Guidance Note: Public works and livelihoods LINKAGES to ENHANCE PSNP GRADUATION and food secuity

MARCH 1, 2017

Table of Contents

1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background and rationale for the guidance note....................................................................1

1.2 Community asset vs household asset creation:........................................................................1

1.3 The move towards PSNP clients’ asset creation......................................................................2

2 Conceptual definitions:.....................................................................................................................3

2.1 Public works:..............................................................................................................................3

2.2 Livelihoods:................................................................................................................................3

3 Potential areas for linkage between PSNP 4 Public works and Livelihoods:................................4

3.1 Potential for linkage..................................................................................................................4

3.2 Principle of the linkage:............................................................................................................5

3.3 Mode of linkage:........................................................................................................................6

4 Linkage activities at different stages of the project cycle.............................................................10

4.1 Annual Plan Objective setting and Targeting Stage:............................................................10

4.2 Planning Stage:..........................................................................................................................10

4.3 Implementation stage:.............................................................................................................11

4.4 Monitoring stage:.....................................................................................................................12

4.5 Reporting stage:.......................................................................................................................12

5 Roles and Responsibilities of implementing institutions at different levels.................................13

5.1 Community Food Security Taskforces:..................................................................................13

5.2 Kebele Food SecurityTask Forces (KFSTFs);.......................................................................13

5.3 Woreda Food Security Task Forces (WFSTFs);...................................................................13

5.4 Region public works and livelihoods coordination units;.....................................................13

5.5 Federal public works and livelihoods coordination units:....................................................13

6 Best practices / case.........................................................................................................................14

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and rationale for the guidance note

PSNP public work impact evaluations show that notable amount of community assets comprising natural resources management/rangeland management, community roads, health posts, Farmers’ training centers, and school classrooms’ expansions have been created and benefited the whole community including PSNP and non PSNP households. This can be counted as a big achievement of the previous three phases of PSNP. In order to consolidate these gains, during PSNP 3, the Government of Ethiopia (GoE) and Development Partners (DPs) reached consensus to develop and implement Household Asset Building Program (HABP) alongside the PSNP interventions that would help address the livelihoods side of the program equation and help chronically food insecure households get out of undesirable situations. In support to this intention, HABP was designed in such a way that PSNP interventions including public works and transfer shall be used as a foundation to build household assets and eventually make PSNP clients graduate from the program. However, the intention was not fully realized as the two programs lacked proper linkages, integration and coordination. Indeed, this was considered as a missed opportunity both in the eyes of the government and development partners. Nevertheless, public works activities benefited the entire communities including the PSNP clients by way of creating and availing new community assets.

Recognizing this reality and learning from experience, GoE and DPs believed that a tailored approach, was needed to enhance proper linkages, complementarities and synergy between the PSNP PWs and livelihoods support within the PSNP 4 where the two sets of interventions – safety net activities and livelihoods support interventions – are merged into one integrated program with a common log frame. This is one of the unique features of PSNP 4 in terms of ensuring linkage between public works and livelihoods interventions. To this effect, a series of technical discussions have been conducted and identified key issues that help explore opportunities to enhance proper linkages between the two components of the program, and the discussants noted absence of operational guidance regarding public works and livelihoods linkages hindered performance. The purpose of this guidance note1 is, therefore, to help improve linkages by way of promoting better understanding primarily for the frontline implementers so that they will be able to materialize proper linkages /integration between the two components while doing the actual planning, implementation, coordination and monitoring of public works and livelihoods activities both at the watershed and household levels.

