Ethiopia
HUMANITARIAN CRISES ANALYSIS 2016
Each year, Sida conducts a humanitarian allocation exercise in which a large part of its humanitarian budget is
allocated to emergencies worldwide. This allocation takes place in the beginning of the year as to ensure predictability
for humanitarian organisations and to allow for best possible operational planning. In an effort to truly adhere to the
humanitarian principles Sida bases its allocation decisions on a number of objective indicators of which the most
important are related to the number of affected people, vulnerability of affected people and level of funding in previous
years. One of the indicators is also related to forgotten crises in order to ensure sufficient funding also to low profile
crises. Besides this initial allocation, another part of the humanitarian budget is set aside as an emergency reserve for
sudden onset emergencies and deteriorating humanitarian situations. This reserve allows Sida to quickly allocate
funding to any humanitarian situation throughout the year, including to Ethiopia.
For 2016 Ethiopia is allocated an initial MSEK 106 of which MSEK 17 is intended for humanitarian needs related to
the South Sudan refugee crisis. The humanitarian situation in Ethiopia will be closely monitored throughout the year
for potential allocation of additional funds.
1. CRISIS OVERVIEW
Ethiopia is one of the fastest growing economies in the world, but it’s growing from an extremely low level. While the
government has invested heavily in development activities and public services, contributing to lifting millions of people
out of poverty, some 80% of the 93m population are rural with their livelihoods based on mainly rain-fed agriculture
(only 5% of the cultivated area is irrigated). Hence huge population groups remain extremely vulnerable to unforeseen
weather changes and other shocks affecting the harvests and thereby the availability of food. In fact, for Ethiopia’s
most vulnerable, acute poverty has increased over the past decade. The country is regularly exposed to droughts,
floods, insect infestations and epidemics. Between 1980 and 2010, a yearly average of 1.8 million people were
affected by disasters. Drought represents the main natural threat which affects a large number of individuals each time
it strikes. These regular shocks have all sorts of negative consequences, such as destruction of assets and
livelihoods, erosion of coping mechanisms, poverty and displacement, with food insecurity and malnutrition being the
main sources of vulnerability. Outbreaks of epidemics occur frequently, and can be attributed to conflict, drought, poor
conditions and low living standards in refugee camps, poor health infrastructure, low vaccination coverage, food- and
water shortage and poor nutritional status etc. Outbreaks of diarrheal diseases, measles, malaria, meningitis, hepatitis
E, Kala and Azar are common.
Even in a “normal” year the challenges mentioned above are enough to result in a substantial humanitarian caseload,
but during 2015 the situation has deteriorated in a rapid pace due to failed spring rains and the arrival of the El Niño
weather conditions. The original Humanitarian Requirements Document (HRD) for 2015 estimated 2,9m people to be
in need of emergency relief food assistance (IPC 3). The mid-year review of the HRD, issued in August 2015
th
drastically revised that figure to 4,5m. On October 13 , the numbers were again revised upwards. This time increasing
by 82% to 8,2m relief food beneficiaries, a figure however regarded as deflated by most actors. The 2016 HRD has a
target population of 10,1m people. Previous estimates of people in need reach as high as 15-20m. The figures
mentioned are in addition to 720,000 refugees that are highly dependent on food assistance in the camps.
SAM (Severe Acute Malnutrition) admission rates are already higher than during the peak of the 2011 food crisis and
according to OCHA “the level of acute needs across virtually all humanitarian sectors has already exceeded levels
seen in the Horn of Africa drought of 2011 and is projected to be far more severe throughout an 8-10 months period in
2016” (Weekly humanitarian bulletin 30 Nov). As another point of reference, in a “good” year Ethiopia has more SAM
cases than Somalia and Kenya combined. The related funding needs for 2015 have gone from the initial USD 386m,
to USD 432m in the mid-year review, to the latest figure 596m with a funding coverage of 43% (Nov 2015). The 2016
HRD still has a staggering USD 1,4bn in gross funding requirements (almost four times higher than the initial 2015
HRD) of which 1,1bn is for food only.
