92–9146–662–5 A regional approach to drought index-
insurance in Intergovernmental Authority 
The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) works to improve food and nutritional security and reduce
poverty in developing co untries through research for efficient, safe and sustainable use of livestock.
Co-hosted by Kenya and Ethiopia, it has regional o r country offices and projects in East, South and on Development (IGAD) countries
Southeast Asia as well as Central, East, Southern and West Africa. ilri.org  
  
Volume II: Intergovernmental Authority on Development 
CGIAR is a global agricultural research partnership for a food-secure future. Its research is carried
out by 15 research centres  in collaboration with hundreds of partner organizations. cgiar.org country annexes
76
I L R I  R E S E A R C H  R E P O RT    
Funding source
This report is an output of the Drought Index-Insurance for Resilience in the Sahel and Horn of Africa (DIRISHA) project.  
The work described in this document was funded with UK aid from the UK government through the Science for 
Humanitarian Emergencies and Resilience (SHEAR) research programme. 
This research was conducted as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and is supported by contributors to 
the CGIAR Trust Fund. CGIAR is a global research partnership for a food-secure future. Its science is carried out by 15 
Research Centers in close collaboration with hundreds of partners across the globe. www.cgiar.org 
Disclaimer
This material has been funded by UK aid from the UK government; however, the views expressed do not necessarily 
reflect the UK government’s official policies.
This report is openly shared as an output of the Drought Index-Insurance for Resilience in the Sahel and Horn of Africa 
(DIRISHA) project, led by ILRI. However, the content might still be updated. 
©2021 International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) 
ILRI thanks all donors and organizations which globally supports its work through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund
This publication is copyrighted by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). It is licensed for use under the Creative Commons 
Attribution 4.0 International Licence. To view this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0.  Unless otherwise 
noted, you are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format), adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the 
material) for any purpose, even commercially, under the following conditions:
 ATTRIBUTION. The work must be attributed, but not in any way that suggests endorsement by ILRI or the author(s).
NOTICE:
For any reuse or distribution, the licence terms of this work must be made clear to others. 
Any of the above conditions can be waived if permission is obtained from the copyright holder. 
Nothing in this licence impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. 
Fair dealing and other rights are in no way affected by the above. 
The parts used must not misrepresent the meaning of the publication.  
ILRI would appreciate being sent a copy of any materials in which text, photos etc. have been used.
Editing, design and layout—ILRI Editorial and Publishing Services, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Cover photo—ILRI/George Wamwere-Njoroge.
ISBN: 92–9146–662–5
Authors of Volume I and Volume II: Felix Lung, Charles Stutley, Yihenew Zewdie and Francesco Fava.
Authors of Volume III: Njoki Kahiu, Anton Vrieling and Francesco Fava.
Authors’ contributions: Volume I and Volume II: Francesco Fava, Felix Lung, Charles Stutley and Yihenew Zewdie conceived and designed the study, Felix 
Lung and Charles Stutley led the data collection, the data analysis and drafted the document, Francesco Fava and Yihenew Zewdie contributed to data 
collection and document writing and review, Yihenew Zewdie coordinated the data collection with national and regional stakeholders, Francesco Fava 
scientifically coordinated the study. Volume III: Francesco Fava, Njoki Kahiu and Anton Vrieling conceived and designed the study, Njoki Kahiu led the 
data analysis and report writing, Francesco Fava and Anton Vrieling contributed to document review, Francesco Fava scientifically coordinated the study.
Correspondence: Francesco Fava, Sustainable Livestock Systems, International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya and Department of 
Environmental Science and Policy (ESP), Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy. E-mail: francesco.fava@unimi.it
Citation: Lung, F., Stutley, C., Zewdie, Y. and Fava, F. 2021. A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on 
Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2: Intergovernmental Authority on Development country annexes. ILRI Research Report 76. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI.
Patron: Professor Peter C Doherty AC, FAA, FRS 
Animal scientist, Nobel Prize Laureate for Physiology or Medicine–1996
Box 30709, Nairobi 00100 Kenya ilri.org Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 
Phone  +254 20 422 3000 better lives through livestock Phone +251 11 617 2000 
Fax+254 20 422 3001  Fax +251 11 667 6923 
Email ilri-kenya@cgiar.org ILRI is a CGIAR research centre Email ilri-ethiopia@cgiar.org 
ILRI has offices in East Africa • South Asia • Southeast and East Asia • Southern Africa • West Africa
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 iii
A regional approach to drought  
index-insurance in Intergovernmental 
Authority on Development  
(IGAD) countries
Volume II: Intergovernmental Authority on Development 
country annexes
Felix Lung1, Charles Stutley1, Yihenew Zewdie2 and Francesco Fava2,3 
 
 
1.Disaster risk finance consultant 
2.International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Sustainable Livestock Systems 
3.Università degli Studi di Milano, Department of Environmental Science and Policy (ESP) 
September 2021
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 iii
Contents
Tables               vi
Figures               ix
Acronyms and abbreviations                           xii
Introduction                1
A. Djibouti               3
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism        4
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods       5
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing initiatives      9
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development        9
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation      11
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in Djibouti through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative         12
B. Eritrea             13
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism      14
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods     15
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing initiatives   18
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development      18
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation     20
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in Eritrea through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative         21
C. Ethiopia            22
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism     23
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods    25
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing practices  29
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development     30
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation     37
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in Ethiopia through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative        39
iv A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
D. Kenya             41
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism     42
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods    45
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing practices  48
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development     50
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation     57
 VI. Summary: Feasibility Assessment of a livestock insurance market through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative        58
E. Somalia            60
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism     61
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods    64
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing initiatives  67
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development     68
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation     70
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in Somalia through 
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative        71
F. South Sudan           73
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism     74
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods    76
 III. Existing drought mitigation and response financing practices    79
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development     80
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation     81
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in South Sudan through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative        83
G. Sudan            84
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism     85
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods    87
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing initiatives  91
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development     92
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation     95
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in Sudan through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative        96
H. Uganda            98
 I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism     99
 II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods                  102
 III. Pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk financing initiatives                104
 IV. Review of national livestock insurance market development                   106
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 v
 V. Operational elements for potential IBLI implementation                   109
 VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility assessment of IBLI in Uganda through  
  a regional IGAD IBLI initiative                       110
References                           112