1.2 Community asset2 vs household asset creation:

It is noted that there is an inherent connection between community asset creation through public works and livelihoods component of the PSNP 4 in as much as the potential for improved

1 There is little knowledge about linkage model in pastoral areas and would be seen if the exercise in the highland would inform to adopt the linkage model. 2 In Ethiopia community assets are built not only through PSNP public works but also through free labor mobilization program designed as part of the Climate Resilient Green Economy Strategy

1

livelihoods at household level is highly dependent on the appropriateness of the natural resource-based PW interventions of the watershed; and availability and accessibility of social services at woreda, kebele and village levels. It is understandable that community assets such as area closures with different soil and water conservation (SWC) structures, feeder roads, primary schools and health posts, farmers’ training centers, water supply schemes, and water harvesting structures built/created on communal lands have significant impacts both to PSNP and non PSNP households, and for the community at large. For instance, natural resources rehabilitation would serve as a springboard to introduce and test new technologies including small scale irrigation, and water harvesting/storage structures, which in turn opens up new opportunities that help PSNP households increase productivity, income and livelihoods diversification, improve nutrition, and eventually lead to household level resilience building and graduation from food insecurity. The issues here are: (i) how to properly plan and implement livelihoods based community asset sub-projects on new and existing watersheds, and (ii) how to ensure that such sub-projects are properly linked with the PSNP clients’ livelihoods support in such a way that they directly produces tangible results and maximize real income for the PSNP clients (women, landless youth, and other PSNP households) within the current operational framework.

1.3 The move towards PSNP clients’ asset creation.

As mentioned above, in terms of quantity, PSNP public works have created numerous types of community assets. However, much has not been done to strengthen the linkage and facilitate the process of shifting from more of community- based to household asset creation approach, most importantly by the local level implementers. Indeed, this needs primarily a shift in mind set of frontline implementers including regional, woreda, kebele and community leaders. Experience from almost all regions shows that there is a plan to move public works focus towards livelihoods - based subprojects (e.g. water-harvesting, fruit production as a multipurpose approach-forest cover, agro-forestry, livelihoods support) which will directly and indirectly benefit PSNP clients. A concern has been raised from some regions where PSNP public works investment (e.g., small scale irrigation) is still concentrated on land owned by better-off farmers with little benefit3 to the chronically food insecure farmers and landless youth. In Afar region, there is a commitment from the regional government to move from social infrastructure construction to water-based subprojects as a result of the 2015/16 drought. Thus, the inclination towards public work sub-projects that contribute to improved livelihoods of PSNP clients and towards enhance disaster risk management, household level asset creation and resilience building becomes a timely initiative. This would enable the program to adequately address both sides of the resilience equation: community and household resilience, where indeed the former is primarily the function of the latter.

3It is noted that most of the chronically food insecure households have little or no suitable land for small scale irrigation schemes to be built through PSNP public works which is a structural problem. Significant amount of PSNP capital budget is being invested on small scale irrigation but very few PSNP HH benefited. Unless the program finds a way as how to invest on PSNP HH land (e.g. water harvesting/storage) they will remain poor.

2

2 Conceptual definitions:

2.1 Public works:

Public works, in the context of safety nets, are social protection instruments used in diverse country circumstances in both low- and middle-income countries with the dual objectives of providing temporary/causal employment and generating and/or maintaining labor-intensive infrastructural subprojects and social services (Subbarao, K., et al, 2013). In the case of PSNP, public works are perceived as labor-intensive community based subprojects4 designed to address underlying causes5 of rural food insecurity primarily supporting conservation-based agriculture and focusing on the rehabilitation of natural resources to enhance livelihoods whilst increasing the program’s impact in the areas of nutrition, climate resilience and disaster risk management. In line with these small scale subprojects on new and existing watershed are planned and implemented locally through participatory processes aiming at integrated watershed management and within the PSNP framework based the Community-based on the Participatory Watershed Development Guideline (CBPWDG) developed by the Ministry of Agriculture. It is designed in such a way that public works are conducted in the lean season between Januarys to June each year and the participants receive transfers (in cash or in kind) for the exchange of their labor. For the purpose of this guidance note public works and community asset creation will be interchangeably used so as to avoid any kind of confusion.

