1. SOMALIA: IRIN Focus on Saudi livestock ban
2. The impact of the livestock import ban by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on
the agro-pastoral and the pastoral food economies in Western Somaliland.

NAIROBI, 22 September 1999(IRIN) - The first reported outbreak of Rift Valley Fever (RVF) outside of Africa, in Saudi Arabia, has resulted in a regional ban on imported livestock from Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, Kenya, and Djibouti.

Although the status of the ban - its length and conditions - has not been formally established, a spokesperson from the Saudi Arabian embassy in Nairobi confirmed to IRIN on Friday that it was now in force. A shipment of goats and sheep from the northern Berbera port, in the self-declared state of Somaliland, was returned by Saudi Arabia on Thursday, local humanitarian sources told IRIN.

The effect of the ban is likely to be "devastating" for countries, such as Somalia, which are heavily dependent on livestock exports to the Gulf states, a regional economic expert told IRIN. The economic impact will be compounded by a simultaneous ban in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), announced by the official UAE news agency on Friday. It said the UAE would stop importing cattle, sheep, goats and camels from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan and Nigeria.

The Saudi Arabia government this week announced emergency measures to curb the spread of the disease, which has reportedly claimed 42 lives so far, news agencies said. A statement by the World Health Organisation (WHO) said a recent outbreak of RVF in the Jizan region in southwestern Saudi Arabia was the first outside Africa. Counter measures include the rapid disposal of dead animals and intensive application of insecticides to eradicate mosquitoes and larvae, as well as public health information.

In Yemen, news agencies quoted a local health official as saying that 77 people had died of RVF, but Health minister Abdullah Abdelwali officially announced a significantly lower figure of 17, AFP said on 22 September. Strict laboratory tests are necessary to establish the viral genome and antibodies to avoid panic-attributions of deaths to RVF, humanitarian sources told IRIN.

In an information sheet on the disease, WHO says the disease primarily affects animals but "occasionally causes disease in humans". It may cause severe disease in both animals and humans, leading to high morbidity and mortality and "exacting substantial economic costs from loss of livestock".

The virus is primarily spread amongst animals by infected mosquitoes. Breeds of livestock long adapted to local conditions fare better than exotic breeds recently introduced to an endemic area, WHO said. People are infected with RVF either by infected mosquitoes or through contact with the blood, body fluids or organs of infected animals. WHO notes that the aerosol mode of transmission has also led to infection in laboratory workers. Symptoms are sudden onset of fever, headache, and muscle pain with severe cases resulting in haemorrhagic fever and death.

Economic blow

The economic impact of the ban is expected to be far-reaching, say regional experts, with Horn of Africa countries, already affected by prolonged drought, among the hardest hit. In Ethiopia, the ban will affect the Somali Region, including the Ogaden, which has been the epicentre of a regional drought. The effect on communities "is as bad as the failure of rains", humanitarian sources in Ethiopia told IRIN. It came at a time when communities in the Somali region were trying to recover from drought, by re-establishing their herds, and looking for markets, said the source.

In the Ethiopian Somali Region, a previous RVF ban issued by Saudi Arabia in 1998 (see Rift Valley Fever, IRIN archives on www.reliefweb.int) forced people to build up herds that would otherwise have been exported through the northern ports of Somalia, resulting in a build-up of animals on the range. Overuse of the range results in environmental degradation and difficulty in maintaining good, healthy herds. "When the drought began to bite, it was almost certainly those animals that died", said the source.

But the 1998 ban on Ethiopia and Somalia was described by international humanitarian agencies as effectively "partial"; to a certain extent it was circumvented by trans-shipping livestock through Yemen. A 1998 Famine Early Warning System (FEWS) report noted that there was an upsurge in peak period exports to Yemen as Somali traders diverted livestock exports to other markets: "When the door is closed, try the window", observed the report. But this weeks ban is likely to have "much more serious" implications, said a business source in Addis Ababa, because of the outbreak of RVF in Yemen and Saudi Arabia, and the recent UEA announcement.

Regional migration and drought

The movement of people, animals and animal products for trade is leading to an increased spread of animal diseases across national borders, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation said in a statement issued from Rome on Friday. It said that "some livestock diseases have been diagnosed for the first time outside of their "normal" areas of origin, sometimes thousands of kilometres away. More than 50 people had reported dead from a RVF outbreak in Yemen, said FAO, and the Al-Hudaydah province at the western coast of Yemen had reported high abortion rates in livestock as well as numerous deaths of young calves and sheep. The affected area borders Saudi Arabia's Jizan province, where 16 people are known to have died last week, said the statement.