Annex A:Livestock organizations in Djibouti                       119
Annex B: Pastoralist and livestock organizations Ethiopia                      121
Annex C: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in Kenya                     126
Annex D: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in Somalia                     136
Annex E:Pastoralist and livestock organizations in South Sudan                    139
Annex F: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in Sudan                     142
Annex G: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in Uganda                     146
vi A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Tables
Table 1: Summary of livestock and insurance in Djibouti          3
Table 2: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Djibouti     9
Table 3: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Djibouti     10
Table 4: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Djibouti (2011)      11
Table 5: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Djibouti    11
Table 6: Access to additional services for pastoralists in Djibouti       12
Table 7: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Djibouti   12
Table 8: Summary of livestock and insurance in Eritrea        13
Table 9: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Eritrea   18
Table 10: Underwriting results for National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea (premium, claims and loss ratio) 
   (2010–2018)            19
Table 11: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Eritrea    19
Table 12: Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas in Eritrea       20
Table 13: Access to additional services for pastoralists in Eritrea      20
Table 14: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Eritrea  21
Table 15: Summary of livestock and insurance in Ethiopia       22
Table 16: Most important donor programs in Ethiopia focusing on the enhancement of the pastoralist  
   and livestock sector          29
Table 17: Other important donor programs in Ethiopia focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist  
   and livestock sector          29
Table 18: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Ethiopia   32
Table 19: IBLI Ethiopia uptake and underwriting results (2012/13 to 2019/20)     34
Table 20: Satellite Index Insurance For Pastoralists in Ethiopia: uptake and underwriting results (2018–2020) 36
Table 21: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Ethiopia (2017)     37
Table 22: Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas in Ethiopia (2020)      38
Table 23: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Ethiopia  38
Table 24: Access to additional services for pastoralists in Ethiopia      39
Table 25: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Ethiopia 39
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 vii
Table 26: Summary of livestock and insurance in Kenya       41
Table 27: Government programs focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Kenya 48
Table 28: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Kenya  48
Table 29: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Kenya   52
Table 30: Kenya Takaful Insurance Company administrative and operating expenses (2015–2019)  54
Table 31: Kenya Livestock Insurance Program underwriting results (2015–2020)    56
Table 32: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Kenya (2017)     57
Table 33: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Kenya   58
Table 34: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Kenya  58
Table 35: Summary of livestock and insurance in Somalia       60
Table 36: Former livestock development programs and services in Somalia     62
Table 37: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Somalia  67
Table 38: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Somalia   69
Table 39: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Somalia (2014)     70
Table 40: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Somalia  71
Table 41: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Somalia 71
Table 42: Summary of livestock and insurance in South Sudan      73
Table 43: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in South Sudan. 79
Table 44: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in South Sudan  81
Table 45: Financial inclusion data for whole population in South Sudan (2017)     81
Table 46: Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas in South Sudan      82
Table 47: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in South Sudan  82
Table 48: Access to additional services for pastoralists in South Sudan     82
Table 49: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in South Sudan 83
Table 50: Summary of livestock and insurance in Sudan       84
Table 51: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Sudan  91
Table 52: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in South Sudan  94
Table 53: Total insurance premiums (SDG million) in Sudan (2013–2017)     94
Table 54: Total agricultural insurance premiums (SDG million) and loss ratios in Sudan (2013–2017)  95
Table 55: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Sudan (2014)     95
Table 56: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Sudan  96
Table 57: Summary of livestock and insurance in Uganda       98
Table 58: Self-reported livelihoods by district in Uganda                     100
Table 60: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Uganda                105
Table 61: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Uganda                  107
viii A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Table 62: Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme cumulative underwriting results  
   (1 July 2016 to 31 December 2019)                      108
Table 63: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Uganda (2017)                   109
Table 64: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Uganda                 110
Table 65: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements  
    in Uganda                          110
Annex A
Table 1: Livestock associations                         119
Annex B
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations                         121
Table 2: Livestock associations                        123
Annex C
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations                        126
Table 2: Livestock associations                        134
Annex D
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations                        136
Table 2: Livestock associations                         137
Annex E
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations                        139
Table 2: Livestock associations                        139
Annex F
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations                        142
Table 2: Livestock associations                        143
Annex G
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations                        146
Table 2: Livestock associations                        150
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 ix
Figures
Figure 1: Numbers of major livestock species in Djibouti (1961–2017)         4
Figure 2: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Djibouti          6
Figure 3: Mean annual rainfall over Djibouti (1981–2010)          6
Figure 4: Coefficient of variation for Djibouti January–May seasonal rainfall (1981–2010)       6
Figure 5: Number of events by disaster type in Djibouti (1976–2020)          7
Figure 6: Number of affected people by disaster type in Djibouti (1976–2020)        7
Figure 7: Incoming international aid funding to Djibouti as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)       8
Figure 8: Numbers of major livestock species in Eritrea (1993–2018)       14
Figure 9: Mean annual rainfall over Eritrea (1981–2010)        16
Figure 10: Coefficient of variation for Eritrean October–March seasonal Bahari rains (1981–2010)   16
Figure 11: Incoming international aid funding to Eritrea as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)    17
Figure 12: Numbers of major livestock species in Ethiopia (1993–2018)     23
Figure 13: Number of cattle in Ethiopia (2014/15)        24
Figure 14: Number of goats in Ethiopia (2014/15)        24
Figure 15: Mean annual rainfall over Ethiopia (1981–2010)       26
Figure 16: Coefficient of variation for Ethiopian seasonal rains February–May (1981–2010)   26
Figure 17: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Ethiopia     26
Figure 18: Number of events by disaster type in Ethiopia (1961–2020)      27
Figure 19: Number of affected people by disaster type in Ethiopia (1961–2020)    27
Figure 20: Incoming international aid funding as to Ethiopia tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)   28
Figure 21: IBLI: Number of insured pastoralists and livestock in Ethiopia (2012–2019)    33
Figure 22: IBLI Ethiopia uptake and underwriting results (2012/13 to 2019/20)    34
Figure 23: IBLI administrative and operating expenses for Oromia Insurance Company,  
     Ethiopia 2012/13 to 2019/20         35
Figure 24: Number of beneficiary households and tropical livestock units insured under  
     Satellite Index Insurance for Pastoralists in Ethiopia      36
Figure 25: Satellite Index Insurance For Pastoralists in Ethiopia underwriting results (2018–2020)  36
Figure 26: Numbers of major livestock species in Kenya (1961–2017)      42
x A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 27: Number of cattle in Kenya (2014)        43
Figure 28: Number of goats in Kenya (2014)        43
Figure 29: Mean annual rainfall in Kenya (1981–2010)       45
Figure 30: Coefficient of variation for Kenyan March–May seasonal rains (1981–2010)    45
Figure 31: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Kenya      45
Figure 32: Number of events by disaster type in Kenya (1961–2020)      46
Figure 33: Number of affected people by disaster type in Kenya (1981–2020)     46
Figure 34: Incoming international aid funding to Kenya as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)   47
Figure 35: Kenya’s disaster risk financing framework        49
Figure 36: Demand by pastoralists for voluntary IBLI (2010–2020)      53
Figure 37: Kenya Takaful Insurance Company IBLI underwriting results     53
