Source: The Nation, 1. Februar 2006 


by Peter Mwaura

In recent years drought-related famine has killed more people in Africa than in any other continent even though it is only the second driest after Asia.

Since the Sahelian drought of 1973-74 and Ethiopian famine of 1984-85, drought and famine have been associated in peoples' minds with Africa.

The Sahelian drought, which affected the semi-arid zone that extended from northern Senegal in the west to eastern Sudan and parts of Ethiopia, marked the beginning of food aid to Africa. The Ethiopian famine, in which an estimated one million people died and Emperor Haile Selassie was overthrown, provoked an international appeal. Irish musician Bob Geldof launched Band Aid and American star musicians recorded the smash hit song "We are the World, we are the Children" - which helped raise more than $60 million for the famine victims.

African countries are easily devastated by droughts. Drylands cover 43 per cent of Africa's land surface and drought is considered a normal fact-of-life. According to a study by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), while drought occurs in all continents, seven out of the 10 most vulnerable countries are in Africa (Somalia, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, Chad, Mauritania and Mozambique).

Natural hazard

In Africa drought is the single most important natural hazard in terms of shattered livelihoods, starvation, deaths, and nutrition-related diseases. According to the UNDP study, the effects of drought are "insidious" due to their "creeping nature." Deaths are simply the end result of a ravaging process.

During the drought in the early 1970s, 1980s, the beginning of the 1990s and 2001 some 50 million Africans were affected. During the 1980-2000 period tens of thousands died in just three countries - Ethiopia, Sudan and Mozambique.

Drought in Africa causes economic losses of tens of millions of dollars and can reverse national development gains of several years. The crushing impacts are much greater for the poor people.

Countries with economies that are relatively simple and predominantly agricultural suffer most under drought conditions. In such countries the effect of drought increases their balance of trade deficits, donor and food aid dependency, urban migration of poor people, and the costs of service provision and welfare.

In countries such as South Africa whose economies are considered intermediate, the impacts of drought are better absorbed by a more complex and diversified economy. Similarly, in mineral-exporting countries such as Botswana and Namibia the impacts are cushioned by the mineral sectors of the economy, which are de-linked from the rainfall-dependent sectors.

National development

In many countries the frequency, duration and severity of drought can have significant impact on the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and reverse many apparently unrelated investments in national development. Drought in a simple or intermediate economy can have a particularly significant impact on the economy both directly and through knock-on effects.

For example, the 1990-91 drought in Zimbabwe resulted in a 45 per cent drop in national agricultural production, 62 per cent in stock market, nine per cent in manufacturing output and one per cent in GDP. The 1999-2001 drought in Kenya cost the economy some Sh180 billion. As a proportion of the national economy, this figure is a very significant loss and can best be thought of as foregone development, for example, in roads, schools and hospitals not built.

A worldwide survey of drought-prone societies by UNDP reveals that the way countries manage the risk of drought depends partly on their levels of economic development. The study found a very high inverse correlation between the Gross National Product (GNP) and human mortality in the face of drought.

Most of the human fatalities from drought and related disasters are experienced in the developing countries, while developed countries record only economic losses that are easily absorbed by their larger economies. Drought in an African country, say Malawi or Mozambique, may cause major human suffering including death, whilst a drought of a similar severity in an American, or even in an Asian country, only has an economic impact.

For example, the drought of 1988 in the United States of America caused an estimated damage of $40 billion due to direct and knock-on effects on the economy. The size of the US economy was sufficient to absorb this shock. An African country with a simple agricultural economy would almost certainly have gone under.

The effects of a natural hazard like drought are mediated through a socio-economic system, which either attenuates or exacerbates the natural effects, according to a recent UNDP report. For example in Indonesia, which has the same drought exposure as Australia, some 25,000 deaths per year were attributed to drought, whereas in Australia there were none. India has more regularly hungry people than all of Africa put together, but virtually nobody starves in India and the country does not depend on foreign aid. India, in fact, has a wheat surplus from year to year.