Regional drought in the Horn of Africa has triggered large movement of livestock across borders - which has provoked conflict in some areas, UN and humanitarian representatives have pointed out. The health effects of human and livestock migration is not known, humanitarian sources told IRIN.

Somalia

Most seriously affected by the regional ban is likely to be Somalia, a country which depends heavily on export of livestock. It lacks an established government and institutions to cope with the ban, and has very limited opportunities for economic diversification. Without a recognised central government for almost a decade, Somalia has struggled to find ways to get livestock certified for export.

The main outlet for livestock exports in through the Somaliland port of Berbera, followed by the northeastern Puntland port of Bosasso. There are a few small active ports, such as Hobiyo, Heis, Mait and Zeila, which are minor compared to the amounts shipped from the main ports. According to a 1998 FEWS report (The Livestock Embargo by Saudi Arabia: A Report on the Economic, Financial and Social Impact on Somaliland and Somalia, 31 July, 1998), livestock exports had recovered since the end of the Somali civil war and by 1998 surpassed pre-war levels from Berbera - the port of Bosasso opened on the eve of the civil war. Estimated value of livestock exports from Berbera in 1997 reached US $120.8 million, and livestock exports from Bosasso in the same year were valued at US $14.8 million, FEWS said.

In the 1998 report, FEWS emphasised that a livestock ban had a direct impact on food stocks and local markets, and was expected to cause "gradual economic down-turn"

his year was expected to be a "bumper year" for livestock exports from Somaliland, UN sources told IRIN. The budget by the administration of the self-declared state has grown by 25 percent to US $27 million, with US $13 million raised directly from livestock. The seriousness of the regional ban on Somaliland can be seen by the fact "nearly half the Somaliland budget is made up of livestock", said the source. The 1998 FEWS report said that Berbera was more vulnerable to a livestock ban by Saudi Arabia because "a greater proportion of its livestock exports goes there". According to FEWS/Somalia interviews with officials from the Somaliland Ministry of Livestock during the compilation of the report "about 50 percent of sheep, goats and camels originate in Ethiopia as well as 70 percent of all cattle". In comparison, most of the animals exported through Bosasso come from the Northeast or the Central Rangelands.

Authoritative Somali sources told IRIN that the ban would quickly reduce the flow of electronic goods, food, and clothing, which were obtained by exchange with livestock. Northern regions would be hit first, but would eventually affect the capital, Mogadishu. Livestock from southern Somalia will be less affected by the ban, as the civil war effectively closed the southern ports of Mogadishu, Merka and Kismayo, and forced southerners to depend more on an internal market. For export purposes, livestock from the southern areas would have to survive the long trek through the Ethiopian Ogaden to get to the main northern ports.

In the 1998 report, FEWS emphasised that a livestock ban had a direct impact on food stocks and local markets, and was expected to cause "gradual economic downturn". Among other things, a drop in livestock exports would result in a shortfall in foreign exchange, causing the local currencies to lose value and raising the prices of imported food products in terms of local currencies, said the report.

According to one Somali livestock expert, the ban "reflects not just on export quality but also on local markets and the environment. It will result in the over-production of herds, without the usual market outlet, which will cause environmental damage".

Somali sources told IRIN that there was an urgent need for international agencies to assist by helping to establish systems to "investigate the health of animals". The source said there were also "hopes that the newly elected president would talk about it and get something done effectively".

This paper considers the ban on livestock into KSA from Somaliland and its impact on the pastoral and agro-pastoral food economy groups. It looks at a scenario in which livestock exports decrease and sales within the country increase by 30% leading to a decrease in livestock prices of about 30%. This scenario suggests that the price of imported foods (particularly rice and sugar) will also increase by 25%. This combination of factors leads to the following predictions:

- The group most affected by the ban in the coming months will be the very poor wealth group within the pastoral community. The very poor pastoral food economy group are estimated to make up no more than 20% of the pastoral population (ie no more than 10% of the total population) in Somaliland and are dependant on support from other wealth groups to meet their food needs.
- The poor pastoral wealth group are in a position where they can meet their food needs but only at the expense of their other needs such as for livestock drugs, human medicines ie expenditure on other essentials may have to be reduced to meet food needs.
- Both the middle pastoralists and the middle and poor agro-pastoralists have sufficient access to other resources that they will not immediately feel the impact of the livestock ban. The impact on these groups will depend upon how the ban develops as well as on the type of interventions developed to support the pastoral food economy.