Figure 38: Number of beneficiaries and tropical livestock units insured under  
     Kenya Livestock Insurance Program        55
Figure 39: Kenya Livestock Insurance Program underwriting results (2015–2020)    56
Figure 40: Numbers of major livestock species in Somalia (1961–2017)     61
Figure 41: Mean annual rainfall over Somalia (1981–2010)       64
Figure 42: Coefficient of variation for Somalia April–June seasonal rains (1981–2010)    64
Figure 43: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Somalia     65
Figure 44: Occurrence of droughts in Somalia (1961–2019)       65
Figure 45: Number of people affected by droughts in Somalia (1961–2019)     65
Figure 46: Livestock grazing and migration patterns in Somalia      66
Figure 47: Incoming international aid funding to Somalia as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)   67
Figure 48: Numbers of major livestock species in South Sudan (2012–2018)     74
Figure 49: Number of cattle in South Sudan (2009)        75
Figure 50: Number of goats in South Sudan (2009)        75
Figure 51: Mean annual rainfall over South Sudan (1981–2010)      77
Figure 52: Coefficient of variation for April–September seasonal rainfall in South Sudan (1981–2010)  77
Figure 53: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in South Sudan     77
Figure 54: Number of events by disaster type in South Sudan (2008–2019)     78
Figure 55: Number of affected people by disaster type in South Sudan (2008–2019)    78
Figure 56: Incoming international aid funding to South Sudan as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)  79
Figure 57: Numbers of major livestock species in Sudan (1961–2017)      86
Figure 58: Number of cattle in Sudan (2011–2015 average)       86
Figure 59: Number of goats in Sudan (2011–2015 average)       86
Figure 60: Mean annual rainfall in Sudan (1981–2010)       88
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 xi
Figure 61: Coefficient of variation for mean March–June seasonal rainfall in Sudan (1981–2010)   88
Figure 62: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Sudan      88
Figure 63: Number of events by disaster type in Sudan (1961–2020)      89
Figure 64: Number of affected people by disaster type in Sudan (1961–2020)     89
Figure 65: Percentage of respondents identifying selected key problems in sub-localities  
      in Gedaref State, Sudan         89
Figure 66: Percentage of respondents citing selected drought coping strategies in sub-localities  
      in Gedaref State, Sudan         90
Figure 67: Incoming international aid funding to Sudan as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)   90
Figure 68: Numbers of major livestock species in Uganda (1961–2017)                   100
Figure 69: Number of cattle in Uganda (2008)                      100
Figure 70: Number of goats in Uganda (2008)                      100
Figure 71: Mean annual rainfall in Uganda (1981–2010)                     102
Figure 72: Coefficient of variation for March–June seasonal rainfall in Uganda (1981–2010)                 102
Figure 73: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Uganda                   102
Figure 74: Number of events by disaster type in Uganda (1966–2020)                    103
Figure 75: Number of affected people by disaster type in Uganda (1966–2020)                  103
Figure 76: Incoming international aid funding to Uganda as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020)                 104
Figure 77: Number of farmers insured by Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme (2019)                 108
xii A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Acronyms and abbreviations
AfDB  African Development Bank
ASAL(s)  Arid and semi-arid land(s) 
CIMA  Conférence interafricaine des marchés d’assurance (Inter-African Conference on Insurance Markets)
DIRISHA  Drought Index Insurance for Resilience in the Sahel and Horn of Africa
eMODIS  Enhanced moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer
FAO  Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations
FCDO  Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office 
GDP  Gross domestic product
IBLI  Index-based livestock insurance
ICPAC  IGAD Climate Prediction and Application Centre
ICPALD  IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development
IDA  International Development Association 
IFAD  International Fund for Agricultural Development
IGAD  Intergovernmental Authority on Development 
ILRI  International Livestock Research Institute
IPC  Integrated Food Security Phase Classification
KLIP  Kenya Livestock Insurance Program
MPI  Multidimensional poverty index 
ND-GAIN Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative
NGO  Non-governmental organization
NDVI  Normalized Difference Vegetation Index 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 xiii
SIIPE  Satellite Index Insurance for Pastoralists in Ethiopia
TLU(s)   Tropical livestock unit(s)
UAIS  Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme 
UK  United Kingdom
USAID  United States Agency for International Development
WBG  World Bank Group
WFP  World Food Programme
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 1
Introduction
This report is Volume II to the report ‘A Regional Approach to Drought Insurance in Intergovernmental Authority 
on Development Countries, Volume I – Operational Feasibility Report’. It should be read in conjunction with Volume 
I, the main report.
This desk-based study has been conducted under the Drought Index Insurance for Resilience in the Sahel and 
Horn of Africa (DIRISHA) research program commissioned by the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth and 
Development Office (FCDO). The study was conducted in the latter half of 2020 by the International Livestock Research 
Institute (ILRI). Volumes I and II of the study review the operational feasibility of a regional index-based livestock insurance 
(IBLI) approach in IGAD countries. A third report, Volume III, focuses on the technical feasibility of such an approach.
The objectives of this report are to review for each IGAD country the overall environment for the operational 
feasibility of implementing IBLI. The operational feasibility areas are summarized and scored at the end of each country 
chapter. They include the following.
• Importance of pastoral livestock for economy: To what extent is the pastoral livestock sector is an important 
contributing factor to the country’s economy overall. 
• Impact of drought on livestock: To what extent livestock is affected severely by recurring droughts in that country. 
• Pastoralist demand for livestock insurance: The extent to which pastoralists in that country have shown a demand 
to purchase livestock insurance. This could particularly be the case in countries where IBLI-based solutions have 
already been implemented before such as Ethiopia and Kenya.
• Effective distribution channels for micro-level IBLI: The extent to which there are potentially effective distribution 
channels to retail micro-level voluntary IBLI policies to individual pastoralists. This includes, e.g., the degree of 
financial inclusion among pastoralists; the level of development of mobile banking solutions among pastoralists; 
and the level of development of insurance companies’ distribution networks in pastoral areas retailing micro-level 
voluntary IBLI policies. 
• Existing pastoralist beneficiary registries: Whether there are existing registries of poor pastoralists that could be 
used for registration of beneficiaries under a potential modified macro-level IBLI solution. 
• Pastoralist financial literacy: The extent to which pastoralists in the respective country show developed 
understanding and acceptance of advanced financial solutions such as insurance. 
• Legal and regulatory insurance environment: The extent to which the country’s legal and regulatory environment 
is supportive of IBLI, e.g. whether there is in-country experience with implementing index-based insurance 
solutions. 
• Insurance market development: The extent to which the in-country insurance markets have developed.
2 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
• Interest from insurers in IBLI: The extent to which local insurance companies have voiced their interest in 
underwriting potential IBLI policies. 
• Finance available for premiums: The extent to which the country’s government has declared its intent or shown its 
commitment in the past to provide supportive financing to IBLI solutions for pastoralists. 
• Interest from government stakeholders in IBLI: The extent to which the country’s government has expressed its 
interest in developing and supporting IBLI solutions in that country.
This report was conducted combining a desk-based study with key informant interviews. As for Volume I, given 
the travel restrictions due to COVID-19, only a minimum of in-country stakeholder meetings have been possible. Instead, 
questionnaires were shared with more than 50 in-country expert stakeholders (of which 21 replied), including ministries 
of agriculture, ministries of humanitarian affairs, ministries of finance, insurance regulators, development partners, 
livestock associations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), inquiring about the status quo of drought risk 
financing initiatives in IGAD countries, the status of needed operational infrastructure for a regional approach, and the 
interest of stakeholders to support such an approach. Where applicable, results from these questionnaires and from other 
stakeholder consultations were included in the country annexes (as indicated). 
The rest of the report is structured as follows. For each IGAD country, a summary country report follows. Each report 
includes short reviews of the socio-economic relevance of livestock production and pastoralism, the impacts of droughts 
on the livestock sector and pastoralist livelihoods, existing pastoralist development programs and existing drought risk 
financing initiatives, national livestock insurance market development, and other operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation. Additionally, a summary and preliminary IBLI operational feasibility assessment and a set of annexes 
listing the most important pastoralist organizations and livestock associations in that country are included (except for 
Eritrea, where no data are available).
