«December 2014 Authored by Bethany Paris With contributions from Kim Do Kristin Lindell Veronica Olazabal Executive Summary The Nuru Kenya (NK) ...»

Household Hunger and Food Security For the 2014 growing season, NK M&E again utilized the Household Hunger Scale in order to assess the severity of hunger each participating household faces. Similar to 2013, in 2014, new Nuru farmers are considered non-Nuru farmers. In this survey, 52 percent of returning farmers reported “none” in response to the survey, while 48 report reported low to severe hunger. In contrast, 47 percent of new farmers disclosed that their household faces no hunger and 53 percent reported low to severe hunger levels. Figure 2 below compares the 2013 Household Hunger Scale results to those collected in 2014. Crop yield data in this report are supplemented by the data collected regarding food security in order to provide a more robust picture of the overall environment in which farmers live and work.

Figure 2: Harvest Crop Yield Compared to Food Security (2011-2014)

Results of Agricultural Income Calculation In order to gauge the average agricultural income gains of farming with Nuru, M&E utilizes an agricultural income calculation which takes into account the total costs of production and total revenue generated from farming as explained above. This analysis results in an annual net profit for farmers that can be compared across years in order to assess the impact of NK Agriculture for Nuru versus non-Nuru farmers. Table 4 outlines the revenues, costs, and profits for Nuru and non-Nuru farmers during the baseline year (2011) and most recent harvest year (2014).

Table 4: Net Profit of Nuru and Non-Nuru Farmers for 2014 Compared to Baseline Calculations

2012 31,347 7,460 23,887 201317 7,169 4,075 3,094 2014 18,360 7,750 10,610

2012 17,901 3,931 13,970 2013 6,367 3,931 2,436 2014 16,632 3,271 13,361 Revenue calculations in the income model are similar to crop equivalent yield calculations, meaning Nuru farmers earned 30 percent more in revenue relative to non-Nuru farmers, 18,360 Ksh compared to 16,632 Ksh. In terms of profit, Nuru farmers earned profits of 4 percent greater in comparison with Nuru farmer profits from baseline yield collected in 2011, 10,610 Ksh compared to 10,163 Ksh. Similarly, non-Nuru farmers generated a 2 percent increase in profits when compared to the 2011 baseline amounts—13,361 compared to 13,079 respectively. Comparing Nuru to nonNuru farmers, Nuru farmers increased net profits by 2 percent, indicating that despite greater total costs taken on by Nuru farmers, these were offset by the total revenue accrued at harvest.

Limitations Several limitations must be considered when reflecting on the analyses presented above. First, the method of collecting the 2011 baseline yields may be introducing bias into the data set, as the farmers were asked to recall their harvest yields in 2012 from that time period, which may have been over- or under-reported, as discussed in the Data Collection portion of this piece.

Second, the negative impacts of MLND are still present throughout Kenya. To combat this crop disease, NK Agriculture recommends a diversified loan package in order to reduce farmer reliance on maize, which is the main crop affected by MLND. This adds another level of uncertainty to The 2013 total costs for Nuru farmers include a 50% loan discount. This discount was offered to farmers due to the severe drought in 2013.

production with the addition of new crops, given that Nuru and non-Nuru farmers use different seed types for all crops planted, which cannot be controlled for throughout the analysis and interpretation.

Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the data collected to date, households in the Nuru Kenya Agriculture Program that adopted the diversified crop strategy in Kuria West district harvested higher crop yields than their 2011 baseline and seem to be recovering from the 2013 drought. The 2014 results show that despite recovery from the negative impact of drought in 2013 with a more resilient crop strategy, Maize Lethal Necrosis Disease (MLND)—which affected the entire Kuria West district during 2013— continued to progress throughout the past growing season. Thus, some farmers are seeing a slower rate of recovery than others. Overall, Nuru farmers are steadily increasing their crop yields and are reporting a decrease in household hunger compared to non-Nuru farmers.

Recommendations for NK M&E and Agriculture to consider as a result of these findings are as

follows:

1. Promote the diversified crop strategy as a long-term solution for Nuru farmers with the caveat that conforming to the prescribed crops and agricultural best practices are a must to maximize the success at the household level.

2. Increase training, supervision, and monitoring of farmers during ground preparation and planting in order to guarantee the proper use of inputs, timely planting, and correct crop spacing.

3. Continue a proactive strategy of avoiding, preventing, detecting, and eliminating MLND by promoting a diversified crop strategy and raising farmer awareness of the disease.

Appendix Appendix 1: Crop Equivalent Yield 2014

When considering all Nuru farmers surveyed (n=407) and accounting for actual diversified loan package adoption and non-adoption, the crop yield drops from 765 to 693 kgs/acre. At this level, there is no (statistical) difference in 2014 between being a Nuru farmer and a non-Nuru farmer since non-Nuru farmers also varied in what they planted (74 percent planted only maize while the rest planted some combination of maize plus sorghum and/or millet) (Table 1).