Introduction

This paper uses food economy information available on the agro-pastoral and pastoral populations in Western Somaliland1 to discuss the possible impact of the Saudi Arabia ban on livestock imports from Somaliland on both pastoral and agro-pastoral households. The paper also considers the other factors that will impact on the household food economy of both pastoralists and agropastoralists in the coming months including: the 1997 harvest; the distribution of cereal associated with the UNHCR returnee programme; and the climatologists predictions: March to May 1998. This paper does not consider the impact of the livestock ban on the administration, the political situation within Somaliland.

A significant proportion of the population in Somaliland are dependant on livestock to access food either directly in the form of meat and milk or indirectly through the sale of livestock and milk and the purchase of other food items (imported cereals, sugar). It is estimated that 55% percent of the population are pastoral, a further 10% are agropastoral and an additional proportion of the population living in urban centres are also involved in the marketing of livestock2. This paper concentrates on the poor and middle wealth groups in both the pastoral and agropastoral populations as these are the populations who are more vulnerable to negative influences on access to food and income. The better-off wealth groups are considered to have the resources to cope with a loss of income form livestock sales resulting from the livestock ban. This paper does not address the impact on the livestock ban on the urban food economy group 3.

1. Background to the present situation

1.1 Livestock exports

In February 1998, following reports of an outbreak of Rift Valley Fever (RVF), the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) banned the importation of livestock from Somalia/Somaliland. Export of livestock to KSA are reported to have stopped in early February and by the beginning of March livestock prices in Somaliland were beginning to decrease4. In addition the availability of export quality animals in the market went down as people stopped bringing their animals to market. Although prices are showing a downward trend, it should be noted that prices had not by the beginning of March decreased dramatically. This appears to reflect the:

- availability of good grazing and water throughout Somaliland and the Haud (grazing land in the Ogaden) following the unusually good rains during the Deyr as a result of the El Nino effect.

- many people's optimistic view that the ban will be lifted before the start of the Haj month, which starts at the end of March/the beginning of April. This optimism reflect the fact that Somali shoats (sheep and goats) are considered to be of particularly good quality and flavour by many people. Artificially fattened animals (eg from Australia) are not as popular as range fattened animals. Eating an artificially fattened animal is said "to be like eating a human"!

However as time progresses it begins to look more and more unlikely that the ban will be lifted. If the ban is not lifted then some people anticipate that livestock will be smuggled via Mukha port in Yemen to Saudi Arabia. The sale of livestock to Mukha port, Yemen is not as popular as to Jessan port in Saudi Arabia. This is because:

- livestock in Mukha are purchased in the local currency which is not very stable and subject to devaluation. This means that following the sale of livestock, local products must be purchased quickly before the currency devalues.

- the quality and variety of local goods for sale in Yemen that may usefully be exported to Somalia/Somaliland is limited to: biscuits, plastic goods eg jerry cans, salt, soda eg Pepsi cola.

- sometimes payments may be withheld, although this has been averted to some extent by demanding payment before livestock are unloaded from the boats.

1.2 Livestock status

The impact of the good rains during the Deyr season, and the Heis season (along the coast) towards the end of 1997 mean that livestock are in a very healthy condition. And early rains reported along the coastal areas at the beginning of March combined with the predictions of the climatologists in Nairobi suggest that conditions for livestock in the coming months (March through to May) can be expected to be normal to good in most areas in Somaliland. A meeting of climatologists in Nairobi in February 1998 forecasted that there is an 80% probability that there will be normal to good rains in the Western Somaliland, whilst in the Ogaden and central Somalia there is a 75% chance of normal to good rains during this period. This has positive implications for herd size, status and milk availability during this period.

1.3 Locusts

Locusts have been reported around Zeylac, along the coastal areas and at the foot of the mountains. At present the locust population are fairly scattered and not dense. The FAO in collaboration with the Desert Locust Control programme for East Africa are monitoring the situation . However if numbers increase and they move towards the Haud, they could cause considerable damage to grazing land.