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 3
A. Djibouti
Table 1: Summary of livestock and insurance in Djibouti
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability None. Currently there is no crop or livestock insurance provision in Djibouti
IBLI planning 2020 IBLI feasibility study conducted (WBG 2020).
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from 
No. of pastoralists  Livestock  (Cecchi et al. 2010)
Livestock 
(% of total MPI rating in rural areas production index 
contribution to GDP
population) (2004–06 = 100)
0.4 M (45%)1 0.6512 3.1%3 1344 
(2015) (2017) (2017) (2017)
Livestock breakdown5 (2018)*
Total TLUs‡ Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
499,000 71,000 301,000 515,000 469,000
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral areas Not available (n.a.)  (seven banks and four Islamic banks with only very few branches in 
inner country
Mobile cash Porte Monnaie Mobile de Djibouti; MDJF (mobile payment system)
Insurance companies n.a. (the two only insurers in-country are not interested in IBLI)
Other La Poste de Djibouti (for cash transfers)
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance law/regulation Djibouti adopts the CIMA code as the basis of insurance. Insurance supervision is carried 
out by the Insurance Control Service under the authority of the Ministry of Economy and 
Finance.
Livestock insurance products There is no history of agricultural crop or livestock insurance provision in Djibouti.
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government partners Directorate of Livestock, Ministry of Agriculture; Ministry of Interior 
Livestock sector associations Djibouti Agro-Pastoralist Association
Most important development IFAD, FAO, WBG, WFP
partners
*FAO data based on imputation methodology, estimates and government data. 
‡Tropical livestock units (TLUs) are livestock numbers converted to a common unit. The conversion coefficient varies by region of the world.  
TLU conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
FAO = Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations; IFAD = International Fund for Agricultural Development; MPI = multidimensional 
poverty index; WBG = World Bank Group; WFP = World Food Programme
1.(UNECA 2017)
2.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty.  
The higher the index value, the greater the poverty (OPHI 2017).
3.(Guthiga et al. 2017).
4.(FAOSTAT 2020c).
5.(FAOSTAT 2020c).
4 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Djibouti
Djibouti suffers from an undiversified economy and a chronic food deficit. The country ranks 171st out of 189 countries 
on the Human Development Index. More than 23% of the population lives in extreme poverty, with a heavy reliance on 
imports to meet its food needs (World Bank 2020h). Youth unemployment (21.3%) is nearly twice the total unemployment 
rate (11.1%), with 47.3% of the total employed considered vulnerable (UNDP 2019a). The total population was 1 million 
in 2017, of which 20% lived in rural areas (FAOSTAT 2020c). There are stark differences between the rural and urban 
population. According to a household survey administered by the Statistics Department in 2013, the incidence rate of 
extreme poverty in Djibouti city was 13.7%, and 40.9% for the remaining part of the country (IGAD 2020a). 
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
The agriculture sector only makes up a marginal part of the country’s economy but is crucial for rural households, 
which tend to depend on subsistence livestock rearing. The national economy is characterized by an urban-centred 
commercial sector reliant on the service industry, and a secluded, rural subsistence-based pastoralist economy (Babikir et 
al. 2015). Agriculture contributes only 1.3% to gross domestic product (GDP) but accounts for 50.4% of total employment 
(FAOSTAT 2020c). The livestock sector contributes 82.2% of agricultural GDP (Guthiga et al. 2017). The ratio of Djibouti’s 
livestock sector to agricultural GDP is the largest for any IGAD country, illustrating the limited relevance of crop farming 
(UNECA 2017). Djibouti’s agricultural sector is constrained by limited natural resources, with over 90% of the land being 
categorized as desert (Babikir et al. 2015).
Figure 1: Numbers of major livestock species in Djibouti (1961–2017).
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
Camels Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
There are two major agricultural production systems, with pastoralism accounting for the majority of rural 
livelihoods. Pastoral activities mostly consist of nomadic herding. More than 90% of the country’s area is used for herding 
purposes, mostly subsistence nomadic or semi-nomadic breeding of small ruminants (primarily goats) and camels. 
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 5
Small-scale crop farming has increased over the past three decades but accounts for only a small percentage of Djibouti’s 
economy, population and land usage (Babikir et al. 2015). 
Pastoralist households face relatively relaxed grazing right institutions, allowing the continuation of traditionally 
applied tenure systems. Djibouti does not possess national land tenure legislation and instead upholds traditional 
tenure rights and management practices of pastoralists. Pastoralist households, in accordance with tribal leadership and 
traditions, continue managing the livestock grazing land independently (UNECA 2017).
Market access for livestock producers
Djibouti is a net importer of livestock, mainly sourcing them from neighbouring countries. The country has 
two cross-border markets at the Ethiopian and the Somali borders. Livestock trade with these two countries is 
indispensable for domestic consumption and for the transit to the port of Djibouti city, where livestock is exported to 
foreign markets, such as Egypt, Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, Jordan, Lebanon and Bahrain 
(IGAD 2013).
Djibouti’s veterinarian facilities and services are scarce. The country has a central laboratory at the Somalia border 
close to Djibouti city but no regional laboratories. Export animals are being tested at the quarantine station (IGAD 
2016).
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
Poor vegetation and prevailing climate risks limit the availability of pasture required for livestock production. 
Djibouti’s vegetation patterns are responsible for limited forage resources for livestock production, a trend that is 
further increased by climatic trends that decrease water resources and risk livestock deaths (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Djibouti’s central highlands and southern region suffer from continuous land degradation. Only 0.04% of the 
country’s land is arable given the limited availability of water and the low and highly volatile annual rainfall. As most areas 
have minimal or no vegetation, agricultural production is limited to a few areas of the country, which further increases 
competition for natural resources (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Physical access to markets to sell and purchase livestock is often restricted. Due to the country’s dependency on 
food imports, livestock are less likely to be sourced from locally grown sources. Therefore, remote areas in the north and 
those at the Ethiopian border have restricted access to critical food items, which increases reliance on supply chains and 
cross-border trade with Ethiopia (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
The majority of the Djibouti’s area can be defined as desert, with minor pockets of forests and dense vegetation in 
the north. The country has three distinct geographic areas: a coastal line, a volcanic plateau in the southcentral region, 
and mountain ranges in the north. The main climate seasons are a dry spell lasting from May to September and a cooler 
season from October to April, with occasional rains in between (Babikir et al. 2015). Djibouti’s climate is classified as arid 
to extremely arid, with average temperatures above 30°C, which can reach 45°C during the dry spell (ICPAC and WFP 
2018). All of Djibouti territory is considered to be arid or semi-arid (IGAD 2020a).
6 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 2: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Djibouti. 
Source: FEWS NET 2020b
Figure 3: Mean annual rainfall over Djibouti (1981–2010). Figure 4: Coefficient of variation for Djibouti January–May 
seasonal rainfall (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Rainfall in Djibouti is generally speaking low and highly variable, depending on the season and region. The average 
annual rainfall is 147 mm, varying from about 60 mm in the northeast to 300 mm at the coast. The rainfall at the coastal 
areas usually occurs from November to March, and inland between April to October. Patterns, however, are irregular, 
with long periods of no rains occurring, with infrequent heavy rain (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Djibouti is heavily exposed to the effects of climate change and increasing occurrence of natural disasters. The 
country ranks 14th globally and 1st in sub-Saharan Africa in the WorldRiskIndex score, derived from the exposure (very high) 
and vulnerability (very high) to natural hazards (BEH and IFHV 2020). It further ranked 77th out of 181 countries on the ND-
GAIN (Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative) Exposure Ranking in 2018, which describes the degree to which a system 
is exposed to significant climate change from a biophysical perspective (ND-GAIN 2020). 
