More Than Markets - Mercy Corps · and were less likely to rely on negative coping strategies. ... farmers in the program areas ... More Than Markets

More Than MarketsB u i l d i n g R e s i l i e n c e i n N o r t h e r n U g a n d a

FOR FIFTY YEARS, NORTHERN UGANDA HAS BEEN A PLACE OF PERENNIAL CRISIS. Decades of insecurity, a shortage of investment, bad infrastructure and, particularly in arid Karamoja, extreme climate variability have conspired to depress development. The next crisis always lurks around the corner. While today security is much improved, opening a window of opportunity, building resilience continues to elude development practitioners and their partners. As Mercy Corps has found, through its market systems development work in the Acholi and Karamoja sub-regions, even where single-sector programs succeed in raising incomes, they may not make communities less vulnerable to the cycles of crisis that exacerbate chronic underdevelopment. Building resilience requires we adopt a longer-term, multi-actor systems approach. Failing that, our efforts are unlikely to be sustainable – and, in some cases, may introduce new, unintended vulnerabilities.

More Than Markets | Page 3

Today, northern Uganda is no longer a place of

perpetual emergency. The LRA largely withdrew from

Acholiland by 2006. The IDP camps closed and,

throughout the north, Ugandans returned to looted

villages and farms to start again. Similarly, in Karamoja,

years of insecurity have largely abated. While

government disarmament campaigns were the subject

of much criticism, they, along with regional livestock

branding campaigns, helped sharply reduce cattle

raids and cross-border smuggling.

Nevertheless, achieving development progress has

proved complicated. Northern Uganda, it seems, is

rich only in challenges. Poverty and food insecurity

are chronic and widespread. The agricultural sector is

badly underdeveloped. In Acholiland, for instance, a

generation raised in IDP camps lacks basic knowledge

about how to cultivate crops, much less the tools to do

so. Meanwhile, climate fluctuations and unpredictable

weather plague farmer and pastoralist alike. The lack

of veterinary care undermines the herds. Pests eat up

the crops; otherwise, poor storage, after harvest, may

spoil the farmer’s labor. A dearth of financial services

and lack of capital – or crippling terms – are among

the biggest challenges to growth. Distant villages are

Decades of aid have spawned a dependency, among many

communities, that continues to be a serious obstacle to progress.

“

”

NATURE OF THE CRISISFor too long, northern Uganda was the poster child

for political and economic collapse. The Acholi sub-

region, which occupies the northern-center of the

country, was at the hub of a decades-long civil war.

The brutal forays of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA),

inter-tribal conflicts and crackdowns by government

forces resulted in a severe and prolonged humanitarian

crisis: more than 100,000 people killed, more than

20,000 children abducted, more than 1.5 million people

displaced. Internally displaced persons (IDPs) were,

under the watch of Uganda military forces, uprooted

and relocated to vast camps, disrupting livelihoods and

education, and killing thousands: Epidemics of malaria

and AIDS made the camps themselves some of the

deadliest places in the world.1

Meanwhile, to the east, the neighboring Karamoja

sub-region’s 1.2 million people consistently register

the lowest, among Ugandans, on human development

indicators. Since the 1960s, Karamoja has been a net

food purchaser and a recipient of food aid.2 Moreover, the

sub-region’s climate woes are Biblical: A severe drought

struck in 2006 and was followed by another dry season

and flooding in 2007, with 2008 bringing little rain. The

combination of shock after degrading shock left nearly a

million people in need of emergency relief in 2009. The

ability of Karamoja’s people to withstand these shocks

has been undermined by years of chronic insecurity, inter-

tribal struggles, the impoverishing rise of professional

cattle raiding and military disarmament campaigns.

1 IRIN, “UGANDA: 1,000 displaced die every week in war-torn north – report,” August 29, 2005. Available online: http://www.irinnews.org/report/56063/uganda-1-000-displaced-die-every-week-in-war-torn-north-report2 Ben Jones, “Why Have Aid Agencies Been in Karamoja for so Long?” The Guardian, January 31, 2011.


isolated from larger markets by poor roads.