2.2 Livelihoods:

Different organizations describe livelihood in different ways. For instance, DFID (2000) explained a livelihood comprises the assets, capabilities and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future while not undermining the natural resource base. For the purpose of PSNP 4, livelihoods is described where chronically food insecure households and landless youth /women engage in one or more of the three integrated livelihoods pathways: on farm or crop and livestock; off-farm (self-employment) and wage employment and earn sustainable living. In simple terms, therefore, the notion of livelihoods can be summarized as means of supporting one's existence or a way of earning money in order to live6. Under the current Ethiopia context PSNP clients ’livelihoods improvement depends primarily on creation and access to diversified livelihoods opportunities, increased land and labor productivity, and enhanced knowledge, skills and access to technology to increase income from their existing asset and income base. One way of doing this, could be creation of employment opportunities coupled with human development (skill and knowledge) as well as technology transfer interventions closer to rural communities and reduce the cost of job search.

4 Typology of public work or community asset building sub projects are identified in the Community-Based Participatory Watershed Development (CBPWD) guideline5 One of the critical underlying causes of food insecurity in Ethiopia is natural resources degradation coupled with population pressure which resulted in very small per capita land holding size 6Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary

3

3 Potential areas for linkage7 between PSNP 4 Public works and Livelihoods:

3.1 Potential for linkage

The different components of PSNP 4 are designed in such way that they are inherently interconnected so that activities of one component is cross linked with the other in terms of addressing food insecurity. Thus, from the nature of the program one can easily understand that there is a huge potential for linkage, complementarity and synergy among the components. However, it is noted that issues related to linkage emanate from inadequate government capacity to plan, coordinate and effectively implement the program. It has to be stressed that where watersheds are now sufficiently productive, public works subprojects should be increasingly focused on PSNP clients’ asset creation.

On the other hand, there are many enablers for the linkage of public works and livelihoods. Both interventions8 are (i) housed under one program – PSNP 4 (ii) managed by the same institution (MoANR and its regional counterparts at all levels (iii) targeting same households - PSNP clients (iv) covering the same geographic area or watershed and micro watersheds, and (v) Government and development partners agreed to employ joint planning and implementation review process to enhance linkages. One also should acknowledge that the two components differ in terms of budgeting and fund management, institutional arrangement, coordination mechanism (implementation modalities) and logframe indictors but these operational disparities do not prevent activities linked to each other as both are meant to serve the same purpose and people. What is really missing is institutional perspective (the objective link between community based asset creation and household-asset creation), and technical knowhow at woreda and kebele levels staff to identify and address points of intersections in such a way that both tasks are properly layered, sequenced and linked to bring about the desired livelihood changes at household level.

For strong linkage at the grass root level, there should be a common perspective and objective-that PSNP PWs interventions are identified, prioritized and implemented in such a way that they are contributing to PSNP clients’ asset creation and bring about a meaningful impact to enhance graduation. In pursuit of this, there should be an effective coordination mechanism at regional, zonal, woreda and kebele levels. Thus to promote and deepen the importance of linkage, PSNP implementers (managers and experts), food security taskforces and other platforms established at all levels should place the linkage agenda at the forefront their priorities-under the linkage framework for enhanced and sustainable graduation. To bring about these results one should consider effective vertical and horizontal coordination mechanisms without which proper linkage is unthinkable. There should also be staff training and community awareness creation sessions for orientation on PW livelihoods linkage that will help clarify roles and responsibilities of both woreda and kebele food security taskforces. In view of this, regional and zonal structures should bear the responsibility to oversee woredas as how they promote and manage linkage agenda.

7connection or relationship between two or more activities 8 Livelihoods interventions except that of livelihoods transfer for the noncredit worthy household cover the whole PSNP clients

4

3.2 Principle of the linkage:

Public works and livelihoods linkage should follow certain principles that help the agreed processes and coordination procedures. One possible principle that every stakeholder should agree and accountable for is: to move away from the business as usual approach and start thinking of doing things differently. To make this work, it is found necessary to introduce conditionality principle where PSNP public works support PSNP clients’/household’s asset creation and graduation as one of the primary functions against which public works performances should be measured. These have to be captured during the annual planning and targeting of both interventions. It is noted that these principles will also serve as responses to the prevailing critiques that says despite the fact that large amount of investment on public works, there is no significant or notable improvement in food security, graduation and resilience building. Even some of the independent researchers argue that engagement of public works clients in community assets creation competes with agricultural season which undermines the normal livelihoods activities.