The country is vulnerable to a variety of different natural hazards that are all increasing in frequency. Disasters 
include multi-year droughts, flash and intense floods, earthquakes in the country’s volcanic area, and wildfires resulting 
from droughts. Droughts occur regularly, with notable ones taking place in 1996, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2010. 
Floods are rare given limited rainfall, with the exceptions of flash floods when torrential rains occur, as happened in 1993, 
1994 and 2004 (ICPAC and WFP 2018). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 7
Figure 5: Number of events by disaster type in Djibouti (1976–2020).     
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-80 -85 -90 -95 0
0
-05 -10 -15 -200
97
6 1
98 98
6 91 -2 01 06 119 6 0 0 0 01
6
1 1 1 1 9 2 2 2 2
19
Hydrological (eg. floods) Biological (eg. diseases)
Meteorological (eg. storms) Climatological (droughts)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Figure 6: Number of affected people by disaster type in Djibouti (1976–2020).
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
6-8
0 -851 6-9
0
1-9
5 000 1-0
5 -10 -152 -
20
97 98 98 99 6- 00 00
6 110 01
6
1 1 1 1 99 2 2 2 21
Hydrological (eg. floods) Biological (eg. diseases)
Meteorological (eg. storms) Climatological (drought)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral 
sector 
The impact of climate risks, particularly droughts, are concentrated in the livestock sector, incurring millions of 
dollars of loss (ICPAC and WFP 2018). Ecological constraints such as erratic rainfall pattern, heavy showers that are lost as 
run-off, high evapotranspiration rates, increased competition with weeds, and low soil organic matter constrain pastoralist 
production systems (IGAD 2020a). An extended drought from 2008 to 2011 caused total GDP to decrease by 4% 
annually. Farmers and herders were hit the hardest, with the agricultural sector losing 50% of its GDP, affecting 120,000 
people (15% of the population) and causing greater food insecurity (GFDRR 2015). Major droughts occurring in 1983–85, 
1991–92, 1998–99, 2010–11 and 2016 led to a mortality rate between 37% and 62% of the national livestock population 
(IGAD 2020a).
As rural households face constrained food availability, decreased access to natural resources and adverse market 
impacts from macroeconomic events, the majority of them are engaging in negative coping strategies. Some 51% 
of pastoralists reported employing negative coping strategies: 17% resort to emergency strategies such as selling assets 
or committing illegal acts, 15% to crisis strategies such as reducing non-food expenses, and 22% to using stress strategies, 
such as buying food on credit or using savings (FSIN 2019). Pastoralists also move domestically and to neighbouring 
countries to follow the rains (Babikir et al. 2015).
8 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
Some 280,000 people are estimated to be chronically food insecure, partially due to the trade imbalance in the 
agriculture sector. In affected areas, about 20–30% of people tend to experience severe food insecurity, Integrated 
Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) level 4 (Severe) (IPC 2020). The country has a vast food trade imbalance, with the 
value of food imports exceeding the value of exported food goods by a factor of 10 in 2017. This imbalance makes the 
country vulnerable to macro-economic trends, foreign market dynamics and price volatility (FAOSTAT 2020c).
Research suggests that pastoralists are especially severely affected by droughts. Rural households are the part of 
the population that is most vulnerable and the most affected by chronic food insecurity. Some 55% of the rural population 
is categorized as moderately or severely food insecure due to limited rainfall patterns and the effects of droughts. An 
additional 40% of rural households are marginally food insecure. Limited domestic food production, decreased economic 
opportunities, and high food prices impede rural households’ access to sufficient and nutritious diets. Especially remote 
rural markets tend to have only poor access to quality and affordable food (FSIN 2019).
COVID-19 has had severe impacts on pastoralist populations in Djibouti and has been an additional key driver 
of food insecurity in 2020 (FEWS NET 2020b). By 5 October 2020, 76,791 tests were conducted, confirming 5,414 
infections, of which nine were still active and 5,344 had recovered. Sixty-one people had died from COVID-19 (IGAD and 
WHO 2020). Expert questionnaire respondents indicated that the impact of COVID-19 on pastoralist populations had 
been severe, indicating impacts in the following areas.
• Disrupted access to (i) agricultural inputs (including labour), (ii) extension and advisory services, (iii) output markets 
for many pastoralists; and (iv) veterinary services, e.g. control of Transboundary Animal Diseases, surveillance 
measures, cross-border control and continued animal treatment.
• Limited options to selling pastoralists’ animals after the prohibition of trade from the neighbouring countries of 
Somalia and Ethiopia.
Humanitarian assistance
Figure 7: Incoming international aid funding to Djibouti as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020). 
USD 50,000,000
USD 45,000,000
USD 40,000,000
USD 35,000,000
USD 30,000,000
USD 25,000,000
USD 20,000,000
USD 15,000,000
USD 10,000,000
USD 5,000,000
USD 0
Incoming funds (total) Incoming funds (food security)
Incoming funds (agriculture)
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020.
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 9
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing initiatives 
Table 2: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Djibouti.
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
Total: USD 17.26 million  
IFAD Soil and Water Management Program 2016–2024
IFAD: USD 6.29 million
Islamic 
Dryland Project USD 10 million 2013–20
Development Bank)
FAO Project of Securing Pastoral Systems in Djibouti USD 10 million
Second Additional Financing for the Rural Community Total: USD 7.2 million  
World Bank 2012 to date
Development and Water Mobilization Project World Bank: USD 7.0 million
Renforcement de la Productivité des Productions 
FAO USD 6,859,364 2018–2022
Végétales et Animales á Djibouti 
Emergency Locust Response Program  USD 6.6 million 
World Bank 2020–2023
(multiple recipient countries) (share for Djibouti)
Rural Community Development and Ware Mobilization 
World Bank USD 3.0 million 2012 to date
– additional financing
Note: USD = United States dollar.
Source: Various.
Existing drought risk financing initiatives
Except for some budgetary allocations, the Government of Djibouti has no financial planning mechanisms for 
drought response in place. The Ministry of Interior has an annual emergency budget line for drought response (Fonds 
d’urgence pour la gestion des risques et des catastrophes) amounting to around 12 million Djiboutian franc (DJF) (67,000 
United States dollar (USD)) for emergency response measures. In the 2020 finance law, the government has indicated the 
intention to raise this amount, due to the financial difficulty faced in 2019 to respond to floods. There is also a budget for 
unforeseen expenditures which in 2020 amounted to DJF 1 billion (USD 5.6 million) but this budget line is not dedicated 
specifically to disaster response (WBG 2020).
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
Djibouti is a francophone country and insurance legislation adopts the CIMA6 code.  In Djibouti, insurance 
supervision is carried out by the Insurance Control Service under the authority of the Ministry of Economy and Finance. 
Insurance legislation only recognizes indemnity-based insurance or, in other words, physical loss or damage to an insured 
object. As such, approval would be required from the Insurance Control Service to implement IBLI.
