dc.contributor.editor
Kreutzmann, Hermann
dc.contributor.editor
Schütte, Stefan
dc.date.accessioned
2018-06-08T08:11:06Z
dc.date.available
2010-08-18
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/19510
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-23159
dc.description
Chapter 1 –
Introduction...............................................................................
1 1.1 The setting – Earthquake and Response
..............................................2 1.2 Earthquake Response
....................................................................4 1.2.1
The ICRC in Pakistan-administered Kashmir
....................................5 1.2.2 The GRC in Pakistan-administered
Kashmir ....................................6 1.3 From relief to development
............................................................7 1.4 Summary of
the GRC/ICRC project....................................................9 1.5
Implementation of the livestock package – challenges and achievements ... 11
1.5.1 The beneficiary selection
process.............................................. 11 1.5.2 Problems of
transportation and non-adapted animals ...................... 13 1.6 The
rationale of evaluating the livestock project ................................
15 Chapter 2 – Context: Introduction to Pakistan-administered Kashmir
......................17 2.1 General facts for Pakistan-administered Kashmir
................................ 17 2.2 Introduction to the project area
.................................................... 21 Chapter 3 –
Methodology..............................................................................24
3.1 Three-Tiered Methodological Approach
............................................ 25 3.1.1 Village Level
....................................................................... 25
3.1.2 Household
Level................................................................... 29
3.1.3 Expert Level
....................................................................... 29 3.2
Implementation of Methodological Approach and Field Logistics ..............
30 Chapter 4 – Assessment of production intervention
............................................33 4.1 Farming
Systems........................................................................
33 4.1.1 Agriculture
......................................................................... 35
4.1.2 Access to forest
resources....................................................... 39 4.1.3
Animal
Husbandry................................................................. 40
4.1.4 Role of cow in the livestock economy
......................................... 41 4.1.5 Interlinkages of
agriculture and livestock economy......................... 43 4.2 Village-wise
variations in cow utilisation strategies.............................. 44
4.2.1 Reasons for the absence of cows in beneficiary households
............... 45 4.2.2 Utilisation of cows in relation to altitude and
market access ............. 48 4.3 At the household level: how the donation is
utilised ............................ 54 4.3.1 Household composition and
economical contexts - characteristics of study
households..................................................................
54 4.3.2 Household-specific factors determining the status of the donated cows
58 4.3.3 Animal health care, (re-)production, and utilisation of milk
.............. 63 4.3.4 The beneficiary training
......................................................... 72 4.3.5 Ten major
findings regarding household performance...................... 73 4.4 How to
handle a cow donation? Three household scenarios .................... 74 IV
Chapter 5 – Assessment of structural interventions
............................................83 5.1 The performance of
Livestock First Aid Workers and Artificial Insemination Technicians
................................................. 83 5.2 Self assessment of
LFAWs and AITs.................................................. 85 5.2.1
Economics of ‘barefoot veterinarianism’ .....................................
86 5.2.2 The work routine of barefoot veterinarians
.................................. 88 5.2.3 Effect of economic crisis on
demand for veterinarian services ........... 89 5.3 Cooperation and
competition between LFAWs/AITs and government
agencies.................................................................. 90
5.4 The future of Livestock First Aid
Workers.......................................... 91 6
Conclusions............................................................................................93
7 References
............................................................................................96
8
Annexes................................................................................................98
Annex 1 - Guideline for focus group discussions
.................................... 98 Annex 2 - Guideline for household
interviews....................................... 99 Annex 3 - Guideline for
expert interviews with different actors................ 100
dc.description.abstract
Three years after the devastating earthquake in Pakistan-administered Kashmir
most relief and development programmes have gradually cut down their
activities to help local communities recuperate from the disaster. In the
immediate aftermath of the October 8th, 2005 earthquake a number of national
and international relief organisations engaged in activities to support local
communities. These activities have only rarely been evaluated to determine
whether they had a mid-range or longer-lasting impact on the livelihoods of
the affected people. The report presented here is the result of an impact