Transportation is expensive and slow, particularly

during the rainy season, inflating the cost of food.31

3 Isolation from markets has vital implications for resilience. Mercy Corps and TANGO International, in a study of household resilience in southern Somalia, found that access to markets was a key contributor to resilience: In the midst of a shock, households with access to markets had more opportunities to buy food and were less likely to rely on negative coping strategies. See Mercy Corps and TANGO, “What Really Matters for Resilience?” October 2013.

As if all that weren’t enough, decades of aid have

spawned a dependency, among many communities, that

continues to be a serious obstacle to progress. One-off

handouts helped few graduate from direct assistance,

but cycles of relief have choked off commercial

investments that would sustainably address need.42

4 The U.N. World Food Programme (WFP) has supplied food aid to Karamoja for more than 40 years, but it is significantly scaling back, weaning the region of food subsidies. From 2009 to 2012, WFP beneficiaries in Karamoja dropped from one million to under 150,000. See IRIN, “Uganda: Weaning Karamoja off food aid,” August 9, 2012; see also Kim Beevers, “Economic Market Systems Overview, Karamoja,” BRACED Assessment, July 2014.

SOUTH SUDAN

KENYA

TANZANIA

DRC

- Funded by U.S. Department of Agriculture - Strategic objectives: • Enhance smallholder farmer production and profitability • Improve agri-business performance in input and output markets • Expand access to financial services in rural areas

Revitalizing Agricultural Incomes and New Markets (RAIN) program (2011-2015)

UGANDA

Mercy Corps Office

Growth, Health and Governance (GHG) program (2012-2017)

Kampala

Kotido

Abim

Kitgum

Kaabong

Sub-region

- Funded by USAID- Strategic objectives: • Strengthen livelihoods and improve market access • Improve nutrition for children (under age 2) and mothers • Enhance good governance and community engagement

Karamoja

Acholiland

Lamwo

Mercy Corps in


Mercy Corps’ market facilitation programs in northern

Uganda are committed to expanding economic

opportunity for the poor. In Acholiland, the Revitalizing

Agricultural Incomes and New Markets (RAIN) program,

funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, seeks to

improve food security and economic growth in target

areas through a focus on the agricultural sector. In

Karamoja, the Growth, Health and Governance (GHG)

program, a five-year Development Food Assistance

Program funded by the United States Agency for

International Development (USAID) Food for Peace

program, focuses on expanding economic opportunity,

promoting maternal and child health, boosting nutrition

and improving governance.

Both RAIN and GHG utilize a ‘light touch’ market

facilitation approach. Rather than provide direct

services, facilitation can create market-oriented

opportunities for the poor that are more sustainable

and more cost effective than traditional direct-delivery

approaches. Rather than focus on easily enumerated

indicators, designed during the proposal stage, our

programs work to expand existing capacities, reframe

opportunities and shape incentives. This shifts the

focus from outputs to process: In facilitation, the

how is often as important as the what. The goal is to

identify leverage points, within communities, where

we can have a positive impact without creating a new

system dependent on our programming.

To that end, we work primarily through partners.

Mercy Corps has cultivated private and public sector

actors, creating a web of commercial relationships.

Members of these networks range from large,

established companies and financial institutions –

who have not, historically, worked with smallholder

farmers in the program areas – to smaller Savings

and Credit Cooperatives. Meanwhile, working through

local agent networks of mobile traders, small retailers,

animal health workers and other service providers

has been key to facilitating the adoption of new, more

efficient farming practices, such as improved seeds

and pesticides.

Mercy Corps’ program staff – having developed

an understanding of local markets and actors

– are well-positioned to pitch external private

sector actors on the opportunities in the north. For

example, Mercy Corps provided data to national

veterinary drug supply companies on the untapped

market demand in the north and connected these

companies to local sales agents. We also increased

the supply of local tillage services by bringing in

a tractor supply company, worked with a bank to

provide connected loans to local businesses for

THE MERCY CORPS RESPONSE:THE PROCESS IS THE PROGRAM

Both RAIN and GHG utilize a ‘light touch’ market facilitation approach. Rather than provide direct services,

facilitation can create market-oriented opportunities for the poor that are more sustainable and more

cost effective than traditional direct-delivery approaches.