6.Inter-African Conference on Insurance Markets - Conférence Interafricaine des Marchés d’Assurance.  CIMA covers 15 countries in francophone Africa and was 
established by treaty in 1992, bringing virtually all insurance supervisory, legislative and regulatory powers under the CIMA Code, and supervised by the Regional 
Insurance Control Commission (Commission Régionale de Controle de l’Assurance).
10 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Status of non-life insurance market
The insurance market in Djibouti is very small and in 2018, the total market premium volume was only USD 21.3 
million. In 2018, Djibouti’s insurance penetration rate (premium/GDP) was 0.77%, with expenditure on insurance of 
USD 20 per capita (World Bank 2020h), which is very similar to Ethiopia (0.72% of GDP and USD 20.46 per capita) but 
considerably lower than the insurance penetration in Kenya (2.75% of GDP and USD 39.97 per capita. Motor vehicle 
insurance contributes nearly 60% of total market premium in Djibouti.
There are only two private commercial insurance companies in Djibouti: GXA and AMERGA. The two companies 
have shared the Djiboutian market since 1999, and in 2018 they collected, respectively, 61% and 39% of market 
premiums. GXA and AMERGA are small companies with few employees, a single office each in Djibouti-city and no 
representation in the provinces or in the peri-urban areas of the capital (World Bank 2020h). 
There are no local reinsurance companies in Djibouti and there is no domestic retention requirement: risks are 
ceded to African-based companies (e.g., Africa Re, ZEP-RE, Best Re) and other global reinsurers and fronting is common.
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability  
There is no history of agricultural crop or livestock insurance in Djibouti. In view of the small contribution of the 
agricultural sector to the economy of Djibouti, the perceived lack of demand by farmers and pastoralists in agricultural 
insurance and the fact that the two insurers lack rural networks and staff to distribute and administer agricultural insurance, 
the insurers do not have the capacity or interest to develop micro-insurance retail products for this sector (World Bank 
2020h). 
Table 3: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Djibouti 
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index Greenhouse Forestry
insurance
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Livestock insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
n.a. R & D* n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Interest from public and private stakeholders
The government participated in the IGAD-ILRI-World Bank Addis Ababa ‘Policy Roundtable and Technical Workshop on 
Index-Insurance for Livestock in the IGAD Region’ on IBLI opportunities in the IGAD region in June 2019, and expressed 
its interest in the concept. The two insurance companies in Djibouti (GMX and AMERGA) lack the financial resources and 
technical capacity to design and implement micro-level IBLI insurance to individual pastoralists. They are not motivated 
to distribute an index insurance product, given recent and consistent drought conditions. While this seems to clearly rule 
out the potential for a micro-level commercial IBLI program, in which local insurers would not be interested in investing, 
they might be willing to underwrite a macro-level government-supported program, such as the Kenya Livestock Insurance 
Program (KLIP) in Kenya or Satellite Index Insurance for Pastoralists in Ethiopia (SIIPE) in Ethiopia. A regional implementer 
and program would support the technical development of products and build capacity to grow the domestic market 
(World Bank 2020h).
African Risk Capacity is licenced to operate in Djibouti and could, if requested by the government, offer sovereign risk 
drought index insurance.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 11
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 4: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Djibouti (2011).
Financial inclusion data for Djibouti’s population (% of population; age 15+) 
Total Rural
Account at financial institution 12.3 8.1
Borrowed from a store by buying on credit 3.3 4.0
Credit card ownership 4.0 4.3
Source: World Bank 2020f.
Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas 
Percentage of pastoralists with bank account 0–10
Percentage of pastoralists with access to mobile phone 0 –10
Pastoral areas with particularly good financial services Arta
Obock, Ali Sabieh, Dikhil, 
Pastoral areas with particularly limited financial services Tadjourah
Source: Expert questionnaires
Financial inclusion of pastoralists in Djibouti is very low. Questionnaire respondents estimated that 0-10% of 
pastoralists own a bank account and only 0-10% of pastoralists have access to a mobile phone. There are seven 
commercial banks and four Islamic banks, who have very few branches in the inner part of the country. Digital financial 
services such as mobile-phone-based transactions are largely non-existent and transactions are mainly cash based. There 
is one provider of mobile money, Porte Monnaie Mobile de Djibouti (www.mdjf.info), but it remains very small in scale. 
Djibouti has been called a ‘digital paradox’ as the population does not benefit from the country’s existing infrastructure 
of eight major undersea fibre-optic cables and access to telecommunications and internet service in the country remains 
limited (Stoppa 2020).
Beneficiary registries
In Djibouti, some beneficiary registries exist already. As per the Ministry of Social Affairs and Solidarity, there are 
19,000 extremely poor households in Djibouti, 12,000 of which are supported through social safety net programs. These 
include a Ministry of Social Affairs and Solidarity-operated safety net in urban and peri-urban areas (3,000 households), 
a WFP-operated safety net in urban areas (4,000 households) and a WBG-supported safety net in rural areas (5,000) 
households (Stoppa 2020).
Table 5: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Djibouti.
Government programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
Ministry of Social Affairs and Solidarity, General Urban and peri-urban areas 3,000 households
Secretariat: financial support to vulnerable families
Donor programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
WFP Urban areas 4,000 households
WBG Rural areas 5,000 households
FAO cash-for-work activities Ali Sabieh, Dikhil, 
Tadjourah, Obock
Sources: Questionnaires; Stoppa 2020.
12 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Other services
Table 6: Access to additional services for pastoralists in Djibouti.
Pastoralist access to public services Pastoralist access to private services
Livestock registration n.a. n.a.
Livestock vaccination n.a. n.a.
Livestock extension (e.g. husbandry, sanitation) n.a. n.a.
Livestock inputs (e.g. vaccines, drugs) n.a. n.a.
Forage and feeds supplements n.a. n.a.
Source: Estimates by experts from questionnaires.
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility 
assessment of IBLI in Djibouti through a 
regional IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 7: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Djibouti.
Status Comments
Importance of The overall contribution of the livestock sector to the economy is relatively low (3.1% of GDP), 
pastoral livestock as Djibouti has a largely serviced-based economy. However, more than 50% of the population 
for economy work in agriculture and the livestock sector contributes more than 80% of agricultural GDP; 
thus, it is important for large parts of the population.
Impact of drought Droughts have had major impacts on the livestock populations in Djibouti. Pastoralists, being 
on livestock the most vulnerable in the society, are often those most negatively affected. 
Pastoralist demand n.a.   No data could be obtained. There are some assistance programs being provided to rural and 
for livestock vulnerable populations. This may lower the demand for other protective programs such as 
insurance IBLI. 
Effective Financial services infrastructure, outreach to rural populations, mobile banking and extension 
distribution services are all weak in Djibouti and, where they exist, focus on Djibouti city. Thus, selling 
channels for micro- micro-level IBLI will be very challenging. 
level IBLI
Existing pastoralist In Djibouti, some social protection programs exist that are also targeting poor pastoralists. 
beneficiary These existing beneficiary databases could potentially be used to identify beneficiaries for a 
registries potential modified macro-level IBLI program in Djibouti.