1.4 Local cereal production in 1997

FSAU estimated that the 1997 harvest was approximately 10,854 MT. This is about a third of pre-war production figures and of production in 1996. This should be sufficient to support the agro-pastoral population but may not provide large surplus for sale in the market. In addition it should be noted that among the agro-pastoral population a proportion of cereal consumption comes from imported cereals (rice, wheat flour or the cheap wheat grain).

1.5 Wheat grain - Refugee repatriation

UNHCR are planning to repatriate 90,000 refugees from the Eastern Ethiopian camps. By the beginning of March about 10,000 refugees had returned to their homes of origin and a further 10,000 were reported to be in the process of returning home. Returnees are given a package which includes nine months food ration made up of: 150 kg of wheat grain, 10 kg of pulses, 5 kg of cooking oil per person. Non-food items include: plastic sheeting, blankets, and jerry cans. In addition the refugees receive a travel grant of approximately 200 Ethiopian Birr to take them to their home villages after UNHCR has returned them to Somaliland.

The bulk of the cereal is reported to be sold by refugees in the camps where the prices for wheat grain tend to be higher than in Hargeisa, Boroma and Gebiley, reflecting the demand from pastoralists and others living in the Ogaden in Ethiopia and the fact that refugees expect to be able to purchase grain more cheaply in Somaliland. An SCFUK-FEAT food economy assessment in the camps at the end of 1996, found that the poor and middle wealth groups within the camps sell a proportion of their wheat ration and replace it with cheaper local cereals (maize and sorghum).

The availability of cereal from the refugee repatriation programme should help to stabilise the price of local cereals both in Somaliland and the Ogaden. The increased availability of a wheat grain, a cheap cereal should help prevent a rise in local cereals (maize and sorghum) following the increase in demand for cheaper cereals to replace imported cereals.

However the repatriation programme may be delayed for any of the following reasons:

- a refusal by either governments involved to allow the repatriation to continue;
- delays in WFP pipeline and insufficient food for the food package;
- contaminated cereals (ie insufficient cereal for the programme);
- conflict at the point of arrival for refugees. Many refugees come from Gebiley where there are reported to be unresolved clan disputes over land ownership If this should be the casee then the price of local cereals may increase.

2. Developing a scenario. The impact of the present situation on access to food and income of pastoral and agro-pastoral households.

2.1 Impact on livestock sales and prices

If the ban is not lifted then many people anticipate that livestock will be smuggled via Mukha port in Yemen to Saudi Arabia. If this happens then the price is expected to go down to $15-20 per animal a decrease of 25 - 33% and the number exported is also expected to decrease to about a third of normal levels.

The reduced number of animals exported will be counter balanced by an increase in sales of livestock locally. Livestock prices will remain at about 30% below normal levels and the number for sale in the local market will show an increase of no more than 25%. This increase in livestock sales and the reduction in prices will not initially be as bad as might be expected. This is because:

- the animals are generally healthy and in good conditions - so people will try and hold onto their animals
- poorer households may attempt to reduce their requirements for cash by changing their consumption from more expensive imported cereals to cheaper local cereals and wheat grain.
- the increased availability of wheat grain from the refugee food distributions should ensure that local cereal prices and wheat grain do not increase significantly.

2.2 Impact on availability of imported foods for purchase in the market.

If livestock are not exported or exported in smaller quantities there may be a reduction in the availability of hard currency for the purchase of goods (particularly imported cereals such as rice and pasta, and sugar). Initially this is expected to lead to an increase in the price of rice and sugar of no more than 25% and will impact particularly on households who do not have access to hard currency (ie the poorer consumers).

The price of imported cereals will depend on both the ability to supply cereals and the demand for cereals.
- The demand for imported cereals is expected to decrease as poorer households reduce their consumption of imported cereals and increase their consumption of cheaper local cereals (maize and sorghum) and wheat grain.
- The supply is dependant on about 10 well known food importers in Somaliland. These have been fairly successful in business over the last few years and have diversified into other goods (including electrical goods, cloth, etc..) It is possible that they may have sufficient access to hard currency to enable the importation of cereals and sugar to continue at the same rate in the short term or they may be in a position to reduce the importation of other goods (electrical goods, cloth,..) and concentrate their resources on the importation of cereals and sugar to meet demand.

2.3 Impact on demand for local cereals.

Demand for local cereals (including wheat grain) is expected to increase as a proportion of the population who previously consumed imported cereals turn to the cheaper local cereals rather than increasing their livestock sales to purchase imported foods.