“

”


the equipment and supported the development of

tractor maintenance services.

These interventions are improving productivity. Prior

to RAIN, agricultural input sales in program areas

were negligible. In 2013, in Lamwo – RAIN’s first

program area – 5,000 farmers purchased inputs

through networks facilitated by Mercy Corps. The

pace of adoption is accelerating: For a six-month

period in 2014, from April to September, the number

of farmers purchasing inputs more than doubled to

11,022. Allowing for some double counting, these

numbers represent between 10 and 15 percent of

all households in Lamwo. While a similar reach might

have been achieved through direct service delivery,

it would not have created a sustainable connection

between the farmers and local merchants, or fostered

income for local trading and retail households.

Meanwhile, Mercy Corps is leveraging financial

partnerships to extend credit to underserved farmers

and pastoralists and the local businesses that serve

them. For example, rather than use program funds

to give grants directly to beneficiaries, Mercy Corps

has provided loan guarantees to banks – covering 50

percent of the individual farmer’s loan – to improve

access to credit for “high risk” individuals with little or

no collateral. To date, loan guarantees to Post Bank,

a large regional financial institution, have triggered

US$83,000 in loans to farmers. The practice of

working through financial partners may also improve

repayment. Historically, when debtors knew their

loan was financed by international donors, some

would strategically default, confident there would be

no consequences. Under the current program, the

repayment rate is 83 percent.

A market systems approach has enabled Mercy Corps

to facilitate local and regional actors in sustainably

advancing development. Throughout the north, our

efforts are improving livestock health, expanding

agricultural markets and increasing savings rates.

Improving Livestock Health In Karamoja pastoralist communities, herds of goats

and cows remain the essential bulwark against food

insecurity. Herds, though diminished by drought

and commercial raiding, are also a vital source of

economic potential.52By one assessment, the value

of the pastoral livestock trade for the Horn of Africa

approached US$1 billion in 2010.6

Yet, according to a report from the Feinstein

International Center, animal disease in Karamoja

now has a greater adverse impact on livestock herds

than cattle raiding, historically the bigger concern.

Improving animal health for the region’s pastoralists

– through the increased availability of drugs and

veterinary care – is a priority for Mercy Corps.

Unfortunately, the animal health and livestock sector in

Karamoja is characterized by systemic inefficiencies.

The veterinary drug system is underdeveloped. Supply

is sporadic and transaction costs are high: Local drug

shops would make small orders at retail prices and

travel many hours to pick them up. This raises costs

for consumers, depressing demand. In Karamoja,

pharmaceuticals have, historically, cost 60 percent

more than in the neighboring Teso sub-region.

But on the basis of Mercy Corps pitches to drug

suppliers, Norbrook, a global veterinary company,

entered the Karamoja market, offering free drug

delivery and credit to local drug distributors. As

of December, Norbrook had shipped 6.5 million

Ugandan shillings of drugs (approximately US$2,275)

to Karamoja. Offering wholesale drug prices to

5 This is not to diminish the decline of Karamoja’s livestock. In recent years, numbers have plummeted. According to a 2014 livestock census by the Food and Agriculture Organization, total livestock in the sub-region fell from 6 million head in 2008 to 1.8 million head in 2014, a 70 percent drop. See FAO/GIEWS Livestock and Market Assessment Mission to Karamoja Region, Uganda, Spe-cial Report, April 2014.

6 John Burns, Gezu Bekele, Darlington Akabwai, “Livelihood Dynamics in North-ern Karamoja,” Feinstein International Center, September 2013.


veterinary supply shops has reduced prices for the

end user. For example, the main drug shop in Kotido

cut prices 20 to 30 percent.73

Creating Markets for AgricultureHistorically, northern Uganda was too chaotic for

most private sector actors to risk entry. In many

communities, there was no centralized market where

an outside buyer could inspect and purchase local

crops. Going farm-to-farm was too time-consuming.

