Objective
The core problems in Trincomalee district (and in the other districts of the North- East Province) are malnutrition (chronic and acute), poverty and disintegration as effect of the conflict. The local public infrastructure, personal property, food stocks, livestock and other production assets such as irrigation systems and markets are severely affected.
The objective of the Integrated Food Security Programme Trincomalee (IFSP) is to support and encourage people who are war affected and face seasonal and structural food deficits. Emphasis is on the diversification and intensification of local and regional food and income sources, improvement of nutrition and health care and promotion of nutrition and food security as programmatic priority of partner institutions and, capacity building. IFSP aims at contributing to stability and conflict mitigation and is actively promoting a peaceful co-existence of the regional communities.
Target groups
 top
Target groups of IFSP Trincomalee are subsistence farmers, specialised farmers, small farmers, fishermen and landless wage labourers, internally displaced persons, women headed households, orphans and unemployed youth. The Tamil, Sinhala and Muslim communities are addressed adequately according to the criteria of conflict affectedness, lack of social infrastructure and food deficit.
Donor
IFSP is funded by the Federal Republic of Germany (BMZ) through German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) and the Government of Sri Lanka through the Ministry of Eastern Development and Muslim Religious Affairs and the North East Provincial Council (NEPC), where IFSP is addressed as ‘special project’ under the overall development efforts for the north and east.
The programme started in August 1998 with a first phase until June 2001 and a second phase until end 2003. IFSP is the largest bilateral support programme for Trincomalee district.
Concept top
The concept of food and nutrition security is focussing on:
- higher availability of food
- better access to food, and
- better use & utilisation of food.
This is to be reached through a number of strategies aiming at actively involving village communities, viz. Participatory Needs Assessment (PNA), community mobilisation and confidence building, cash-for-work and food-for-work (‘cash and food for production and social infrastructure assets’), small scale business and employment promotion through a village development fund, establishing of a health and nutrition team together with the Department of Health and EHED, a Trincomalee based NGO, capacity building for stake holders (CBO, NGO, government institutions) and finally, intensive cooperation with CBOs and service providers.
Budgets top
Locally available budgets (excluding GTZ experts and international consultants, which are facilitated directly through GTZ head office) from German and Sri Lankan sources are as follows:
1997/98: Rs. 31.9 million (expenditure), 1999: Rs. 28.3 million (expenditure), 2000: Rs. 49.9 million (expenditure), 2001: Rs. 94.1 million (expenditure), 2002: Rs. 82.4 million (expenditure), 2003: Rs. 120 million (estimate). Included are additional German funds for food-for-work (equivalent to Rs. 60 million) from 1997/98 to 2000/2001. Direct local expenditure from the Federal Republic of Germany through GTZ is estimated up to Rs. 345 million and Rs. 55 million from Sri Lankan funds (DF) totalling to Rs. 400 million for the period 1998 to 2003.
Monitoring top
Physical and financial performance and the quality of cooperation with partner institutions and CBOs in particular are monitored. Impact monitoring has been established. The ‘village data sheets’ (vulnerability profile for all 582 villages of the district Technical Paper 10, village data sheets 2003 Technical Paper 35) are a tool for assessing change. IFSP has updated its monitoring concept in December 2002 with a strong focus on impact assessment. Regular review of project progress and addressing the process of communication with partners and CBOs allows to adjust procedures. Impact assessment has been done for assets created and for community mobilisation (Focused Impact Assessment, Working Paper 54). The ‘lessons learnt - best practices’ exercise of February 2003 (Working Paper 52) has confirmed the approach IFSP has been practising since 1998. All processes and results are documented (publications).
IFSP in post-conflict top
The cease fire Memorandum of Understanding of 23 February 2002 has brought many changes. The guns are silent and peace is at the doorsteps. At the same time, a certain degree of uncertainty prevails. How would the ‘Interim Agreement’ look like and how would power sharing be effected? What would be the priorities for development? How to ensure adequate funding for the ever increasing needs of the communities? How would the many internally displaced persons (IDP) be reintegrated? What would happen to the combatants - how would they be guided into normalcy?
The major impediment for reconstruction and development is the lack of capacity. Capacities in the north and east are extremely limited. This refers to manpower, funds and facilities. It appears that no adequate funding is at hand for what is proclaimed and intended. It also appears that the resources available are not being used efficiently. A lack of capability and willingness to cut through red tape prevails.
The recipient mentality among people prevents them from becoming active. It is observed that NGOs contribute to dependency and vulnerability. Most NGOs have no concept to promote independent village or CBO development. Their focus is on relief and welfare. Most NGOs lack an adequate exit/transfer strategy. Here again, capacity building with and among all partners in development would be an essential prerequisite for development. The antagonism between public sector institutions, NGOs and private sector establishments affects post conflict development. Round table meetings and joint and coordinated planning cum monitoring need to be established.
Since IFSP is in its final stage with a phasing-out concept in place until end 2003, conclusions and consequences of the post-war to post-conflict situation are obvious. All village development projects have to be finalised. Communal assets need to be handed over to local authorities. Maintenance plans have to be established. Placement for IFSP staff is to be ensured. The knowledge base of IFSP has to be institutionalised into a ‘Centre for Information Resources Management’, CIRM.
Download IFSP Programme Profile PDF file (416 KB) top
Good bye - December 2003
IFSP says good bye to all partners and visitors. Significant achievements in the fields of infrastructure, health services, local markets and improved institutional capacities are recorded. IFSP Trincomalee has contributed to the reduction of vulnerability and poverty. IFSP has created a learning site for many individuals and institutions and has developed into a ‘learning institution’ over the years.
The experience and knowledge created will be used by the Centre for Information Resources Management. CIRM, an institution under the Provincial Council of the Northern and Eastern Provinces, supports good practices and information management for development in the north and east.
top
|
