As a general rule, there are common economic conditions surrounding drought that transcend national and cultural differences. In the early stages of drought, the terms of trade turn against producers: the price of essential grains rises and the sale value of livestock falls. During this time, herders may have to sell classes of animals such as pregnant females that would not normally be put up for sale, in order to meet short-term food security needs. When the rainfall levels rise again and the pastoralists try to restock, the price of domestic stock goes up again. But, with limited capital, many producers are unable to restock to sufficient levels and thus they remain vulnerable to the next climatic anomaly. Indeed, some pastoralists are forced to leave the system permanently and to set up as agropastoralists.

It is now recognized that risk in relation to rangelands is a complex and dynamic concept. The subjective experience of risk and the ability to cope with adverse conditions are as important as the negative event itself. Thus, although the drought cycle remains the same, the individual’s response to external stresses differs. Consequently, in recognition of the inherent complexities of drought, IFAD’s projects and programmes have attempted to address the differing needs of producers through flexible strategies encompassing a variety of client needs.

Ever since its creation in the late 1970s, IFAD has been involved in a number of drought-mitigation approaches for the benefit of rangeland users. In general, the strategies follow two main courses: early warning and drought contingency planning. With the introduction of new technologies and better systems of data management, the means and mechanisms for both strategies have evolved dramatically over the years.

In principle, an early-warning system would make it possible to avoid many of the adverse economic and human costs that arise from herders having to commit resources every year without knowing what the outcome of the rains will be. Reliable forecasting would also allow governments and donors to undertake more efficient drought-relief interventions. Key lessons learned from IFAD’s projects and programmes in the development of early-warning systems are as follows:

• coordination at the district level is preferable for deciding on the parameters for data collection and on key partners;
• local coordination and control is needed to collect and consolidate information at the sub-district level and reduce crisis reaction times; and
• central coordination is necessary to ensure standardization of field data collection, which helps to prioritize drought-relief needs and disseminate remote sensing data among interested parties.

Other tools that may provide drought early-warning signals include field monitoring and remote sensing systems. Ideally, field monitoring should provide monthly flows of information on the availability of water and the general state of crop and livestock production. Useful production parameters include marketing trends, particularly the balance of trade between livestock and grain foods, and anthropomorphic measures such as the mean arm circumference of children under five. Remote sensing, which relies on imagery satellites, is a valuable tool when used in conjunction with field monitoring.

Finally, IFAD is collaborating with cutting-edge research in the development of early-warning systems. Current research is creating livestock-based monitoring systems, which evaluate dietary intake and energy levels of cattle through an innovative fecal monitoring process. Preliminary results demonstrate that measuring changes in animal health and well-being may provide far earlier warnings of impending environmental disaster than can be obtained through traditional methods.

Once a drought has been detected, contingency plans at the national, district, local and household levels should be activated as soon as possible. Based on IFAD’s experience, four main components to drought response mechanisms have been identified:

• Drought alert: consensus must be reached at the community, district and national levels with regard to drought indicators and on categorizations of drought conditions (e.g. mild, moderate, severe).
• Response processes: for each category of drought, agreement should be reached on specific, concrete action to be taken and the levels at which the tasks will be performed (i.e. district, national or local). The roles and responsibilities of the different stakeholders should be clearly defined.
• Coordination: effective coordination among all the different actors in drought interventions is of critical importance.
• Listening to local communities: local people are often overlooked when contingency plans for droughts are drawn up. IFAD’s experience has demonstrated that herders and farmers may often know the most efficient means of aiding drought responses in their communities and thus help to establish effective and sustainable measures.

Specific drought-contingency plans in IFAD’s Special Programme for Africa (Niger and Mali) included the development of appropriate, sustainable marketing and meat processing facilities as well as support for herder mobility and access to productive pastures. Furthermore, in a large number of rangeland projects, IFAD has invested in infrastructure, including roads, markets, slaughterhouses and cold storage. By strengthening infrastructure, local communities are better able to destock the rangelands during times of stress and thereby greatly reduce economic loss. IFAD’s projects have been able to reduce crisis response times and to lessen the need for costly short-term emergency aid.

IFAD has demonstrated that risk mitigation in the rangelands requires long-term, lateral thinking. Drought has been a feature of rangeland landscapes since time immemorial, and short-term, easy solutions are clearly impossible. However, the Fund’s projects and programmes have proved that the worsening socio-economic conditions that have beset many pastoralist communities may be reversed. Well-designed and inclusive drought-contingency measures can have a positive impact on the well-being and livelihood security of present and future generations of pastoralist families.

IFAD has also learned, however, that without close communication and cooperation among all stakeholders, risk-mitigation projects may have difficulty in meeting objectives. Given the range of actors and agents involved, the effective coordination of inputs is a major challenge for projects and programmes. Although the use of participatory planning processes may alleviate many of these problems, differing political aims and objectives must be accounted for prior to project implementation.

Relevant IFAD Projects