Improving sustainability of cash-based animal production interventions

Cash transfer programmes (CTPs) are widely implemented in humanitarian contexts because of their multiple benefits, including flexibility, positive market effects, reduced logistical requirements and operational costs for organisations, and enhancement of crisis-affected populations’ dignity and agency. Among the various types of CTPs, cash for livelihoods interventions enable affected populations to restore or establish livelihood activities, therefore strengthening their resilience during protracted humanitarian crisis or recovery from a shock.

Livelihood activities supported by CTPs are diverse, context-specific and include small-scale poultry, small ruminant and fish farming. Through cash grants provided in instalments, crisis-affected populations establish their farms and purchase animals, feed and veterinary services. Instalments are released as affected populations progress through the different phases of the project.

Prior to grant distribution, crisis-affected populations receive training focused on the selected animal production sector and delivered through a multidisciplinary approach. The sale of farm products generates income, allowing affected populations to cover their basic needs including a balanced diet and to access essential services such as healthcare and children’s education. Households also benefit from integrating proteins of animal origin into their diets. According to cost-recovery principles, the income generated enables crisis-affected populations to continue and sometimes expand their businesses by diversifying animal production and increasing their participation in the value chain, for example through transformation of animal products.

Experience across multiple programmes suggests that these projects can be highly effective, particularly for vulnerable crisis-affected populations such as women-headed households, people with disabilities and at-risk youth. In addition to generating income, they foster social inclusion and enhance crisis-affected populations’ dignity and recognition within their communities. They can take place in urban, peri-urban and rural areas, based on space availability, while are generally not recommended in camp settings because of space constraints and increased risk of disease transmission among animals and, in case of zoonotic diseases, Zoonotic diseases can be transmitted from animals and their products to people (examples: tuberculosis, brucellosis). between animals and people.

While there are guidelines for implementing CTPs, including cash for livelihoods, across a wide range of organisations and contexts, little attention has been paid to the specific operational requirements of CTPs focusing on animal production. These projects present unique challenges which, if not properly addressed, may hamper the project outcome. Drawing on the author’s multi-year experience in designing and implementing cash-based animal production interventions across diverse humanitarian contexts, this article highlights operational considerations and shares practical lessons for practitioners and organisations seeking to strengthen programme sustainability. The presented recommendations are derived from recurring operational challenges and successful practices observed across these programmes.

Why cash and not in-kind inputs?

Benefits of CTPs have been widely documented across diverse humanitarian contexts. In small-scale animal production, the use of cash plays a fundamental role in building crisis-affected populations’ capacity, which enhances the intervention’s sustainability. During training, crisis-affected populations learn how to select healthy zero-day old chicks Chicks are purchased shortly after hatching and raised on the farm until they are sold, at around six weeks of age. or fingerlings, Young fish stocked into ponds for rearing to market size. as well as quality inputs including animal feed and mineral supplements and how to spot counterfeit veterinary products. As crisis-affected populations purchase the inputs at project onset, they can seek technical advice from the project staff throughout the process. Across several programmes, this process has built a long-lasting expertise in setting up the production cycle. If crisis-affected populations were directly provided with inputs, the whole learning process related to inputs selection would be postponed to the second production cycle, when the implementing organisation has withdrawn and support mechanisms have ended, creating potential barriers to long-term sustainability.

Engaging a cross-sectoral team to improve human, animal and ecosystem health outcomes

These interventions offer valuable opportunities to apply the One Health approach, which aims at enhancing health in a holistic way, benefitting humans, animals and the environment they live in. This is achieved by engaging experts from different disciplines and integrating indigenous knowledge. The extent to which different areas of expertise can be integrated depends on the expertise available in-house and on the budget, as external experts can also be recruited.

Continuous engagement of animal health and welfare experts such as veterinarians throughout the project cycle is essential, particularly during the training phase, where affected populations learn about animal care, animal health, behaviour and welfare as ‘healthy animals mean healthy people’. Involving nutritionists from the assessment phase enables the collection of baseline nutrition data. When compared with data collected during project monitoring and post-intervention evaluation, this data can inform impact indicators by demonstrating how increased availability of animal proteins and income generation improve access to a more nutritious diet, ultimately enhancing the nutritional and health status of crisis-affected populations and their families.

Experience showed that interventions were most sustainable when crisis-affected populations’ training was complemented by nutrition, hygiene and business skills. Nutrition key messages can highlight the benefits of introducing animal-based proteins into the diet, particularly for children and pregnant and lactating women. Hygiene promotion, delivered through collaboration between animal and human health professionals, can help prevent zoonotic disease transmission, an important consideration given that small-scale farms are mostly established in backyards. Hygiene key messages on cooking, sanitation and safe water practices can be delivered based on the context needs. The nutrition and hygiene training components have the potential to improve household health. Integrating general waste-management principles with specific guidance on the safe disposal of animal waste and veterinary products can contribute to protecting environmental health.

Marketing and business experts can support crisis-affected populations’ knowledge following assessment of market trends and consumers’ habits. Based on the context and its analysis, protection key messages can be integrated into the training and extend to the broader community where affected populations live. Mental health and psychosocial support can target specific groups of affected populations, for example survivors of gender-based violence, contributing to the holistic approach to health, while strengthening the sustainability of the small-scale businesses as affected populations are supported in their recovery.

Opportunities for mutual learning throughout the production cycle are essential to ensure affected populations can benefit from others’ experiences and indigenous knowledge while establishing a support network that may eventually evolve into cooperatives or farmers’ associations.