But by helping aggregate local production for

external buyers, Mercy Corps’ agent networks are

opening new markets for smallholder farmers.

Early on, Mercy Corps partnered with local

communities to build agricultural storage facilities.

Participating farmers could safely store their produce,

which would protect it from incidental damage,

while also serving as a bulking center for external

7 The Jie Community Animal Health Workers Association.

purchasers. These storage facilities, combined

with Mercy Corps’ networks of local partners, have

provided entry points: Agents could organize local

harvests; agricultural produce could be cleaned,

bagged and stored in a single place; and external

buyers could efficiently access markets that had

been, previously, scattered among dozens or

hundreds of smallholder farms. This drove down the

cost of doing business. By aggregating supply, Mercy

Corps could more easily pitch large agricultural

companies on the commercial appeal of the north.

Today, investment is following opportunity. A high

global price for sesame, paired with Mercy Corps’

facilitation work, encouraged the Gulu Agricultural

Development Company (GADCO), a large Ugandan

agrobusiness, to court smallholder farmers as

suppliers. Eager to ensure a consistent, high-

quality supply of sesame, GADCO offered pricing

guarantees to participating farmers. These contract

farming arrangements encourage investments by

both sides. Farmers, confident of a return, have

expanded planting and are investing more resources

in production. Meanwhile, GADCO provides


communities with supervision, training and new

equipment, like tarpaulins, to ensure quality post-

harvest handling – all at no additional cost to RAIN.

Spurred by growing global demand for sesame,

GADCO’s investment helped catalyze a local sesame

boom. From 2012 to 2014, the price of sesame

more than doubled.84There are over 17,000 farmers

registered with GADCO, representing a third of all

farmers in Lamwo. In the 2014-2015 season, GADCO

purchased 3,168 tons of sesame, valued at about

US$3.1 million. For a single growing season, it was a

dramatic injection of capital, and equivalent to almost

half of RAIN’s four-year budget.

Northern Uganda, once a quiet backwater, is

participating in international commerce: Seeds grown

on smallholder farms in rural Uganda can be found on

buns in Germany and the Netherlands.

Increasing SavingsIn northern Uganda, harvest sales are typically cash

transactions concluded toward the end of the year,

from November into January. Shortly after the harvest,

it is a time of Yuletide celebrations and matrimonial

revelries: Weddings are traditionally conducted

in January. In other words, the party starts. “I see

people drinking their profits away,” said one Acholi

farmer. “They even pour alcohol on the plants to

8 From about 2,000 UGX per kilogram to 4,320 UGX.

thank them. It’s crazy behavior.” Unfortunately, the

financial hangover is painful. Shortly after the new year,

farmers face some of the largest annual expenditures:

February school fees come due, combined with the

costs of planting for the new season. In the beginning

of the year, households have the least cash on-hand

precisely when they have the greatest need.

Money in the pocket is easily spent. One solution is

to avoid putting it in a pocket in the first place. Mercy

Corps is cooperating with private sector partners

to facilitate mobile banking and direct deposit

among smallholder farmers. It is still a pilot program,

initiated in partnership with GADCO and Post Bank.

GADCO, rather than pay participating farmers in

cash, will directly deposit sales to the farmers’ savings

account. The program is good for Post Bank, which is

expanding its customer base. And the money saved is

more likely to be productively reinvested back into the

next season’s crop, which is good for GADCO.95It is

also, we hope, good for the farmers, providing them

with greater resources for investment and a cushion

for hard times. At this stage, 250 farmers are targeted

by the program, with the goal to eventually reach 5,000.

9 In the behavioral economics literature, the notion of the “choice architecture” suggests that the manner in which choices are presented can have a positive or negative impact on outcomes. Nudging farmers toward better savings and investment can encourage productive investment. See Richard Thaler, Cass Sunstein and John Balz, “Choice Architecture,” January 2012.