Ethiopia generally maintains open borders for refugees seeking protection and it is party to the 1951 Convention
Relating to the Status of Refugees, its 1967 Protocol and the 1969 OAU Convention. It is now is the largest refugeehosting country in Africa having surpassed Kenya already in October 2014. According to UNHCR the country is host
to 736,000 refugees as of 30 September, of which 289,000 from South Sudan, 251,000 from Somalia, 150,484 from
Eritrea and the remaining from Sudan (38,000) and of other nationalities (7,000). The refugees live in 24 camps
spread over 5 different regions. There are also some 440,000 internally displaced people (IDPs) in the country, with
the cause of displacement being mainly floods and violent clashes over scarce resources.
1.1 Geographical areas and affected population
1
As mentioned, more than 80 per cent of Ethiopia’s population live in rural areas and rely on rain-fed agriculture for
their livelihood. The slow onset natural disaster driven by the El Niño phenomenon is having the highest impact in the
northern, eastern and central areas of the country with severe drought resulting in up to 80% of the 2015 harvest
having failed. Worst affected areas in southern Afar and northern Somali region were already in October at emergency
level (IPC 4) and the worst period is yet to come in 2016 during the long wait until the next harvest. One needs to keep
in mind as well that the formal humanitarian caseload is in addition to the approximately eight million people who are
targeted by the Government’s safety net programme, PSNP, of which most are as vulnerable as the people included
in the humanitarian figures. In addition, the vulnerability is frequently exacerbated by other natural disasters including
flooding and disease outbreaks. Drought and floods increase the risk of water-related disease outbreaks, particularly
Acute Watery Diarrhoea (AWD), malaria and measles, and especially affect children under the age of 5. Access to
clean water and basic health care, including life-saving maternal and neonatal services, is low. Meanwhile,
humanitarian access to some parts of the country and persons affected by crisis remains difficult due to poor
transportation, infrastructure and insecurity.
Inter-communal and inter-ethnic clashes are common and cause displacement in particular in East and West
Hararghe, south Oromia and Borena and in the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ region/Gambella border.
There are also regular armed confrontations between the Ogaden National Liberation Front and the Somali Regional
Special Police and/or the Ethiopian National Defence Force.
A common priority concern among the refugee population of 736,317 people is the high proportion of unaccompanied
minors and separated children which as of October amounts to 37,859 (5,1%). Among the South Sudanese refugees
in Gambella region, women constitute 70 % of the adult population and women and children constitute 90% of the
total population. The refugee population in Gambella is almost the size of the host population which creates tensions
underneath the surface. Of the Somali refugee population of 251,000, 210,678 are residing in five camps in Dollo Ado
near the border to Somalia and the remainder in Jijiga, the capital of Somali Region. The gender balance among the
Somali refugees is much more even than among the South Sudanese refugees.
1.2 Risks and threats
As highlighted in the HRD, Ethiopia is experiencing one of the worst droughts in decades with lives at risk mainly due
to a lack of food and water, and the risk of disease outbreaks. At the same time livelihoods have already either been
destroyed or remain precarious due to limited access to seeds and other agricultural inputs for the coming year.
Hence the already very vulnerable populations have very limited coping mechanisms and very low levels of resilience
to additional shocks. The HRD targets a total of 10,1m of which 10,1 for food assistance and 2,1m for nutrition
interventions including 0,4m projected as severely acute malnourished (SAM), 5,8m for WASH and 3,6m for health
interventions to name a few of the key sectors. These figures are based on the planning assumptions that the 2016
spring rains will not fail. A fair prediction based on rain patterns following previous El Niño years. Another key
assumption is that the safety net programme provides monthly food and cash transfers to 7,9m people (not included in
the above figures) as planned during the first half of 2016.
Ethiopia’s refugee agency (ARRA) has launched an urgent appeal for food aid (Nov 2015) to assist hundreds of
thousands of refugees particularly South Sudanese refugees who are in a critical state since ARRA has run short of
food supplies. As of November 2015, reduced food rations are being distributed in all camps due to the break in the
food pipeline expected in January 2016. A recent statement by the ARRA Director General said that the refugees “will
soon face chaos as the food aid in stock will be totally consumed by the end of December”. With already high
malnutrition levels in all six camps, acute malnutrition is expected to increase due to the cut in rations in addition to
other aggravating factors such as constant Hepatitis E outbreaks. The inter-agency regional refugee response plan
(RRRP) for the South Sudan Crisis has 35,000 new arrivals in 2016 as planning figure, while partners have agreed to
develop contingency plans for a potential higher rate of arrivals. There is a concern among the partners working with
the refugee populations that there is risk that the needs of the refugees will be forgotten by the international
community with all attention on the El Niño related needs. It remains to be seen if those fears will be realized. As part
of Sida’s response strategy for Ethiopia, both refugee response and support to tackle the drought will be included.
