1. Building Comprehensive Resilience Measure for Development Interventions in South Sudan
John M. Ulimwengu, PhD
Senior Research Fellow,
International Food Policy Research Institute
Juba, November 13-15, 2018

2. DEVELOPMENT RESILIENCE (Constas and Barret, 2013)
Development resilience is the capacity over time of a person, household or location to avoid bad state (poverty, food insecurity, etc.) in the presence of various stressors and multiple shocks;
If and only if that capacity is and remains high over time, then the person, household or location is resilient;
Improvement from the ecological concept of resilience, in which resilience helps systems to remain in their current state, development resilience can imply “productive disruption”;
Humanitarian resilience, which aims to remove households from the humanitarian emergency state, can be nested within development resilience.

3. RESILIENCE AND POVERTY
Occasionally poor households experience transient poverty at point A and become eligible to receive resilience package (RP) for a given period;
Descending households experience a negative shock that pushes them below the RP eligibility threshold as they are vulnerable to poverty at a critical point;
Always poor households are persistently below the eligibility threshold;
Usually poor households are persistently poor in the long run, but they can experience temporary non-poverty spells.
RP graduates should be ‘escapee’ households who become non-poor in the medium-term after crossing point C
Source: Adapted from Villa and Niño-Zarazua (2014)

4. FRAMEWORK TO GUIDE INTERVENTIONS
Determinants of resilience
Proposed interventions
1. Low productivity
[chronically low returns to asset]
1. Income generation schemes
[productivity-enhancing interventions]
2. Vulnerability
[transitorily low returns to asset]
2. Safety nets
[direct transfers, productivity-restoring interventions, or consumption smoothing microfinance]
3. Dependency
[inability to work]
3. Social welfare
[Direct social transfers]

5. Resilience Index Measurement and Analysis II (RIMA-II)
Standard variables for estimating development resilience
Resilience Index Measurement and Analysis II (RIMA-II)
1. Basic Condition Measures: Initial states
Food security (FAO’s four components)
Health index
Assets index
Social capital index
Access to services index
Infrastructure
Ecological eco-services index
2. Disturbance Measures: Shocks and Stressors
2.1. Covariate shocks and stressors
Drought/flood
Health shocks
Political crises
Market prices
Trade/policy shocks…
2.2. Idiosyncratic shocks and stressors
Illness/death
Loss of income
Failed crops
Livestock loss…
3. Response Measures:
Mitigation strategies
Coping strategies
Adaptation strategies
4. Subsequent State(s): Current state
Adaptive Capacity (AC)
Social Safety Nets (SSN)
Assets (AST)
Access to Basic Services (ABS)
Source: Ngesa 2018
Source: Adapated from Constas and Barrett (2013)

6. Collected by MSI from 4,208 households in 7 counties
Data description
Collected by MSI from 4,208 households in 7 counties
Yambio (537 households)
Torit (414)
Bor (709)
Wau (641)
Yei (817)
Rumbek East (445)
Aweil (645)
Data collected in __, 2018

7. In all counties except Wau, the majority of households mainly rely on crop farming

8. The majority (67.5%) of households lacked food in the past year

9. ACCESS TO BASIC SERVICES (ABS)
AWEIL
YAMBIO
HLTH1:Does the health facility you go to provide free care
EDUC: How far to the nearest primary school from your house (1/km)
EXT: Do you know any ag extension workers or experts who can provide advice about farming?
MKA: Do you have a common open market where you buy goods for the household
HLTH: Number of health facility types where household members go when sick

10. GOVERNANCE AWEIL YAMBIO
The government is creating jobs for its population? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is helping keep prices down? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working toward reducing crime? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working on improving basic health services? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working on combating HIV/AIDS? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is addressing educational needs of the country? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working on providing water and sanitation services? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working on ensuring that everyone has enough food? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is doing enough in fighting corruption? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working on resolving violent conflict between communities? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is trying its best in maintaining roads and bridges? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government is working on providing a reliable supply of electricity? (1=very poor, 5=very good)
The government has tried in defending the country? (1=very poor, 5=very good)

11. INSTITUTIONS AWEIL YAMBIO
NINST: Number of institutions in your community that affect your daily lives
NMEET: How often do the traditional leaders call for community meetings (1=at least every week, 6=never)