A shift9 in PSNP Public works implementation approach should emanate from a better and broader understanding of the PSNP PWs conditionality. Putting conditionality to the PSNP PWs aims at avoiding dependency and taking advantage of their labour contribution for productive purposes at household level. Conditionality is possible at household level by identifying appropriate interventions whereby PSNP PWs still contribute their labour to invest in productive work that contribute to PSNP clients ‘asset contribution and in aggregate the household-based assets could be valued as group and community assets and contribute to the four pillars of development objectives: as social protection, disaster risk management, climate resilience green economy and nutrition.

Some of the examples of PSNP PWs interventions that meet community-based and household-based asset creation as well as the broader development functions are: water harvesting (for irrigation, human consumption and livestock), high value tree-based livelihoods (fruit production as part of plantation program), supporting home gardening through seedling supply (tree, fruit and forage seedlings raising in seed multiplication centres), total complete sanitation to be considered in the PSNP PWs conditionality). Total complete hygiene and sanitary interventions to be considered as conditionality in the PSNP PWs may include soil fertility management and investment on opportunity creation/ livelihoods diversification.

In summary, the combined effects of implementation of PSNP transfers as designed, PSNP PWs (appropriate conditionality and intervention options) and livelihoods support are determinant factors for food security and graduation. The conditionality principle allows to explore, design and implement tailored and appropriate types of public work interventions in such a way that

9 Please note that this is not a complete shift or abundance rather expand space for flexibility in terms of public works implementation and use of associated capital budget for asset creation at PSNP client/ household level and there pave the pathway to graduation and resilience building.

5

they enhance PSNP client’s or household level asset creation and livelihoods capacity as well as enhance resilience to climate change.

The context matters in identifying incremental activities and implementation processes that encompassshared responsibilities / interdependence, optimal use of resources and transformational approach:

Figure 1: Linkage and Incremental growth

3.3 Mode of linkage:

One possible way of tackling chronic food insecurity in rural areas is to invest part of the PSNP 4 resources (labour, skill and capital) on private farmland of households like constructing water harvesting, storage structures (e.g. ponds and where necessary use of geo membrane), planting high value fruit tree and forage seedlings as well as road operation and maintenance. Similarly it is also possible to work around identifying10 and in-depth analysis of subprojects in terms of benefits / merits they will bring most importantly for the landless PSNP clients; for instance11, use of grasses from area closures through cut and carry system, develop small-scale irrigation, introduce and distribute high value fruit tree seedlings, fodder species for small ruminant fattening to PSNP clients, semi-skilled laborer and causal employment opportunities (e.g., guarding, cleaning, gardening, etc.) on some of the social services created through the subprojects such as health posts, farmers training centers, childcare centers and etc. These show that there are enormous possibilities and opportunities that help PSNP clients benefit directly from public work subprojects though these are not consciously practiced/ exploited by implementers. In addition, public works12 including construction of water harvesting and storage

10 Potential for livelihoods improvement should be one of the defining selection criteria for sub projects to be carried out in new and existing watershed 11The intervention options mentioned here are not exhaustive-thus, regions, woredas and communities may identify context-based appropriate intervention options.12 One of the provisions in the PSNP PIM includes to conduct public works on the private land like that of critical watershed

6

InterdependenceEnsure collectively shared responsibilities and accountabilities among different actors for joint efforts and synergetic results

Investment to returnUse resources optimally: -Avoid duplication / wastage of resource: -Focus on program objective,value for money

TransformationalPWs and livelihoods support interventions are critical to enahnce gradaution and enventually realizg climate resielint food security

structure on private land of labor poor the female headed households can also be considered as an entry point for the linkage.