Pastoralist financial Levels of financial literacy among pastoralists are expected to be very low. Pastoralist knowledge 
literacy and acceptance of insurance was identified by all questionnaire respondents as an expected key 
challenge for implementing a regional IBLI approach in Djibouti. Significant investments would 
have to be made in capacity building and awareness raising of insurance products.
Legal and The insurance regulatory framework has not yet been adapted to allow for selling index 
regulatory insurance insurance. The majority of questionnaire respondents identified regulatory issues as an 
environment expected key challenge for the development of a regional IBLI approach in Djibouti. 
Insurance market Insurance market development in Djibouti is very low. 
development 
Interest from There are only two insurers (GMX and AMERGA) that both do not have any agricultural insurance 
insurers in IBLI activities and no experience with index insurance. For a recent World Bank study, both did not 
express interest in developing and/or distributing an IBLI-type product (Stoppa 2020).
Finance available Djibouti is part of the World Bank Horn of Africa Initiative but has not yet expressed interest in 
for premiums using resources to invest in IBLI. The government of Djibouti has no previous experience and 
has not otherwise expressed willingness so far to use financial resources to support IBLI. 
Interest from The government participated in the IGAD-organized regional conferences on IBLI and 
government expressed its interest in the concept. The level of interest in IBLI indicated by government 
stakeholders in IBLI stakeholders via expert questionnaires ranged between ‘somewhat interested’ (Ministry of 
Finance) and ‘very interested’ (Ministry of Agriculture). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 13
B. Eritrea
Table 8: Summary of livestock and insurance in Eritrea.
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability None. The National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea offers limited indemnity-based crop and livestock 
insurance.
IBLI planning None. The Government of Eritrea is studying the role of IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from Cecchi et al. 2010)
No. of pastoralists MPI in rural areas Livestock Livestock  
(% of total population) contribution production index  
to GDP (2004–06 = 100)
676 K (13%)7 0.6518 15–17%9 12610 
(2015) (2017) (2017) (2017)
Livestock breakdown11 (2018)*
Total TLUs Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
3.1 M 378,000 2.1 M 1.8 M 2.4 M
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral areas Saving and Micro-Credit Program
Mobile cash n.a. (does not exist)
Insurance companies National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance  There is no specific insurance legislation in Eritrea. There is a single monopoly life and non-life 
law/regulation insurance company the National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea, which is majority-owned by the 
government.
Livestock insurance The National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea offers livestock indemnity-based insurance and is 
products planning to introduce crop insurance but does not offer IBLI insurance.
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government partners Ministry of Agriculture 
Livestock sector 
n.a. (no information)
associations
Most important 
IFAD, AfDB, FAO, WFP, European Union (with in-country office)
development partners
*FAO data based on imputation methodology
TLU conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
7.UNECA 2017
8.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2017).
9.Guthiga et al. 2017
10.FAOSTAT 2020c
11.FAOSTAT 2020c
14 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Eritrea
Eritrea faces widespread poverty, but the socio-economic situation is difficult to assess given a lack of reliable 
data. The country ranks 182nd out of 189 countries on the Human Development Index (UNDP 2019a). The most recent 
available survey data from 1997 indicated a 70% poverty rate (World Bank 2020a). Some 78.2% of total number of 
people employed are considered to be vulnerable, and youth unemployment (11.6%) is nearly twice as high as the total 
unemployment rate (6.5%). Some 88.5% of the population lives in rural areas (FAOSTAT 2020c). 
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
The contribution of the agricultural sector to the national economy is modest compared to the relative importance 
it has for the people’s livelihoods. The agricultural sector contributes 17.6% to GDP but 62.9% to employment 
(FAOSTAT 2020c). The livestock sector contributes 35–49% to agricultural GDP (Guthiga et al. 2017). Reasons for the 
relatively modest role of the sector to overall economic output include the impact of recurring droughts, outdated farming 
methods, and the effect of continuous conflicts (Babikir et al. 2015). Eritrea further has extensive mineral resources 
including copper, gold, iron, nickel, silica, sulphur and potash, as well economic opportunities given its location at the 
Red Sea: fishing, salt extraction, tourism, and oil and gas reserves (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Figure 8: Numbers of major livestock species in Eritrea (1993–2018).
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
Camels Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c.
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
Livestock production is limited to pastoral farming systems in the arid and semi-arid areas of the country. Most land 
is suitable for pasturage, except for the coastal regions and the far north, which are too arid. There has been little change 
or development in livestock production systems in the country over the last decades. The livelihoods of rural populations 
depend on income from the sale of crops, livestock and livestock products from traditional subsistence agriculture. 
Overall, livestock and crop producers suffer from a lack of modern farming equipment and techniques, erratic rainfall, 
exhausted soils and lack of financial services and investment (Babikir et al. 2015).
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 15
The livestock sector almost exclusively relies on mobile or semi-mobile production systems. In the lowlands, 
nomadic livestock keepers move according to the traditional migration patterns between grazing areas for the dry and 
rainy seasons. The construction of some water ponds and water catchments help in extending the presence of water 
beyond the rainy season, reducing livestock movements until depletion of the reservoirs, but mobility remains the main 
livelihood strategy. In the highlands, the population is more stable, agriculture is largely practiced and livestock keepers 
are more anchored to their areas, even though movements take place depending on the climatic conditions (drought 
is rare in the highlands). The whole livestock economy is largely based on subsistence, where people live on what they 
produce, and sell the surplus to the local market.12
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
The country’s pastoralist population living in arid and semi-arid areas is vulnerable to the adverse effects of 
climate change. Reoccurring dry seasons and droughts put their health and livestock-based livelihoods at risk. Dry spells 
increase the risk of pest infestation and decrease the availability of fodder and water due to an increased degradation of 
natural resources, thereby affecting overall food security (Babikir et al. 2015). 
Eritrea is one of the countries most affected by land degradation in the region. Vulnerable areas are mainly located in 
the central-northern part of the country, which is characterized by steep slopes, fragile soils, poor vegetation cover, and 
extensive usage for agricultural purposes. Short periods of intense rainfall cause significant soil erosion and runoff. Other 
factors include inappropriate land management, burning of animal waste and crop residues, unsustainable agricultural 
practices and over-exploitation of natural pastures and water for fodder (ICPAC and WFP 2018). Thirty-five per cent of the 
total land area is categorized as degraded (UNDP 2019a).
Pastoralists face state-enforced land tenure restrictions, increasing the risk of violent resistance. Resolute tenure 
legislation increases the risk of conflict between pastoralist communities and the government: Proclamation No. 58/1994 
conferred all ownership of land to the state, creating a system of individual utilization rights while reserving the final 
dispossession rights to the national government (UNECA 2017). 
The livestock sector is further affected by prevailing tensions between Eritrea and other countries. The border 
conflict with Ethiopia from 1998–2000 displaced nearly a third of the population, killed a large number of livestock and 
destroyed essential agriculture infrastructure. Continuous border tensions, even after restoring full diplomatic relations in 
2018, limit traditional cross-border livestock migration and trade. Finally, poor diplomatic relations between Eritrea and 
the international community hinder the delivery of aid and emergency services that could strengthen rural and livestock-
focused interventions (Moehler 2008).