assessment of a livestock project implemented in the earthquake affected areas
by the German Red Cross (GRC) in collaboration with the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). This assessment was a joint effort of the
relief and development activities executed by GRC/ ICRC, and academia from the
Centre for Development Studies in the Institute of Geographic Sciences at
Freie Universität Berlin. The participatory evaluation involved experienced
staff from the Red Cross and representatives of village communities from the
four Union Councils in Muzaffarabad District that were severely affected by
the earthquake. Both acted as valuable knowledge resources, interpreters and
mediators in focus group discussions and expert interviews that were conducted
during the three weeks of fieldwork between March 18 and April 2, 2009. The
learning experience during the mission changed the perspectives and insights
of eight master and diploma students and their supervisors from the Centre of
Development Studies at Freie Universität Berlin. The prime objective of this
joint programme was to evaluate the impact of a livestock package that
intended to augment the livelihoods and provide a resource base for families
affected by the earthquake, going beyond sheer disaster relief efforts and
moving towards more sustainable development. The second objective was to
identify achievements and short-comings of the livestock package in order to
identify lessons-learned for future economic and social programmes in the
context of post-disaster interventions. The results presented in this report
are encouraging and differentiated. For all participants it was a learning
experience. This included the major challenge of determining how to evaluate
the impact of a single package on the overall development of households and
rural communities. The complex system of household economies and the variable
sets of income sources, activities directed towards domestic sustenance and
market production posed an intellectual challenge for the design of concepts
and methods. In our approach we tried to understand and address these
complexities by identifying different scenarios at the household level. From
the aggregation of data it became obvious that certain households were better
prepared to adopt and utilize offers such as the livestock package than
others. The identification of eligible households with potential for success
can be regarded as one of the great challenges of the programme. A second -
sometimes rather neglected aspect - is the careful selection of suitable
breeds of animals and the logistical burden of making the link between
providers and receivers of improved livestock. Overall this evaluation found
the GRC/ICRC project to have been planned and implemented with a high degree
of understanding and consideration for the earthquake victims. I would like to
thank Dr. Erhard Bauer form the German Red Cross for conceiving the idea of
this evaluation mission and for the generous support of the evaluation team. I
would also like to thank Marc Souvignier who acted as the link between Berlin
and Islamabad. In Pakistan we enjoyed the challenges posed to us by Esther
Lopez from the EcoSec department of the ICRC. In Muzaffarabad Jean-Jerome
Casabianca proved to be a considerate and protective head of the mission and
his team created a conducive environment for our task. II Without our
interpreters and section experts who accompanied the team to the field and
were valuable resource persons for a multitude of questions, none of our
students could have conducted the necessary focus group discussions and
interviews that led to the results presented in this report. Therefore, I also
express my sincere gratitude to Imran Mehmood Banday (EcoSec Secretary), Arif
Ayub Qureshi (MEI Team Leader), Mamoon Riaz Mughal, Fouzia Rafiq, Amer Rasheed
Malik, Mohsan Nazir (MEI Field Officers), Sayed Ali Haider Bukhari, Rubina
Shaheen Awan, and Muhammad Asif (former ICRC Field Officers). From the Berlin
group I thank all participants of this course for their motivation and
diligence in preparing the field visit, executing the empirical impact study,
processing and analyzing the data and compiling of the report. The exercise
would not have been feasible without the enthusiasm and unceasing motivation
of Dr. Stefan Schuette who helped to incorporate this joint programme into the
Master Studies Programme at the Centre for Development Studies at the Freie
Universität Berlin. Finally I would like to express my gratitude to all
institutions, named and unidentified supporters who contributed to the success
of this enterprise that helped to bridge the gap between academia and
practice, between relief and development, and contributed to a better
understanding of the challenges people in Pakistan face in post-disaster and
everyday circumstances.
de
dc.format.extent
VII, 101 S.
dc.relation.ispartofseries
urn:nbn:de:kobv:188-fudocsseries000000000080-2
dc.rights.uri
http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen
dc.subject.ddc
300 Sozialwissenschaften
dc.title
Three years after
dc.title.subtitle
evaluation of the GRC/ICRC livestock programme in the earthquake-affected
areas of Pakistan-administered Kashmir
refubium.affiliation
Geowissenschaften
de
refubium.affiliation.other
Institut für Geographische Wissenschaften / Centre for Development Studies (ZELF)
refubium.mycore.fudocsId
FUDOCS_document_000000006333
refubium.series.issueNumber
36
refubium.series.name
Berlin Geographical Papers
refubium.mycore.derivateId
FUDOCS_derivate_000000001085
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access