Interview with DPPC head Simon Mechale

Simon Mechale is head of the Ethiopian government’s emergency arm, the Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Commission (DPPC). Here, after appealing for 841,000 mt of food aid and US $85 million for non-food items for 2004, he tells IRIN that government policies are now in place and the international community's support is to reverse Ethiopia’s dependency on food aid. QUESTION: What is the situation for 2004 in Ethiopia? ANSWER: In terms of the needy population it has come down from 13 million to just about 7 million. In terms of total requirements it has come down from 1.8 million mt to about 840,000 mt. Q: Why do so many people in Ethiopia still need food aid? A: This is a reduction compared to last year but that in itself is a very big number. The major problem is the lack of purchasing power, it is related to poverty and lack of alternative sources of income. It is related to these problems. Then there are issues connected to variations in the weather that affect the crops. Unfortunately our farmers are subsistence farmers and unfortunately they depend on rains. If the rains do not come then the problem comes. So our major problems are related to a combination of these factors. Q: You say millions of lives have been saved in the 2003 crisis. How many lives were lost? A: Well 2003 we have said repeatedly was an unprecedented, difficult, disastrous year. We have also been saying this was a complex emergency. In such an emergency if we say that we managed without the passing of any lives because of a lack of humanitarian assistance we would be lying – not only lying but also then it would not be considered as an emergency. If it is an emergency then the loss of life will be inevitable. But unfortunately - we are not trying to hide the facts - but we do not have concrete information related to lives lost because of lack of food, of emergency health [assistance] or lack of water assistance. There are people who have lost children or their lives, but we do not have figures for that. Q: Do you think any government policy, for example a lack of land reform, has exacerbated the crisis? A: I don’t think so because I don’t think the poor peasants, the subsistence farmers, refuse to farm because they feel they don’t own the land. I don’t think their crops failed because the farmers felt that the land did not belong to them. And I don’t think they were not able to introduce irrigation because the land did not belong to them – I don’t think so. Q: What are the challenges now for 2004 for the government and the international community? A: The challenges are that we have agreed to do business differently, both within the government and the international community whilst at the same time trying to address the emergencies or the humanitarian needs. To do business differently for the Ethiopian government is to put very clear workable mechanisms in place which the government has already started with its partners. And reversing this dependency syndrome at the household level is also very critical for the Ethiopian government. For the international community, doing business differently would be a sustainable resource flow for that vulnerable population and also creating – this is true for the government and the international community – a means where people can get alternative sources of income. This is a challenge. Q: Has too much emphasis in the past been placed on food aid at the expense of other areas and is this why Ethiopia finds itself in this current situation? A: Yes. This is true, but there have been discussions all the way along and you cannot change overnight something that has been there for so long. We have been emphasising equally the need for food aid while at the same time overcoming these structural problems that are deep rooted and related to poverty. Unless we change these structural problems, then this problem is going to stay with us. There has been yes, emphasis on food aid, but even the international community and the government are saying we jointly agree to find different solutions. Q: Why was support for non-food areas like health and nutrition lacking compared to food aid in 2003? A: These are very critical points that we have been stressing and re-stressing. In some areas food may be critical but in other areas health may be much more critical. In other areas water may be critical. It will be difficult for the beneficiaries, the victims, to place priority on either water, food and health but all are equally important. I think for the international community, I don’t know why, but it has been difficult for them to provide adequately on the non-food side as they have done on the food side. The implementation is not as clear on the non-food, it is harder to do and when the donors pledge the non-food they are encouraged in the future to provide information to everybody. On food we have very clear information this is what is really missing for non-food. So we have to work hard jointly with the international community, the implementing partners and the donors. Q: When can Ethiopia escape from this cycle of dependency? A: The government has very clearly put forward a programme, and with the international community also there is an agreement and a consensus that in the coming three to five years we will be able to do business differently and very seriously. But this is a challenge and requires an uninterrupted flow of resources. Q: Are you happy that the resources are there to meet this three to five year time frame? A: Yes I think so. We are just at the beginning and we should not forget that. We are not just satisfied with the concrete pledges but with the continued interest that the international community is showing. This is very encouraging. So there are concrete pledges and also continued support. So I would say both the government and the international community are in line and what is left is to begin implementation, possibly as of next year – next year possibly being a transition year. Many donors have agreed to give their support in the form of budget support and this is very critical to us. While we have maybe surplus products in the country if food comes into the country, it could act as a disincentive to farmers so we are encouraging donors, if they could, to give us part of their resources in the form of budget support cash so we can conduct local purchases.