This thesis assesses the food security status of households receiving support from the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) in Libokemkem woreda, South Gondar zone of Ethiopia. Data was collected through surveys of 144 households across two kebeles. Key findings include: 1) 86.25% of households were found to be food insecure; 2) Chronic malnutrition, as measured by stunting, affected 62 children under 5 years of age; and 3) Significant determinants of food insecurity were found to be larger family size, smaller amounts of cultivable and irrigated land, and greater distance to market. Recommendations focus on improving agricultural productivity, diversifying livelihoods, and linking

1. Masters Thesis Defense
Assessment of food security status of PSNP beneficiary
households in Ethiopia: The case of Libokemkem woreda,
south Gondar zone.
Supervisor of thesis: Dr.Temesgen Tilahun
Behailu Shewangizaw
September, 2015

2. OUTLINE
Introduction
 Background and statement of the problem
 Objectives of the study
Conceptual Framework
Methodology
 Selection of the study area
 Data type and source
 Method of data collection
 Sample size and sampling procedure
 Model specification and method of data analysis
Major Findings
 Household food security status
 Stunting (chronic malnutrition)
 Major coping strategies
 Determinants of household food security
Conclusion
Recommendation

3. INTRODUCTION
 Food security recently applied to community, local,
household & individual level (Foster 1992).
 Necessity to include nutrition into food security
evolved over time (Quisumbing 1995) .
 Food insecurity, malnutrition and vulnerability remain
high in Ethiopia (WB 2014):
29 % absolute poor,
44 % suffer from chronic malnutrition, and
43 % vulnerable to absolute poverty.

4. CONT.
 Causes of food insecurity in Ethiopia?
poverty;
weak institutions (market and land tenure);
land degradation;
insufficient landholding;
low productivity rain fed agriculture;
low off farm opportunities;
population pressure;
low literacy.
[Firehiwot 2007; Degefa 2002; Gebremedhin 2001;
Devereux-2000; Masefield 2000; Hurni 1998]

5. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
 Previous food security studies focus on process indicators.
 Studies on the nutritional status of children in PSNP woredas
are not easily available
 Attention to investigate the status of the linkage between food
security program (PSNP) and nutrition is not adequate .
 Hence the main gap is to assess food security status of PSNP
households using both process and outcome indicator:
prevalence of food insecurity (access)
prevalence of stunting (chronic malnutrition)

6. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
 General Objective
to assess the food security status of the PSNP beneficiary
households in Libokemkem district.
 Specific Objective
measurement of prevalence of household food insecurity
(access);
measurement of prevalence of stunting (chronic malnutrition);
determinants of food insecurity;
identify household coping strategies.

7. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 What does the PSNP beneficiary household food security (access
to food) status look like in the study area?
 What does the chronic malnutrition (stunting) rate of children
under five look like in the area?
 What are the factors affecting food security situation in the area?
 What are the main coping strategies in food shortage situation?

8. HYPOTHESES
 Household food security status has a positive correlation with :-
use of chemical fertilizer,
market distance,
annual income,
plough oxen,
TLU,
size of cultivated land, and
size of irrigated land;
while it is negatively associated with family size .

9. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Basic service
Extension
Market
PSNP
Conditional
cash transfer
Livelihood
assets
Cultivated land
Livestock,
Oxen
Income
Irrigation
Demographic
Factor
Family size
Education
Household
activities
On/off
farm
activities
Non-farm
activities
Access
Food
availability
Utilization
Househol
d food
security
and
nutrition
status
Food
intake
Health
status

10. METHODOLOGY
 Selection of study area
selection of Libokemkem district was purposive:
CFI districts [targeted by PSNP program];
frequent visit RRM (Rapid Response Mechanism)
Data source; Ethiopian mapping agency

11. CONT.
 Sample size and sampling procedures
two clusters of PSNP kebeles (case load)
two kebeles were selected randomly