A risk to a varying degree is present in all countries with humanitarian needs is that of corruption. With general
challenges in all societal pillars including law, order, stability and justice - the area of checks and balances also
becomes fragile. Ethiopia ranks number 110 out of 174 countries on Transparency International’s Corruption
Perceptions Index for 2014. That puts Ethiopia ahead of other African countries included in Sida’s humanitarian crisis
allocation like Mali, Kenya and DRC, but behind Niger, Liberia and Burkina Faso.
1.3 Strategic objectives identified in the Strategic Response Plan
2
Ethiopia is not taking part in the humanitarian program cycle process led by OCHA, hence there is no Humanitarian
Needs Overview (HNO) or Strategic/humanitarian Response Plan (S/HRP) launched. Instead, a government approved
Humanitarian Requirement Document (HRD), compiling humanitarian needs in all regions is launched on a yearly
basis with a mid-term review after 6 months. The 2016 HRD has the following three strategic objectives:
1) Save lives and reduce morbidity related to drought.
2) Protect and restore livelihoods
3) Prepare for and respond to other humanitarian shocks – natural disasters, conflict and displacement.
The first objective focuses on monthly food distributions, safe drinking water, and immunization as some of the key
priorities. The second objective focuses on livelihood protection including livestock survival and timely access to seeds
and fertilizers. The third objective focuses on contingency planning for forced displacement to flooding and drought
which could potentially lead to inter-communal violence and tension.
2. IN COUNTRY HUMANITARIAN CAPACITIES
2.1 National and local capacities and constraints
The Ethiopian government has historically been reluctant to publicly acknowledge domestic humanitarian needs that
are beyond its capacity to handle. The current ongoing drought signals a change where the Government has gone
public with the need for international partners to assist meeting the needs of its people although at several occasions
downplaying the scope of the crisis. The Government has also allocated more than USD 192m (Dec 2015) to address
emergency food and non-food needs and has promised allocation of resources will continue.
Ethiopian Red Cross and 13 domestic NGOs are conducting and supporting humanitarian operations according to the
HRD. These include faith and community based organizations. National NGOs are however not allowed to receive
funds from the UN administered Humanitarian Response Fund which makes it an exception among the CBPFs
globally.
The overall domestic humanitarian coordination is led by the Government's National Disaster Risk Management
Coordination Commission (NDRMCC, formerly Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector, DRMFSS).
NDRMCC leads federal and regional level Disaster Risk Management Technical Working Groups (DRMTWGs) across
the country and hosts a series of specialised task forces that work in tandem with the clusters/sectors. As the crisis
evolves, the Government is with OCHA’s support strengthening the DRMTWGs. Different UN, NGOs and the
Ethiopian Red Cross are active participants, including at the regional and sub-regional levels.
In 2013, Ethiopia adopted a national policy and strategy on disaster risk management (DRM). It includes general
directions and major implementation strategies, including on a decentralized DRM system, early warning and risk
assessment, information management, capacity building, and on integration of disaster risk reduction into
development plans. The Government has also established an Emergency Food Security Reserve Administration,
which provides a short-term buffer stock of emergency response commodities and items on loan to agencies engaged
in relief activities (be it Government, UN or NGOs) until they can mobilize replacement resources through other
mechanisms.
2.2 International operational capacities and constraints
The Ethiopia Humanitarian Country Team (EHCT) is the principal humanitarian policy and decision making body. Its
role is to provide guidance on major strategic issues related to humanitarian action in country, including developing a
strategic vision, setting strategic objectives and priorities and developing strategic plans. The EHCT is chaired by the
Humanitarian Coordinator and is composed of the UN agencies working in the humanitarian sphere, other
international humanitarian organizations, four international NGO representatives nominated by the Humanitarian
INGO group, one national NGO coordinator (CRDA) and three donors nominated by the Development Assistance
Group; Department for International Development of the UK (DfID), European Commission Directorate General for
Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
The current operational international presence consists of ten UN agencies, ICRC, IFRC and 43 INGOs. An
information sharing platform, the Humanitarian Community Coordination (HCC) meeting occurs on a monthly basis as
an opportunity for all humanitarian actors to share information on the current and evolving situation.