Sectoral market assessment

As with any other type of CTP, animal production interventions should follow the usual market assessment processes. However, specific considerations apply, requiring integration between market and veterinary expertise. Local availability of day-old chicks, fingerlings and breeding stock should be assessed, particularly their origin, and, if they are delivered to affected populations, also the conditions under which they are transported.

For veterinary products, it is important to refer to veterinary authorities for a list of authorised suppliers and registered products. Inspecting premises of veterinary suppliers and assessing cold chains is essential to checking whether veterinary products are properly stored. In some contexts, with high availability of inputs in the market, and a wide range of breeders and veterinary suppliers, it proved useful to share with affected populations a list of pre-identified suppliers to ensure minimum quality standards while preserving their freedom to choose where to purchase their inputs.

Landlords: an overlooked challenge

Small-scale farms are often established in backyards, creating challenges that are uncommon in other livelihood interventions. Across several programmes, affected populations renting accommodation were often involved in disputes with landlords. Most recurrent issues included rent increase, once landlords became aware that tenants received cash assistance. This reduced the resources available for the livelihood activity, as part of the grant or income generated was used to cover rental costs. Risk of eviction also occurred as landlords feared that keeping animals would cause property damage, hygiene problems and issues with neighbours.

Selecting affected populations based on property ownership is a potential mitigation measure. However, this approach excludes the most vulnerable people, including displaced people who do not own property. Assessing affected populations’ property status and early sensitisation of landlords on the rationale for supporting vulnerable households through livelihood interventions, as well as the potential benefits for the wider community and local economy, have proved effective to prevent rent increase and evictions. Where feasible, written agreements with landlords appeared to help protect affected populations against these risks.

Why veterinary support matters beyond the cash grant

Unlike crop or small retail businesses, these enterprises involve living animals whose health can deteriorate rapidly. Access to timely veterinary care is therefore essential. As part of the project assessment phase, to ensure sustainability of the small-scale farms, it is paramount to evaluate availability of local veterinary services to provide treatment and preventive care including vaccination. Veterinary services’ capacity and access to quality vaccines and drugs are fundamental requirements for ensuring animal welfare and project effectiveness. Willingness of veterinary services to support the project should also be assessed. Public veterinary authorities should be engaged from the project onset to identify any regulations regarding small-scale farming and to assess the animal disease situation in the area.

Although a veterinarian should be part of the project team to ensure technical oversight throughout all project phases, additional veterinary personnel should be recruited to provide an ‘on-call’ service for emergencies and technical advice. Where possible, public veterinary services may provide this support; otherwise, private veterinarians can be contracted. These veterinarians are responsible for providing preventive care and emergency treatment, with the cost of medicines and vaccines covered by affected populations through the cash grant. Farm visits that do not require administration of medications are covered by the project budget. This service not only strengthens knowledge and protects animal health and wellbeing and farm productivity, but also fosters lasting relationships between local veterinary providers and affected populations. These relationships can continue beyond the project’s completion, enabling affected populations to access trusted veterinary support as they develop their businesses independently. A recurring lesson across multiple livestock cash interventions was that affected populations valued access to on-call veterinarians as much as the initial cash grant.

Additional lessons from implementation

To enhance project sustainability, affected populations select the type of animal production that best matches their previous knowledge and expertise. If the project considers engaging affected populations without previous experience, extra budget is required for a longer training and extended on-call service to ensure they develop the knowledge and confidence needed to manage their enterprises independently.

Project planning must consider seasonality of breeding cycles and climate conditions. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa it is not recommended to establish a poultry farm at the beginning of the dry season as high temperatures increase chick mortality.

To protect the cash grant, an additional 10% of the total grant amount is provided to cover unforeseen costs, such as health expenses. The grant also includes an amount of cash equivalent to half of the food ration, based on the country standards set by the Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster. This additional support further protects the grant and helps ensure that it is used for its intended purpose of supporting the small-scale farm.

Conclusions

Cash-based animal production projects are valuable interventions to support vulnerable crisis-affected people, particularly women-headed households and people with disabilities, in restoring livelihoods and strengthening their resilience in protracted crisis and post-crisis settings. While these interventions should be structured according to best practices for CTPs, the sector’s specificities and particularly the fragility of the health of the animals involved require ad hoc operational considerations. Their success depends on involving multidisciplinary teams with veterinarians playing a leading role, and on integrating One Health principles throughout the project cycle, from design to implementation.

Take-away points

• Provision of cash rather than inputs contributes to the affected populations’ knowledge development as they learn how to select quality inputs, therefore increasing project sustainability.
• Integration of different disciplines including nutrition, animal health and welfare, animal production, hygiene, waste management, protection, mental health and psychosocial support according to a One Health approach throughout the project cycle can contribute to improving the health of humans, animals and the ecosystem they live in.
• Project planning depends on the seasonal calendar.
• Market assessments require integrated veterinary and market systems knowledge.
• Negotiation with landlords and written agreements can prevent eviction and rent increase.
• Besides the technical oversight from a veterinarian as part of the project team, an additional locally sourced veterinary workforce is required to provide preventive care, emergency treatment and educational support. It also builds the foundation for continued engagement as the business progresses.

Marta Bonsi is a One Health researcher and humanitarian programme manager working in fragile settings across Africa and the Middle East. She designs and delivers humanitarian research and evidence-based multisectoral programmes to support sustainable and locally relevant solutions. She has particular interests in participatory methods and the integration of gender, age and disability inclusion across research design and the programme cycle.