In the beginning of the year, households have the least cash on-hand precisely when they have the greatest need. Money in the pocket is easily spent. One solution is to avoid putting it in a pocket in the

first place.

“

”

Northern Uganda, once a quiet backwater, is participating in

international commerce: Seeds grown on smallholder farms in rural Uganda can be found on buns in Germany and

the Netherlands.

“

”


THE BOONS OF MARKETSYSTEMS DEVELOPMENTA facilitation approach takes time and flexibility. RAIN

started in 2011, and it took several years to pilot

and refine its programs. Working with donors and

recruiting a process-oriented staff allowed us to build

the necessary partnerships, assist public and private

actors in overcoming market constraints and perceived

risks and, ultimately, help farmers and communities

capitalize on their potential. Now, the program’s efforts

are paying off. Across its program areas, RAIN has

been associated with a striking increase in income and

productivity. For approximately 36,000 households

in the north, annual incomes increased, on average,

by 82.5 percent, from approximately US$400 to

US$730, or from a tad over a dollar a day to two

dollars a day. By capitalizing on – and extending – the

sesame boom and other agriculture opportunities, by

expanding links to markets and by improving input

supplies, market development has catalyzed new

wealth in northern Uganda.

A distinct, but related, measure of development is the

cultivation of new farmland. Families who once planted

two acres are now planting twice or three times that.

According to RAIN survey data from 2014, Acholi

farmers reported opening 4.5 acres of new land.

Average farm size is now roughly 6.5 acres, and crop

yields have, on average, improved 63 percent.106

Some positive impacts, however, are harder to

measure. In the north, we are seeing the market take

on a life of its own. Our programs in Uganda are

having impacts beyond our immediate partnerships.

10 Some crops have seen much bigger increases. Bean crops, for instance, which have benefited from extensive investments in improved seeds, have increased from 211 kilograms per acre to 648. See RAIN Mid-term eval.

This is the result of a “crowding in” effect. Once

GADCO started aggressively purchasing sesame,

its competitors entered the market: Yield Uganda,

Export Trading Group and Olam Group started

purchasing sesame. Meanwhile, another agricultural

company, SAGE Uganda Company, eyeing untapped

agricultural opportunities, entered the market to

buy chia, a new cash crop for the north. Similarly,

in Karamoja, after Norbrook entered the market

to provide veterinary drugs, competitors Quality

Chemicals Uganda and Eram Uganda followed

suit, supplying pharmaceuticals through regional

distributors. Vigorous competition is good for the

market. It will continue to drive down prices and

improve services for the local communities.

Across its program areas, RAIN has been associated with a striking

increase in income and productivity. For approximately 36,000 households

in the north, annual incomes increased, on average, by 82.5

percent, from approximately US$400 to US$730, or from a tad over a dollar

a day to two dollars a day.

“

”


THE SHORTCOMINGS OF A MARKET-ORIENTED APPROACHIn northern Uganda, market facilitation has grown

incomes and opportunity, prompted innovation and

catalyzed measurable growth in the agricultural

sector. It has not, however, improved food security.

High levels of malnutrition are still evident. According

to focus group discussions, this is in part due to

parents working for long periods in potentially distant

sesame fields, leaving young children on their own.

The high profitability of sesame has perhaps distorted

priorities, encouraging farmers to grow the cash crop

and, in some cases, reduced cultivation of vegetables

and other crops that can be consumed at home. And

while incomes have risen, much of the money earned

is neither being saved nor spent on nutrition: Lavish

expenditures – some non-productive, others on

investments in tools and equipment – have been the

bane of improving food security.

In addition, market development approaches

may animate new vulnerabilities. Current farming

practices, for instance, are environmentally

unsustainable, exhausting the soil and leading

farmers to annually migrate their fields. Rising

incomes, it appears, are also spawning new conflicts.

Theft is on the rise, and domestic disputes over

money are increasingly common. Conflict, however,

is not confined to the home. Poor land management,

paired with the itinerant nature of planting, threatens

to aggravate territorial feelings among neighbors.