The cluster approach was rolled out in Ethiopia in early 2007 following consultations among the international
community and the Government of Ethiopia. In implementing the cluster approach at the federal level, the
humanitarian community sought to strengthen support for the Government-led coordination structures housed in the
Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector (DRMFSS), and key line ministries, including Agriculture, Health
3
and Ministry of Water Resources. The clusters work at the technical level and aims to support government-led sector
task forces and avoid the establishment of parallel coordination mechanisms. The Office for Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) convenes the inter-cluster coordination mechanism, which meets every two weeks and
is intended to provide a forum for the respective cluster leads to discuss issues of mutual concern and ensure that
cross-cutting issues are followed up. The inter-cluster coordination mechanism also has a role in making
recommendations of key issues for EHCT consideration and of carrying out activities requested by the EHCT.
UNHCR has the overall coordination role in the refugee response which will be further enhanced through the
established Refugee Task Forces, co-chaired by the Government and UNHCR, both in Addis Ababa and in the field.
These fora continue to serve as key information platforms for updating refugee situations, active interaction and
exchanges among various actors, including UN agencies, NGOs and the Government, as well as the diplomatic and
donor community. Sector coordination will also continue, through functional technical groups such as the Child
Protection Working Group.
2.3 International and Regional assistance
US, ECHO, UK and the CERF are the major humanitarian donors in Ethiopia with Sweden among the top seven.
There is no indication of major changes in the donor pattern for 2016. In response to the increasingly alarming
information coming out of the country during August and September, donors stepped up and contributed some USD
140m between 30 September and mid-November. Even so that left a funding gap of more than USD 270m for 2015
st
alone. To illustrate, at the time of Sida’s substantial contribution (1 tranche) of SEK 70m/USD 17m, WFP had a gap
of some USD 39m just to carry out the already planned rounds of food distribution in Somali region.
3. Sida’s HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE PLAN
3.1. Sida’s role
The lion share (75%) of Sida’s initial 2015 allocation was channelled towards multisector refugee response mainly in
Gambella, with the remaining 25% focused on resilience interventions and humanitarian coordination. During the
course of the year, additional funding was provided for the refugee response with the revised RRRP and later Sida’s
rapid response mechanism was used by partners to respond to the ongoing drought emergency. In December the
HRF was supported with funds from Sida’s almost depleted global humanitarian reserve. In addition, Sida has in
November contributed with SEK 70m in development funding as a first tranche of two, to WFPs food distribution
rounds in Somali Region. The second tranche will be paid at the beginning of 2016. This exceptional and rare support
with development funding to a strict humanitarian intervention was made possible due to unused funding from other
country strategies. In hindsight it may seem as if Sida’s response strategy for 2015 was heavily tilted towards refugee
response, but the failed rains and El Niño driven emergency was not possible to predict a year from now. During the
course of the year, Sida has been flexible and has adapted its support based on needs.
3.2. Response Priorities 2016
As a result of the ongoing slow-onset food crisis which is expected to worsen in 2016 in terms of humanitarian needs,
Sida will compared to 2015 increase the initial humanitarian crisis allocation for Ethiopia. The total amount including
support related to the South Sudan crisis, will be SEK 106m, which is a 55% increase from the initial allocation for
2015. In addition, the late allocation in December 2015 of SEK 6m to the HRF should be mentioned. Funds that will be
spent during 2016. On top of that comes the second tranche of SEK 70m from the exceptional support to WFP from
the development budget for Africa.
This HCA proposes that Sida’s humanitarian allocation for Ethiopia in 2016 continues to support refugee related
interventions while a substantial increase is foreseen in support of drought related response in order to contribute to
the tackling of the growing food crisis. In absolute numbers, the refugee related support will see a small decrease
compared to the initial allocation for 2015, while relative to the total allocation the refugee response is decreased
substantially. The support is however always subject to changes in humanitarian needs and Sida constantly monitors
the various humanitarian contexts globally and stands ready to use its flexible reserve when needs change. Sida’s
response should be gender-sensitive, and take into account the specific needs of women and men, girls and boys.