12. DWELLING/ASSETS AWEIL YAMBIO
qroof: Material used for roof of house (1=iron sheet or tile roof, 0=grass or tumpline/canvas roof)
qwall: Material used for walls of house (1=stone or brick walls, 0=mud sand wattle or papyrus/reed/bamboo walls)
qfloor: Material used for floor of house (1=cement or tile floor, 0=mud/dung floor)

13. ADAPTIVE CAPACITY YAMBIO AWEIL
HEDUH: Highest level of education obtained by household head
NAgL: Number of ag-related livelihood activities household members are involved in
NNagL: Number of nonag-related livelihood activities household members are involved in
NCrop: Number of crop types planted in 2018

14. RESILIENCE INDEX
AWEIL
YAMBIO

15. OVERALL PATH TO RESILIENCE

16. RESILIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT TYPOLOGY
There is a broad range of different factors and constraints which can explain why certain counties are performing better or worse than others with respect to GAM. For example, some counties might simply be endowed with a less favorable bio-physical environment, or there might be production, access or utilization constraints of different level and kind.
By constructing an indicator for each FNS dimension and by opposing each pair of indicators, we try to explain nutritional outcomes as a function of relative production, access and utilization constraints. This will be largely done in a non parametric way, summarized by the following set of diagrams.
Source: Adapted from Pangaribowo et al. (2013).

17. TYPOLOGY
4 axes, each referring to the 4 dimensions of the conceptual scheme: potential, production, acquisition and nutrition
The arrow gives the chronological sequence
4 quadrants emerge and within each we will impute a scatter diagram

18. FNS INDICATOR PER DIMENSION – period 3 (2015-17)
Potential: based on data from remote sensing on cropland extent combined with data on deforestation to identify arable pixels; then by hypothetically cultivating these pixels with the most important food crops using optimal yield factors, and by converting this hypothetical production to calories and dividing by population, we obtain for each county the “daily potential calorie production per person” (using a root-transformation).
Production: same procedure as potential but based on actual/official production statistics per county
Acquisition: based on the WFP Food Consumption Score (FCS), which is a household access indicator using consumption frequency and diet diversity to get a proxy of food access. Measure of acquisition is the prevalence of households with a FCS above the standard threshold.
Nutrition: based on previously shown GAM data. Measure of nutrition is the prevalence of <5y children not suffering from global acute malnutrition

19. TYPOLOGY – ( )
Result of plugging constructed indicators into 4-dimensional diagram.

20. ACCOUNTING FOR PERSISTENT AND TRANSIENT CONSTRAINTS
Distinction between persistent and transient constraints by repeating FNS typology for three periods
Level of constraints/efficiency of the last period is labelled as:
“persistent” when the same level applies for the previous two periods
“transient” when a different level applies for at least one of the previous two periods
Constraints
production
access
utilization
Period 1 ( )
high; medium; low (3)
Period 2 ( )
Period 3 ( )
Period 3 - combined
high (persistent/transient);
medium (persistent/transient);
low (persistent/transient) (6)
Period 1 ( ): Production data 2014, Access data 2015, Utilization data 2015
Period 2 ( ): Production data 2015, Access data 2016, Utilization data 2016
Period 3 ( ): Production data 2016, Access data 2017, Utilization data 2017

21. Key message: different policy responses are needed to address the spatially diverse nutritional challenges of the country; or put differently, each county requires a different set of interventions.

22. PROFILE FOR 29 HIGH PRIORITY COUNTIES
High priority counties are those with GAM levels above the emergency threshold of 15%

23. PROFILE FOR 14 CPA COUNTIES

24. Concluding remarks Lessons learned
Potential to improve evidence-based development and humanitarian interventions, mutual learning, accountability and benchmarking;
Missing relevant variables (FNS, wealth, assets, etc.);
Extension beyond food and nutrition security;
Location matters;
Need to determine intervention thresholds;
Need to combine resilience analysis and locations typology.
Key recommendations
Improved data collection at local level; preferably, mobile-based;
Increase demand for research-based evidence at local and national level;
Build coordination at every stage of decision-making process;
Improved knowledge management;
Improve analytical capacity for strategic analysis.
Centred on enhancing mutual accountability and transparency in the use of development resources
Donors agreed to provide timely, transparent & comprehensive information on aid flows
Partner counties agreed to strengthen parliamentary role in development & budgets and reinforce participatory approaches in formulating & assessing development progress
Jointly assess through existing and increasingly objective country level mechanisms mutual progress in
implementing agreed commitments on aid effectiveness, including the Partnership Commitments.

25. THANKS