Since most land is communal, the acceleration of

non-sustainable cultivation may lead to a rise in

tensions over land use, triggering local disputes, the

foundations of which may have been laid after years

of conflict-driven displacement.117

Still, the worry that nags most is that the good times

will end. The income boom in Acholiland is largely

fueled by spiking sesame prices, and the turbine

that has dragged incomes up could very well drag

them down again. In 2014, sesame accounted for

83 percent of total agricultural sales, dwarfing all

other crops. In the event of a crash in global sesame

prices, this could be disastrous. Farmers may find

they lack enough income-earning crops and, worse,

in their shift toward sesame, they have failed to grow

enough food to get through a lean time.

11 Throughout northern Uganda, land conflicts historically fell under the purview of the customary authorities: councils of elders, such as Karamoja’s akiriket, who are now much diminished by decades of conflict and the growth of the formal state.

Farmers may find they lack enough income-earning crops and, worse, in their shift toward sesame, they have

failed to grow enough food to get through a lean time.

“

”


Market-oriented development remains a powerful

tool for reducing vulnerability. As we have seen in

Uganda, it can improve efficiency, promote sustainable

growth, broaden access to finance and increase the

transparency of regional markets and prices. In short,

using facilitative approaches, development actors

can leverage good outcomes and, just as importantly,

empower communities.

Certainly, facilitating increased access to information

can mitigate risk. In Karamoja, GHG’s commercial

platform linked kraal leaders with commercial traders

who can provide daily updates on pricing information.

This, combined with a drought early warning system,

developed by the Agency for Technical Cooperation

and Development in partnership with the government

of Uganda, can help pastoralists anticipate shocks and

sell when prices are still high and livestock are healthy.

This will, we hope, enable livestock herders to better

withstand market shocks resulting from drought.

Nevertheless, market system development and

resilience are not synonymous.128Enhanced efficiency

and increased incomes, the intended outcomes of

market development, do not, in and of themselves,

reduce risk. They may exacerbate it. Market system

development will likely expose households and

communities to new cycles of boom and bust, price

and income fluctuations, environmental degradation,

and social and cultural change.

Building resilience requires that we design

interventions across multiple systems: the economic,

12 USAID, Market Systems for Resilience, LEO Report #6, Washington, DC: USAID, January 2015.

certainly, but also social and ecological systems.

This explains, at least in part, why successful market

development programs may achieve gains but fail

to build resilience. In the case of northern Uganda,

market-oriented programs facilitating the sesame

boom improved incomes, but have run afoul of social

constraints, such as rising land tensions rooted in

communal traditions, or ecological consequences,

resulting from unsustainable cultivation.

All development risks trading one vulnerability for

another. Flexibility, however, and a commitment

to learning can help mitigate the worst outcomes.

Working through our agent network, Mercy Corps’

programs are now educating farmers about the value

of savings, the long-term importance of sustainability

and the necessity of diversifying incomes through

new cash crops, such as chilies and sunflower seeds.

Rooted in ongoing learning about the places where we

work, and enabled by a flexible program design, these

are important adjustments.

Market system development and resilience are not synonymous.

Enhanced efficiency and increased incomes, the intended outcomes of market development, do not, in and

of themselves, reduce risk. They may exacerbate it.

“

”

BRIDGING MARKET SYSTEMSAND RESILIENCE


Yet they are not enough.

In northern Uganda, building resilience is stymied by

problems beyond the scope of any program or NGO.

Generally speaking, these are problems of governance:

ill-informed or incoherent development plans, poor

infrastructure investments and sluggish regulation.

After all, expanding supply chains and building market

linkages will mean little if, during the annual rainy

season, the roads are flooded and goods can’t get

to market. Or if poor regulation routinely undermines

investment: when government-certified produce scales

in the village are tampered with, for example, or when

legitimate drug suppliers are squeezed by a black

market in smuggled and expired drugs that Uganda’s

National Drug Authority has, to date, been unable to

police. Expanding veterinary drug availability among

pastoralists, meanwhile, will not be sustainable if some

actors provide those drugs for free, or if local politicians,

eager to score points among the electorate, demand

they be provided at no expense.

