35 From Conflict to Coping: Evidence on the contributions of peacebuilding to drought resilience among pastoralist groups April 25, 2012

Overview 1.Purpose of the study 2.Key findings and supporting evidence 3.Implications

Test the program theory linking peacebuilding to drought resilience Aim

Context: Somali-Oromiya regions of Ethiopia Source: Temesgen, A.K., Climate Change to Conflict? Lessons Learned from Southern Ethiopia and Northern Kenya. Fafo, 2010.

Sources and Methods Before (baseline)After (mid-term) Program target groups Participatory assessment HH survey (n=769) Participatory assessment (4 communities x 3 FGDs x 10 pax; n=120) HH survey (n=140) Comparison groups Recall from participatory assessment Participatory assessment (2 communities x 2 FGDs x 10 pax; n=40)

Key Finding #1 Improved peace and security within the intervention areas have created conditions that enable greater freedom of movement and access to important resources that pastoralist groups depend on to cope with and adapt to severe drought.

HH Survey Findings Inability to access resources due to insecurity in target areas

Aggregated Focus Group Scores Change in reported access to key resources (from one year prior) Greatly increased

Key Finding #2 Pastoralist groups who have greater freedom of movement and access to natural resources are less likely to have to rely on distressful coping mechanisms in response to extreme drought and more likely to be able to employ adaptive capacities.

HH Survey Findings Factors associated with use of distressful coping mechanisms HH Survey Findings

Perceived Change of Proportion of Families Relying on Coping Strategies Aggregated Focus Group Scores Coping Mechanism Distressful Adaptive Selling livestock at low prices Killing calves to save mother Herd splitting & livestock migration Use of enclosures Firewood collection & charcoal production Community Target Kebeles Wachile -5%5%25%30%40% Kebele % 45%40%50% Webb 0-15%45%030% El-Nasib 55%-25%55%40%55% Comparison Kebeles Adelay 5%n/a-20%n/a-5% Yedi 40%5%-5%50%10%

Implications Treat conflict as a disaster risk to be reduced, rather than an externality Strengthen local governance and social cohesion that underpin resilience Invest in efforts to identify accurate measures and predictors of resilience