The below diagram is created to show the logical and sequential processes that lead rural poor households in general and PSNP clients in particular towards livelihoods improvement. Thus while designing a plan for community asset creation, the planner should bear in mind and effectively communicate end results or improvement in terms of households’ livelihood.

Figure 2: Integration of conservation and livelihoods

The linkages and complementarities of PSNP PWs and livelihoods support should also be expressed in planning, implementation, monitoring and reporting. To this end, there should be effective coordination: management and programmatic functions, aiming for better results-called synergetic effect. The diagram below supports such functions.

7

Figure 3: Framework of PSNP PWs and Livelihoods linkages and coordination for better results

One aspect of this guidance note is to help frontline implementers focus on the overarching objectives, stimulate strategic thinking and promote innovations which will enhance efficiency and effectiveness of the program.

To this effect, the below table is constructed in such a way that it will help reflect each and every public works intervention are directly and indirectly linked to the program results (activities, outputs and outcomes even goals) and also clarify how to materialize the linkage and which will be explained in generating desired household level benefits (outcomes).

8

Public works activities

Linkage w/ livelihoods pathways

Output How PSNP clients could benefits (outcome)

Contribution to PSNP 4 - Goal

Land rehabilitation through area enclosure

Crop and livestock

Apiaries (Bee-keeping)

Agroforestry

Ecofriendly pulses and spices production

Improved land and soil fertility and restoration

Honey production

Fruit production

Pulses and spices production

Landless youth, women and PSNP HHs earn income from cut and carry system as well as planting high value fruit trees in the rehabilitated areas, and production and sell of honey, fruits, spices and pulses

Enhance graduation, nutrition

resilience building and supports climate resilient green economy

Introduction of forage/fodder species

Fodder bank establishment

livestock feed Increased fodder availability and improved livestock productivity

Fodder crops are introduced to PSNP HHs lands

Fodder security, livestock production and productivity, nutrition

Gully control /land reclamation

Bench terracing

Crop and livestock Increased land availability for land poor and land less households

Land augmented through reclamation or bench terracing shall be distributed to land less PSNP HHs

resilience building and climate change adaptation

Spring development

Human, Crop and livestock

Improve access to drinking and irrigation water

PSNP HHs will irrigate their farmland

Water security for human consumption, nutrition

Construction of water harvesting13 and storage structures (e.g. pond, hand dug well, roof water harvesting)

Human, Crop and livestock

Improve crop and livestock productivity

PSNP HHs will produce vegetables at their home garden

PSNP HHs will access to livestock watering points

same as above

Small-scale irrigation canal construction or rehabilitation

Crop and livestock Improved crop productivity

PSNP HHs will irrigate their farmland, produce cash crops such as vegetables and fruits

graduation from PSNP, food security, resilience building and nutrition

Road, human and animal health post construction

Off- farm Improve access to market, human and animal health

PSNP clients save money which was supposed to be

enhances resilience building

13 In the course of constructing water harvesting structures Woreda food security task forces may consider use of capital budget to procure minor capital goods such as geo-membrane and pedal pump for household level ponds as part of improving water use efficiency.

9

Public works activities

Linkage w/ livelihoods pathways

Output How PSNP clients could benefits (outcome)

Contribution to PSNP 4 - Goal

services and reduce travel cost

spent for transportation

Skill training through public works (e.g. carpenters, masons…)

Employment Improve income and livelihoods

Landless youth PSNP clients will access both unskilled and semi-skilled jobs and earn better income

Improves livelihoods capacity: employability

Nursery site establishment and management, focusing on fruit seedlings, valuable high value vegetable seedlings

Employment Crop and livestock

Improve income and livelihoods

Increase availability of fruit tree seedlings

Land less youth PSNP clients will get job opportunity e.g., guarding and managing the nursery site