These are fundamental challenges. Good

governance, broadly defined, enables a society to

appropriately organize and marshal its resources,

which is directly linked to resilience. The ability to

Mercy Corps’ Resilience ApproachFor Mercy Corps, resilience is a process, a way of thinking and acting, not just an end state. We work to build diverse connections and relationships between people, communities and the systems that support them to plan, prepare and manage for change in times of increasingly complex and dynamic crises.

Our approach is a direct response to our definition of resilience: the capacity of communities in complex socio-ecological systems to learn, cope, adapt and transform in the face of shocks and stresses.

We recognize that addressing recurrent crises and building resilience requires an integrated systems approach to humanitarian response and development programming. By understanding the root causes of vulnerability, our work can support a community’s capacity to cope with disturbances, adapt to changing conditions, and enable learning, innovation and transformation.

Mercy Corps’ role is to look across inter-connected social, ecological and economic systems to help determinehow they influence the communities we serve. We work in partnership with multiple actors to identify which vulnerabilities and capacities are the most critical to address. Working through local champions, we strengthen existing opportunities for positive change. Together, we learn how to ensure long-term development gains and build resilience.

For more, see Shannon Alexander, “Our Resilience Approach,” Portland, OR: Mercy Corps.

Available online: http://d2zyf8ayvg1369.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/Mercy%20Corps%20

Resilience%20Approach_April%202015.pdf

Expanding supply chains and building market linkages will mean

little if, during the annual rainy season, the roads are flooded and

goods can’t get to market.

“

”


withstand a crisis is rooted not in the household,

but in the society’s collective assets: These include

everything from infrastructure to relationships and

human capital. When those assets are coordinated

to respond to a shock, they foment the potential for

“collective action,” which has been identified as vital

to pulling a community through a crisis.139In northern

Uganda, we are beginning to see how this might

manifest through an approach that integrates across

programs and systems, and which harmonizes the

efforts of local communities, governments, the private

sector, donors and NGOs.

13 Tim Frankenberger, M. Mueller, T. Spangler, and S. Alexander (2013).Community Resilience: Conceptual Framework and Measurement Feed the Future Learning Agenda. Rockville, MD: Westat, October 2013.

In the end, we need to change what we do, and how

we do it. Resilience demands a diversification of risk.

To that end, we need to throw out narrowly defined,

piecemeal programs in favor of more comprehensive,

integrated partnerships with local communities,

governments, donors, the private sector and other

development actors. We need to continually assess

vulnerability across economic, social and ecological

systems. And, critically, rather than simply define our

goals at the outset, and pursue them without reflection

to program’s end, we must be adaptive, empowered

to pilot new ideas and flexible enough to respond,

quickly, to unforeseen challenges and opportunities.


Getting that balance right, however, requires new

partnerships between NGOs, which work in local

communities, and global multilaterals, like the

World Bank or the International Monetary Fund,

which have long prioritized improving government

capacity. But we must also work to improve

social accountability. We need to approach this

from two directions. Enhancing the ability of civil

society organizations to amplify local voices must

be paired with governmental mechanisms – at

the local, regional and national level – to help

integrate and respond to feedback.

• Prioritize a market systems development

approach. Market systems development,

utilizing a facilitation approach, is vital to good

development outcomes and enhancing resilience

among target communities. Using program

resources to catalyze new relationships, build

skills and extend services to underserved

populations can be sustainable when those

interventions are market-oriented and

implemented through local partners. By contrast,

where benefits are contingent on continued

funding, programs are not building local

resilience. More likely, they’re contributing to long-

standing problems of aid dependence that render

local populations more vulnerable, not less.

• However, building resilience requires moving

beyond market development alone. While

a market development approach is vital to

sustainable development, it does not automatically

build resilience. A market development strategy

• Initiate multi-year programs that work across

economic, ecological and social systems.