During the 1980-2000 exposure to drought in several countries across the globe there were no drought-related deaths in Bolivia, Jordan, Ecuador, Spain and the United States while there were thousands of deaths in Ethiopia, Sudan, Mozambique, Chad, Somalia and Mauritania.

Why is Africa in such a perilous position? The scientific knowledge exists that could enable the continent reduce its vulnerability to drought. In his message to the world on the World Water 2004, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said that modern society has distinct advantages over those civilizations of the past that suffered or even collapsed for reasons linked to water.

"We have great knowledge, and the capacity to disperse that knowledge to the remotest places on earth. We are also beneficiaries of scientific leaps that have improved weather forecasting, agricultural practices, natural resources management, disaster prevention, preparedness and management," he said.

But only a rational and informed political, social and cultural response - and public participation in all stages of the disaster management cycle - can reduce disaster vulnerability, and ensure that hazards do not turn into unmanageable disasters.

Africa has not benefited from this scientific knowledge, or rather it has not taken a "rational and informed political, social and cultural response" to reduce disaster vulnerability and ensure that hazards do not turn into unmanageable disasters. Africa has not adopted the right policies to combat the impacts of drought. That is why many analysts say that most famines in Africa are policy, not meteorological, famines.

A number of international organisations exist to help countries cope with drought. The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) operates a global information and early warning system, while UNDP has a unit dedicated to assisting countries to drought-proof their societies.

UNDP's Drylands Development Centre, which is located in Nairobi, addresses the question of drought-related vulnerability through policy reform. For example, it has embarked on a project to help southern African countries enhancing their resilience to drought.

Africa is lagging behind in drought-proofing because of a number of factors. Eric Patrick, a policy specialist with the Drylands Development Centre, lists some of the factors that increase or decrease vulnerability to drought.

First, there are the patterns taken by drought, which are exacerbated by conflict and competition for resources, creating a vicious circle. This is well illustrated in northern Kenya and the greater Horn of Africa, where conflict has engulfed the region, thus amplifying the impacts of drought.

Second, there are dysfunctional socio-economic systems, which may magnify the natural impacts of drought. Factors such as inappropriate land tenure, poor infrastructure and provision of services can exacerbate the effects of drought. This is another way of saying that Africa is badly governed and many of the famines in Africa are policy famines.

Third, there is the feeling that the government can always turn to humanitarian aid to bail it from a famine situation. The international system for "humanitarian dumping" of surplus grains insures Africa against the vagaries of nature and insulates many African leaders from the political fallout of bad policies that perpetuate food insecurity.

A close look at Africa's vulnerability to drought shows that poverty is in fact the root cause. African drylands are characterised by endemic poverty.

For example, in Cameroon although 31 per cent of the population live in the semi-arid Northern Region, 50 per cent of the country's poorest people are found there; they have the highest rates of illiteracy, poor housing and maternal mortality. Similarly, in Kenya the highest incidence of poverty is in its northern arid and semi-arid districts, where life expectancy, adult literacy, secondary school enrolment are lower than in other areas.

Within Africa's drylands are found many disadvantaged groups, such as female-headed households, land-poor farmers, and pastoralists who have no control on external factors that impact on their livelihoods.

Africa's drylands face special challenges that are not generally found in other areas and they have fallen behind in development. There is a risk that the gap in development will widen in future unless there is a change in thinking and strategies.

More often than not Africa's drylands do not receive the attention they deserve in terms of resource allocation and development attention. And when they receive such attention it is usually inappropriate, unsustainable or not fully backed up with the right resources or management skills.

According to a UNDP report, low financial rates of return, financial unsustainability, mismanagement and unforeseen consequences contribute to the poor project performance in Africa's drylands. Recent projects have tried to correct such mistakes but it is still generally held that dryland development projects are doomed to fail.

However, treating Africa's drylands as "development sinks" may be more expensive in lost production, food aid and social instability, according to the UNDP report. African countries must integrate drought into national development and mainstream drought risk in their decisions on development policies to free themselves from the consequences of recurring droughts.