Land less youth, women and PSNP HHs will have income and nutritious food from fruits gardens

Creates job/employment opportunity

Introduce hygiene and sanitary practices and services

Off - farm Produce and sale hygiene and sanitary facilities

Improve hygiene and sanitation at all levels Improve human and social capital

contribute to improved nutrition and sanitation

4 Linkage activities at different stages of the project cycle

4.1 Annual Plan Objective Setting and Targeting Stage:

Vulnerability to shocks, food insecurity and poverty are basic considerations for identification and prioritization of interventions and planning. Improving food security status of the PSNP households and achieving graduation is the main objectives of the PSNP PWs and livelihoods support. In line with this, there should be a realistic and achievable target prior to setting annual plan interventions. The activities should therefore be identified and prioritized in terms of their contribution to the broader objective and annual graduation targets and beyond.

4.2 Planning Stage:Planning is one of the integral stages of PSNP 4 where targeted households/members are expected to be actively involved in identifying sub projects and also be aware of what that mean in terms of linkages and livelihoods improvement. Development agents should help communities at large and PSNP households in particular, understand how much labour (person days), skill and capital is required and also what real benefits each subproject will have to contribute towards their livelihoods improvement and income generation/household investment. It is, therefore,

10

essential for the poor households to fully engage in the selection and decision making of subprojects.

Following are some steps for a joint plan and linkage exercise:

Step 1: At the subproject identification and prioritization14 stage, the DAs with the watershed technical committee shall conceptualize and understand the potential immediate and future benefits of the linkages in terms of livelihood improvements.

Step 2: Development agents in consultation with the community will identify potential areas such as rehabilitated watersheds, gully sites with different water harvesting structures (downstream of check-dam ponds, SS dams), closed areas with potential for bee-keeping or for livestock feed with cut-and-carry, and prepare plan for possible future development;

Step 3: Development agents will then prepare one comprehensive plan addressing both for public works and livelihoods implementation,

Step 4: If the identified subprojects is on communal land and there might not be a need for having household level plan options unless the protected communal land is divided among members (e.g., jobless) rather it gives sense to consider group based business plan that will indicate overall benefits to the group members as well as expected per capita/income,

Step 5: Woreda and zonal subject matter specialists provide technical support to development agents during the planning process

Step 6: Finalize plan and submit to woreda level technical sectors (NRM and Extension desks) for further review

4.3 Implementation stage:

It is known that public work activities are implemented by PSNP beneficiaries with the technical support from development agents. PSNP households are contributing labour to translate the plan into action but are not empowered or have little control over the asset created which ultimately undermines sense of ownership and sustainability of the subprojects. Thus, at implementation phase, it is important to emphasis that there will be benefit sharing mechanism from the overall common goods, although this should be specified in the planning document. Some of the steps to be followed include:

Step 1: Organize user groups for sustainable use of the subprojects created

Step 2: Ensure both PW subprojects and livelihoods business plans are implemented as planned Step 3: PSNP households are fully responsible for the implementation per the plan

14 Make sure that women are involved in the process of identification and prioritization of the public work sub projects

11

Step 4: Ensure the involvement of women in the implementation process and develop sense of ownership

Step 5: Regularly track and confirm the intended households are accessing the benefit

4.4 Monitoring stage:

One way of ensuring sustainability of community assets is to put in place participatory community monitoring and review mechanisms. This should include PSNP households along with communities so that they will be able to check whether the subprojects are completed on time, implemented as per the specified quality and are in a position to offer expected benefit. In the event that deviations are observed, PSNP and non PSNP members of the community develop joint action plan and take corrective actions. In addition, the joint public works and livelihoods planning and implementation review will also help to document and share lessons with the wider stakeholders of the program.