This increased demand will to some extent be met by the wheat grain provided through the returnee programme as well as from local production. If UNHCR refugee\returnee programme to return 90,000 people this year continues then cereal is expected to be available for purchase at normal prices: wheat grain expected to remain below at $10 for 50kg. In addition although cereal production in 1997 was only a third of pre-war production, it was as good or better than the preceding years with the exception of 1996 in which production reached pre-war levels. The good harvest in 1996 combined with the wheat grain distributions suggests that the availability of local cereal and wheat grain should be sufficient to meet any additional demand.

2.4 Impact on the diet (milk and meat)

Although in pastoral areas livestock products (milk/meat) contribute 30-60% of kilocalorie intake, most of this comes from the consumption of milk and/or ghee.

Livestock meat consumption tends to be low. It is unlikely that the ban on livestock imports into KSA will lead to a substantial increase in livestock meat consumption. This reflects the fact that the income from the sale of 1 shoat will purchase 4-5 times more kilocalories in terms of cereal than can be obtained from eating the same animal.

- A 15kg shoat at 200 kcal per 100g will provide a total of 30,000 kcal.
- A 15kg shoat sold for $20 will purchase 40-50kg of cereal. 40 kg of cereal at 355 kcal per 100g will provide 142,000 kcal.

2.5 Seasonality

During the coming Gu season, sugar consumption is expected to decrease as usual. This is because many households tend to reduce their tea intake and increase their milk intake (either skimmed or fresh) during the Gu season reflecting the seasonal increase in milk supplies. This is also the season that both camel milk and skimmed milk are increasingly available as gifts to very poor households.

2.6 Impact on sources of income - livestock as a source of income

Livestock are an important source of income particularly for pastoral households. Income comes from the sale of milk and ghee but also most importantly from the sale of livestock. In agro-pastoral households milk sales are a more important source of income than animal sales.

3. To summarise - the most likely scenario in the coming months.

Phase 1

- Livestock prices decrease by 30%. Numbers exported (via Yemen) low only 30% of normal.

Phase 2

- As the ban continues the price of imported foods (rice and sugar) will increase by 25% in terms of the local currency reflecting the loss of access to hard currency/income from the sale of livestock outside Somalia.
- The number of animals for sale in the country will increase as people sell more animals to meet their basic food and non-food requirements. Number of animals sold expected to increase by 30% and prices to continue to be about 30% below normal whilst pasture and water are available.
- The prices of local cereal (maize and sorghum) and wheat grain from the refugee camps will not increase dramatically initially reflecting the increased availability of wheat grain in the area due to the repatriation of refugees.

3.1 Note on the graphs

The first bar in each bar chart represents how people may normally access either food or income or spend their money.

The second bar represents the impact of the scenario described above on sources of food, income and expenditure patterns.

The third bar represents the summarises how households respond to these changes. This bar is divided up into food, non-food and other. Non-food is considered to be essentials such as agricultural inputs, soap, education for children etc. that households presently spend. Other is considered to be a cash surplus that may be spent on items that households could cut back on in a poor year.

4. How will this scenario impact on each food economy group and the wealth groups.

4.1 Impact on middle agro-pastoral households

There will be an overall reduction in the cash surplus available to middle agro-pastoral households following the loss of income from cereal sales (due to normal-poor production in 1997), a decrease in income from animal sales, and an increased expenditure on imported foods.

- Local cereal consumption from own production will remain stable.
- Initially there will be decrease in what the household can purchase, following the increase in price of imported cereals. However the increased cost of purchased foods (mainly imported cereals/sugar) can be met from a reduction in expenditure on other non-food items or through the sale of additional animals.
- A reduction in cereal production following a normal to poor year harvest in 1997 may lead to a loss of income from the sale of own cereal production of about 13%.
- An additional 1-2 shoats may be sold if cash is required an increase in livestock sales of about 30%. Middle income agro-pastoral households can:
- reduce expenditure on other items
- reduce the purchase of imported cereals and increase expenditure and consumption of the cheaper local cereals.
- they can sell more of their shoats (ie cash in some of their assets in the "current account")

4.2 Impact on poor agro-pastoral households: An overall reduction in cash surplus following an increase in expenditure on food (due to both a reduction in own cereal production and increase in imported cereal prices), a decrease in income from animal sales.
- Local cereal consumption from own production down by 50% following poor harvest in 1997 leading to an increased in purchase of cereal in the market. This group would tend to purchase local cereal or wheat grain.
- The increase in the price of purchased foods (mainly imported cereals/sugar) can be met from a reduction in expenditure on other non-food items.
- An additional shoat may be sold if cash is required.