Programs need the time and space to adapt in

order to build the capacity and knowledge of local

staff, earn community trust and take advantage of

ongoing learning. To that end, programs should

be, ideally, five or more years in duration. And to

build resilience, programs should be based on

robust, iterative assessments of risk across social,

ecological and economic systems.

• Anchor resilience programming in government-

led development platforms. One of the biggest

challenges facing development actors in northern

Uganda is incorporating a resilience framework

into national and regional government planning.

Specifically, donors must align their regional

strategies with government planning documents

to ensure that resources are properly allocated

and their impact is maximized. While donors and

NGOs may bring valuable functional expertise,

government regulation and infrastructure are vital

to development outcomes.

• As part of a resilience framework, build the

voice and transformative capacity of local

communities. In many communities, in northern

Uganda and elsewhere, the local electorate is

not appropriately engaged: It fails to see the

government as a service provider. Improving the

capacity to deliver public services, while at the

same time improving the systems of accountability

that drive the delivery of these services, is vital to

effective governance and long-term development.

RECOMMENDATIONS


can emphasize new linkages and income

opportunities that potentially increase vulnerability

to some shocks. By contrast, resilience demands

a diversification of risk. Any resilience-building

activity should increase coping and adaptive

measures, which include finding ways to diversify

and protect incomes. Increasing systems analysis

and adapting market systems interventions to

consider risk can lead to gains in both incomes

and resilience.

• Support adaptive management approaches.

Systems are complex and respond to variables

in unpredictable ways, requiring mid-stream

adjustments. To this end, donors must allow

Resilience CapacitiesTo build resilience, development programs must help individuals, households, communities and systems

prepare for and respond to risk. Mercy Corps envisions resilience capacities as strands of rope, each made

stronger when braided together. The capacities required for resilience are:

Absorptive Capacity: The ability to minimize sensitivity to shocks and stresses. Examples include informal

savings and loan groups, hazard insurance and disaster preparedness.

Adaptive Capacity: The ability to proactively modify conditions and practices in anticipation of or as a reaction

to shocks and stresses. Examples include livelihood diversification, access to weather or market information,

access to technical training and new skill development.

programs to be iterative, empowered to

pilot new ideas, and able to adapt, quickly,

to unforeseen challenges (or opportunities).

Monitoring and evaluation should be re-

conceptualized as an internal feedback loop

for management and impact, rather than a rigid

measurement of quantitative outputs. Typically,

donor requirements limit program flexibility: The

desire for clearly defined indicators and outputs,

articulated during design, tends to undermine

innovative, community-led and market-driven

solutions. Where possible, these constraints

must be reformed.

Transformative Capacity: Creates the conditions to facilitate systemic change and a

positive environment in which people are willing and able to invest and innovate, while

managing risks. Transformative capacity addresses the underlying cultural, institutional

and learning dynamics within the system, enabling communities to absorb and adapt

over the long term. Examples are: inclusive control over shared resources; equitable and

transparent budgeting processes; and generation and adoption of knowledge.

ABOUT MERCY CORPSMercy Corps is a leading global humanitarian agency

saving and improving lives in the world’s toughest places.

With a network of experienced professionals in more than

40 countries, we partner with local communities to put bold

ideas into action to help people recover, overcome hardship

and build better lives. Now, and for the future.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank Mercy Corps’ country team

in Uganda – particularly Sean Granville-Ross, Melaku Yirga,

David Okutu and Tirhas Tsegay – for their invaluable help, time

and patience. Many thanks also to Shannon Alexander, Sasha

Muench and Ann Vaughan for their guidance throughout the

research and writing.

mercycorps.org

CONTACT KEITH PROCTOR

Senior Policy [email protected]

Mercy Corps

Global Headquarters

45 SW Ankeny Street

Portland, Oregon 97204

800.292.3355

Mercy Corps

Europe Headquarters

40 Sciennes

Edinburgh EH9 1NJ

Scotland, UK

+44.0.131.662.5160

Documents

More Than Markets - Mercy Corps · and were less likely to rely on negative coping strategies. ... farmers in the program areas ... More Than Markets