Some of the steps to be followed include:

Step 1: Revise and simplify the existing monitoring data (size of area closure, number of groups organized, group members disaggregated by sex, type of inputs from the PWs supporting the business plan, benefits generated, etc.) gathering tool that would help capture relevant and pertinent information

Step 2: Keep records or documentation of work done

Step 3: Development agents conduct regular monitoring of the implementation of both PW and livelihoods jointly with the community

Step 4: Reflect back, identify constrains and take the necessary action on spot by kebele food security task forces,

Step 5: Provide report/ update to woreda on a regular basis,

Step 6: Woredas provided feedback to Kebeles and provide technical support

Step 7: Woredas report to regions how the linkage agenda is promoted

Step 8. Regions provide timely technical support including the necessary trainings to zonal and Woreda staff in promoting the linkage agendas

4.5 Reporting stage:

Once activities are planned, implemented and monitored one should know progress towards the milestones and targets set during the planning period. One of these mechanisms is to employ reporting and show the business case – what success, what failure / challenges and what can be learnt for future improvement. Reporting should be mainstreamed with the existing PW and LH template. For this to happen there should be continue and regular flow of information from kebele to woreda; from woreda to zone and from zone to region and from region to federal on timely fashion. There should also be a feedback system where the upper structure provides to the respective lower

12

implementation units. Thus for this particular guidance it is better to strengthen monthly/ quarterly and annual flow of information in such a way that it helps informed decision making

5 Roles and Responsibilities of implementing institutions at different levels

5.1 Community Food Security Taskforces:

In consultation with the development agents and health extension workers, community food security task force should play a pivotal role in ensuring adequate community/ poor households’ participation in selecting appropriate sub projects. Depending on the type of the sub projects, the CFSTF should determine and govern the whole site selection process and as much as possible make sure that the subprojects will most importantly benefit PSNP households. The CFSTF will then submit the agreed plan to kebele food security task forces (KFSTFs).

5.2 Kebele Food Security Task Forces (KFSTFs);

Discuss with the community food security task force and critically review whether the subprojects is/are:

Chosen by the community including the PSNP clients Technically, environmentally and financially feasible, Verified and validated to meet community interest and help improve livelihoods The KFSTF compiles, and consolidates and submit the kebele plan to the woreda food

security task forces.

5.3 Woreda Food Security Task Forces (WFSTFs);

Review and consolidate kebele plans and ensure that all subprojects are linked with the livelihoods in line with the program.

Provide technical support to the kebele task forces and development agents and confirm proper linkage is identified and established

Promote and facilitate the linkage agenda at all forums/ technical committee meetings

5.4 Region public works and livelihoods coordination units;

Undertake quarterly joint monitoring visits to woredas and provide technical support Track whether linkages are established and included in the report in/planning templates

as appropriate, disaggregated by sex and group/ membership Ensure the linkage agenda is promoted and implemented at all forums/ technical

committee meetings

5.5 Federal public works and livelihoods coordination units:

Undertake semiannually joint monitoring visits to sample woredas and Kebeles, and visit clients/groups action plans and provide technical support

Ensure established linkages and the inclusion in their reporting/planning templates. Undertake joint planning and implementation review on annual basis Provide strategic guide or direction on the linkage agenda

13

6 Possible monitoring indicators for effective linkage

Number of kebeles / woredas implementing and reporting as per established guidance note

Number of groups/members benefiting from established area enclosures

Number of groups/members benefiting from constructed water harvesting schemes

7 Best practices / case study

The experience of Gerado (04) kebele of Habru woreda in North Wolo zone of Amhara region can be cited as one of the best practices in terms of very good linkages between Public works and livelihoods. Ponds are constructed at household levels by PW clients organized in groups; geomembrane for ponds and pedal pumps are provided to the households through credits as these activities were part of the business plans prepared by the clients. Perennial crops such as papaya, avocado, mango and other fruit trees were planted and irrigated; annual crops such as tomatoes, green pepper, cabbages and others were intercropped. Farmers have already started selling products and gradually paying their debt. It is also noted that their diet/nutrition has improved in addition to the economic benefit the households got.

14

Figure: Pond for irrigating high value crops