4.3 Impact on middle pastoral households

Middle income pastoral households should have an average of about 75-100 shoats above that necessary to provide a sufficient number of meals every day. This is assuming:
- that middle income households have 100-250 small stock and up to 10 camels and that
- a poverty line for Somaliland previously defined as an average herd size of 50-60 adhi (small stock - sheep and/or goats) or 5-10 camels5 and 72 adhi, (small stock) 3 cattle or 8 camels6

By increasing the sale of livestock, middle income households can fill the gap caused by both the increase in cereal prices and the decrease in livestock prices. In the situation described the additional number of livestock that may need to be sold would be between 15-20 per middle income household to enable an equivalent amount of expenditures on food and non-food items.

4.4 Impact on poor pastoral households

This group can be considered to be borderline. They can meet their own food needs but only through reducing the income spent on other items (many of them essential eg animals drugs, soap, human medicine etc.). Their livestock holdings fall around the poverty line. This year prior to the ban - could have been a year that would have helped this group to build up their resources whereas now it is a year when they will struggle to make ends meet. The value of the gifts that this group receives in local currency decreases in relation to what it will purchase. Employment opportunities are expected to remain the same - these include de-silting of water catchment areas, selling charcoal, herding animals.

4.5 Impact on very poor households pastoral households.

(The example looks at pastoralists who have a greater dependency on livestock sales rather than on income generating activities.) The very poor pastoral households are extremely vulnerable to any crises and the ban on livestock imports into KSA will impact on this group in a number of ways. This group already have livestock holdings considered to be below the poverty line and are dependant on gifts particularly of milk from other wealth groups to meet their food requirements.

A proportion of their food comes from imported cereals (rice and sugar), an increase in the price of imported foods will push this group into a food deficit.

This group do not earn sufficient income or have sufficient livestock to replace this food deficit without further taking themselves into destitution by selling more animals. This group will continue to be dependant on the support of other wealth groups in the community.

The very poor pastoral wealth group are estimated to be less than 20% of the pastoral population ( or less than 10% of the total population). This is based on the estimate for the year Gu 1995 - Gu 1996, a poor year in which herd sizes decreased and a number of households fell below the poverty line. This period has however been followed by two normal to good years in terms of livestock production in which herd size should have increased to some extent and a proportion are expected to have moved back into the poor wealth group.

5. Follow-up

- Assess changes in herd composition July 1997 to July 1998.
- Continue to monitor market prices:
- including wheat grain, local cereals, wheat flour and imported cereals
- livestock prices and numbers sold (locally and abroad)
- milk prices
- Changes in marketing patterns including:
- the reaction of other markets in the region to changes in the prices for Somali livestock
- small port activities
- Access to pasture and water for livestock
- The on-going monitoring of locusts.
- Develop an urban food economy profile in order to assess the impact of the reduction of livestock sales on the urban food economy group.
- Identify programmes to support the very poor pastoral households.

NOTES

1 SCF-UK/FSAU: Somaliland. The agro-pastoral food economy group. Part 1: Background information. SCF-UK/FSAU: Somaliland. The agro-pastoral food economy group. Part 2: Description of the food economy in a normal year.

SCFUK-FEAT: A description of a pastoral food economy group of Western Somaliland in a bad year Gu 1995-Gu 1996

2 The proportion of the population who are pastoral and agro-pastoral is based on a number of sources of information including: SCF-UK: The prize of peace. A survey of rural Somaliland; Booklet produced by the Department of Statistics and Research of the Ministry of National Planning and Co-ordination, Republic of Somaliland. January 1998.

3 The urban food economy group is defined here as those who are not involved in agricultural production (either crops or livestock).

4 UNCTAD data indicates that exports decreased by 48% in February 1998 when compared to the same period in 1997.

5 Lewis I.M, A pastoral democracy: A study of Pastoralism and Politics among the Northern Somali of the Horn of Africa. OAU 1961

6 Jamal V, Agrarian policies and rural poverty in Africa, 1983 as cited in SCF First steps to recovery. Urban Surveys in Somaliland.