Multisector interventions are prioritised in particular for the drought related response.
The Swedish Government is expected to decide on a new Swedish strategy for development cooperation with
Ethiopia during quarter one of 2016. The main areas for synergies when looking at Sida’s results proposal to the
Government are in the areas of resilience and social protection. Resilience interventions under a new strategy may
include land use planning and biodiversity as well as potentially supporting programs such as the PSNP (Productive
Safety Net Program). The PSNP is also a contribution to increased social protection. Another type of social protection
support that will be explored is a health insurance program under development. In the area of SRHR there are
4
synergies linked to the refugee response where Sida is already supporting UNFPA in strengthening SRHR services in
Gambella, both in the camps and in host villages. The preliminary budget for Sida’s development cooperation with
Ethiopia in 2016 is SEK 150m including the second tranche of the support to WFP mentioned above.
3.3. Partners
Framework agreement partners proposed for Sida support in 2015
A total of seven strategic civil society partners (including Swedish RC) have through their initial submissions indicated
interest in applying for humanitarian funds for Ethiopia in 2016. Three of those were included in the initial 2015
allocation (Swedish Red Cross, NRC, Save the Children) and one (ACF) was added during the year. The other three,
Plan, Swedish Mission Council (SMC) and Church of Sweden (CoS) have not received support except for SMC
through an RRM-intervention. In addition to the civil society partners, contributions to OCHA, ICRC and UNHCR have
been considered. Below follows a brief description of the interventions of those partners hereby proposed by Sida for
support in 2016.
NRC and ACF propose both refugee response and drought related response, while SMC is the only partner proposing
a strict drought related intervention. CoS and Save propose refugee related response in Gambella only. The
Humanitarian Response Fund primarily responds to needs triggered by natural disasters and has only exceptionally
allocated funds to refugee response. The fund is an important gap-filling tool between planning periods to facilitate
response to unforeseen needs and historically emergency nutrition has been the dominating sector receiving HRF
funds. UNHCR is proposed for support linked to its core protection mandate and coordinating role in the three refugee
response settings in Ethiopia. ICRC is in Ethiopia not only important related to its core conflict-related mandate, but
also as an actor in livelihood protection and resilience building. Swedish Red Cross is proposed for continued
support to its ongoing resilience programme in Tigray and Somali region. In addition to the service delivery
interventions mentioned above, Sida will continue to support the humanitarian system and its coordination structures
through increased support to OCHA (Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) who has played a pivotal role in
raising international attention to the ongoing drought situation. FAO will be supported for the final year of an already
agreed three-year programme. Finally, a major contribution is planned to Unicef to complement the food aid support
through WFP, with critical interventions in the areas of nutrition, health and water and sanitation.
SIDA’s HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO Ethiopia in 2016
Recommended partner for
Sida support
ACF
NRC
Swedish Mission Council
Swedish Red Cross
HRF
OCHA
ICRC
UNHCR (Global appeal)
FAO (y 3 of 3, already agreed)
Unicef
Sector/focus of work (incl. integrated or
multi sectorial programming )
Nutrition & IYCF
Multisector (WASH, shelter, FS, edu, prot)
Drought response: WASH & FSL
Resilience
Multisector
Coordination
Multisector (prot, ecosec, wathab)
Coordination, multisector
Rainwater management
Nutrition, health,WASH
Proposed amount
by Sida
5,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
4,500,000
8,000,000
2,000,000
5,000,000
4,500,000
2,000,000
49,000,000
TOTAL: 89,000,000
Refugee response in Ethiopia related mainly to the South Sudan crisis
Recommended partner
Sida support
ACF
NRC
Save the Children
Church of Sweden
for Sector/focus of work (incl. integrated or Proposed amount
multi sectorial programming )
by Sida
Nutrition & IYCF
5,000,000
Multisector (wash, shelter, FS, edu, prot)
2,000,000
Child prot. & education
6,420,000
WASH & FSL
3,700,000
TOTAL: 17,120,000
5
6