value adding initiatives, and underdeveloped human and institutional capacities. The

combined effects of these resulted in food insecurity. Nevertheless, most productive systems are

rarely environmental friendly which adds the question of sustainability. In order to achieve

production and productivity levels that will propel the growth rate of the sector and the

economy in general, there is a need to implement the strategies, hit the targets and monitor the

performance indicators stated below.

Strategies

• Increase investment and interventions to improve productive and service sectors

• Improve sector services delivery systems

• Enhance technology development, transfer and utilization

• Improve access to and use efficiency agricultural inputs and implements

• Enhance value addition functions

• Improve land management and adoption of water conservation technologies and

implementation of national plans under MEA’s to halt desertification and restore

degraded land

22

• Build and sustain the human resource capacity in the agriculture services delivery of

the ministry

• Create awareness of the staff and stakeholders on pertinent issues

• Ensure environmental sustainability of the productive systems(through research, identify

and promote modern environmental friendly farming technologies and practices for rural

areas)

• Improve food security

23

6: REFERENCE;

Devereux, S., al. (2004). Improving The Analysis of Food Insecurity

Ellis, F., 2000, Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries, Oxford: Oxford

University Press

Scoones, I., 1998, ‘Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis’, Working Paper

72.

Mike Morris, John Butterworth, Richard Lamboll, Evelyn Lazaro, Faustin Maganga, and Neil

Marslandighton: IDS ‚Household Livelihood Strategies in Semi-Arid Tanzania‛: Synthesis

of Findings

Sheila Kiratu, Lutz Märker and Adam Mwakolobo, 2011., ‘Food Security. Tanzania case’.

International Institute for Sustainable Development.

Mukhebi, A. et al., An Overview of Food Security Situation in Eastern Africa

Woodward, D., 1992,: Debt, Adjustment and Poverty in Developing Countries, Vol. I & II,

Save the Children, London

‚Survey 2: Agricultural Trade Policies Tanzania” Author: Economic and Social Research Foundation, Dar

Es Salaam, Tanzania

“Comprehensive Food Security and Nutrition Assessment Report of the April, 2012”: Prepared

by Tanzania Food Security and Nutrition Analysis System - MUCHALI, Tanzania April 2012