12. CONT.
sample size (Yamane1967):- n = N/1+N*(e)²
Where: n- sample size, N -population size, e –sampling error (5%)
however, sample size scaled up to 171 (all pw in Birkute)
increase number of child
manageable
finally systemic random sampling to select respondents
Sample Kebeles Total PW - HH Sample size (PPS)
Ginazana Selqisa 149 96
Birkute 75 48
Total 224 144

13. CONT.
 Data type
 Quantitative; &
 Qualitative .
 Data source.
 Primary;
 Secondary.
 Data collection methods:
 Household survey questionnaire;
 Focus group discussion;
 Key informant interview;
 Observation; &
 Analysis of relevant documents.

14. CONT.
 Model specification and analysis
Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS):
to measure household food insecurity status
Child Anthropometry:
to measure stunting (chronic malnutrition) status
Multiple Logistic Regression Model: flexible and easily used
function; meaningful interpretation, and simpler in estimation
(Nelson 1984).
to identify the determinants of food security status.

15. CONT.
 Mixed data analysis method
 Quantitative data analysis
 descriptive statistical techniques;
 inferential statistics (simple regression using T-test as
well as maximum likelihood estimate of logit model).
 Qualitative data analysis
 narrated to substantiate quantitative findings;
 qualitative data was reduced according to similar patterns of
characteristics:
 major sources of food;
 households’ coping strategies;
 reasons to sell most of agricultural products...

16. MAJOR FINDINGS
 Household food security status
13.75 % (n=22) food secure
86.25 % (n=138) food insecure

17. CONT.
 Measurement of Prevalence of Stunting
not stunted 17; moderately 4; and severely 41

18. CONT.
Stunning by food security status
 11 food secure ; 34 food insecure

19. CONT.
 Stunting by sex
 N = 62 [F 29, M 33]
 2 out of 3 were admitted for Out Patient Therapeutic Feeding (Birkute HP).

20. CONT
 Major coping strategies

21. CONT.
 Distribution by Coping Stages
Source: Adopted from MOH (2011)
Coping Stages Marked by Percent
Stage 1 Insurance Strategies Reversible strategies 77.5
Stage 2 Crisis Strategies I
Marked by the sale of
non productive assets 16.88
Stage 3 Crisis Strategies II
Marked by sale of
productive assets 5.63

22. CONT.
 Distribution by coping stages

23. CONT
Determinants of food security
The maximum likelihood estimate of logit model
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
Variable Estimated Coefficient Odds Ratio Std.
Err.
Significance Level
Family Size -.853 0.426 .17961 0.043**
Cultivable Land 6.775 875.724 2140.93 0.006***
Irrigated Land 16.707 61.222 1.5938 0.004 ***
Market Distance .572 1.772 .4058 0.012 **
Education -.737 .478 .2952 0.232
TLU .349 1.418 .8006 0.536
Annual Income .0001 1.000 .0003 0.63

24. CONCLUSION
 The farming systems is constrained by:
demographic,
biophysical,
socioeconomic , and
technological factors
 Lack of sources of employment opportunities other than on-
farm activities was found one of the challenges;
 The majority of study households are food insecure; &
 The prevalence of chronic malnutrition is also higher.

25. RECOMMENDATION
 Shift from short term support scheme to livelihood based and
development oriented approach;
 Improving productivity through technology based approach:
ss irrigation...
 Strengthening complimentarity between PSNP and other
development initiatives;
 Livelihood diversifications to improve food access through:
on farm;
off-farm;
non-farm business;
employment pathway in the local labor markets;

26. RECOMMENDATION
 Appropriate development interventions toward women:
increase women’s income earning opportunities;
reducing their work load;
IGS and decision making at household level.
 Targeted intervention within the ongoing FSP [ PSNP] :
pregnant and lactating mothers;and
 child.

27. RECOMMENDATION
 Linking the PSNP cash/food transfer with non food
contributors of nutrition:
social transformation process through
social behavioral change approach:
family planning;
nutrition promotion…

28. Thank y u!!!