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
Climatic conditions are determined by the country’s topography and location at the south-eastern border of the 
Sahel Zone. The central highlands mostly experience a semi-arid climate, whereas the western and eastern-coastal 
lowlands face hot arid climatic conditions. The country has two main rain seasons: the Kremti rains in western lowlands 
and the highlands from June to September and the Bahari rains in the eastern lowlands from October to March. Mean 
annual rainfall varies greatly by region, ranging from less than 300 mm in the coastal areas, to 400 mm in the western 
lowlands, and over 750 mm in the central highlands and southwest areas (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
12.Email communication with International Committee of the Red Cross Eritrea.
16 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Most areas in Eritrea have poor agroclimatic conditions for farming and livestock production. Less than 5% of the 
total land mass is arable, with less than 0.1% being used for crop farming (Babikir et al. 2015). Rain-fed production systems 
exist, if at all, in the central highlands, given its flat geography, relatively fertile soil and milder climate. The western 
lowlands only occasionally experience favourable rain seasons that allow crop cultivation and agro-pastoralism (ICPAC 
and WFP 2018). Most other areas can be used for pasturage, excluding some parts in the northern and coastal areas, 
were the arid climate diverts water and forage (Library of Congress 2005). Overall, total rainfall received in most regions is 
insufficient for sustainable and consistent crop and livestock production (ICPAC and WFP 2018). 
Figure 9: Mean annual rainfall over Eritrea (1981–2010). Figure 10: Coefficient of variation for Eritrean October–March 
seasonal Bahari rains (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Eritrea experiences adverse effects from climate change and increasing occurrences of natural disasters. The 
country ranks 84th on the WorldRiskIndex score, given its exposure (low) and vulnerability (very high) to natural hazards 
(BEH and IFHV 2020). It ranks 119th out of 181 countries on the ND-GAIN Exposure Ranking in 2018, which measures the 
degree to which a system is exposed to significant climate change from a biophysical perspective (ND-GAIN 2020). 
Climate-related natural hazards include droughts, locust swarms, and floods in isolated few areas, with 
droughts causing the largest negative impact on rural populations. On average, Eritrea experiences a drought 
every three to five years, with parts in the central and coastal regions having experienced even more incidences 
between 2000 to 2015. Floods only rarely occur, given the low rainfall patterns, and have minor effects on the 
population (ICPAC and WFP 2018). 
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral 
sector 
Declining seasonal rainfall and increasing occurrences of droughts require livestock production systems to adapt 
in order to protect livelihoods and food security of rural populations (ICPAC and WFP 2018). While much concrete 
information is lacking, a lot of anecdotal and contextual evidence with neighbouring countries in the Horn of Africa points 
towards severe impacts of droughts on pastoralist populations and food security outcomes. The Ministry of Agriculture, 
in responding to the expert questionnaire of the DIRISHA project team, communicated that “Drought occurs once every 
three or five years in the country. Hence, the impact of recurrent drought on the livelihood of pastoral communities and 
livestock is huge”. Officially, the Government of Eritrea maintains that recurrent El Niño-induced large-scale droughts does 
not have serious negative effects beyond the ordinary droughts that the country experiences (UN OCHA 2018)OECD, 
UNDP, 2014.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 17
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
Food insecurity rates are high and disproportionally affect rural households. Eritrea is a net food importer, importing 
food items worth USD 91 million (excluding fish) per year with only USD 1 million exported in 2017 (FAOSTAT 2020c). 
Domestic food production only covers 25–50% of national consumption, depending on the rainfall experienced. 
Rural households are most affected, given their dependence on agriculture-based incomes, with almost two thirds 
of households considered food insecure. Other factors affecting food security include war damage to agricultural 
infrastructure and assets, population displacement and dislocation disrupting farming activities, predominance of low-
productivity subsistence farming techniques, fragmented land ownership, poor farm management, deforestation and 
uncontrolled over-grazing, and limited market access for their produce (CAADP 2013).
The emergence of COVID-19 in 2020 has had a severe impact on pastoralists and has further exacerbated food 
insecurity issues. There is no official data on the number of tests conducted in the country. By 5 October 2020, the 
number of confirmed cases was 375, with 34 still being active and 341 having recovered. The number of fatalities is 
unclear given the lack of comprehensive testing IGAD and WHO 2020). While the government has not imposed strict 
lockdown measures for the agricultural sector, experts in-country describe the impact on pastoralists as severe. COVID-19 
has considerably inhibited the distribution of livestock inputs and transportation of produce to the markets. Many weekly 
markets have also been closed as intra-zone movements within Eritrea have been restricted. There are restrictions of 
movement of livestock to grazing areas, watering points and weekly markets. All this has led to disruptions in the food 
value chain and to reduced livestock product marketing and consumption. Impacts on food security and nutrition of poor 
households have thus been severe.13 
Humanitarian assistance 
Figure 11: Incoming international aid funding to Eritrea as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 180,000,000
USD 160,000,000
USD 140,000,000
USD 120,000,000
USD 100,000,000
USD 80,000,000
USD 60,000,000
USD 40,000,000
USD 20,000,000
USD 0
Incoming funds (total) Incoming funds (food security)
Incoming funds (agriculture)
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020.
13.Information provided by Ministry of Agriculture and FAO Eritrea. 
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
18 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing initiatives
Table 9: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Eritrea.
Organization Project title Project cost/contribution Duration
IFAD National Agriculture Project Total: USD 36.15 million 2012–2021
IFAD: USD 27.05 million
AfDB Drought Resilience and Sustainable Livelihoods Program V USD 25.4 million 2019–2025
FAO Improved food security/livelihood of vulnerable pastoral and USD 400,000 2019–2020
agro-pastoral communities in NRS, Eritrea
FAO Social protection n.a. n.a.
Existing drought risk financing initiatives
No existing drought risk financing initiatives in Eritrea could be identified.
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
There is no specific insurance legislation or law in Eritrea. The Bank of Eritrea is nominally in charge of financial and 
insurance market supervision but lacks specialist knowledge of insurance. There is only one monopoly insurance company 
in Eritrea, the National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea, which is majority owned by the government and which is 
responsible for all life and non-life insurance in the country. 
Status of non-life insurance market14
The National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea was established through Proclamation No.20/1992 in 1992, shortly 
after independence, when it inherited the portfolio of operations which were previously part of the Ethiopian 
Insurance Corporation. The corporation operates out of three locations: Asmara (head office), Massawa and Assab. 
Moreover, it also markets its products through a network of agents across the entire country. It is a composite insurance 
company, underwriting life and non-life insurance products.
In pursuance of its development policy, the Government of Eritrea has partly privatized the National Insurance 
Corporation of Eritrea by initiating a ‘public offer’ of its shares in 2004 and 2013, making it possible for Eritrean 
individuals and institutions to have 44% ownership of the company.
The corporation is supported by highly renowned reinsurers and balanced reinsurance treaty facility led by Munich Re 
of Africa followed by Africa Re and ZEP-RE. 
In 2019 the National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea total market life and non-life premium amounted to 245 
million Eritrean Nafka (Nkf) (USD 16.3 million), of which non-life premiums amounted to Nkf 235 million (USD 15.7 
million) or 96% of total. The growth in non-life insurance premiums has declined since 2015 (see Table 10). Motor vehicle 
insurance accounts for more than 50% of non-life premium.
14.This section is based on information from NICE’s website http://www.niceritrea.com/background.php and NICE’s 2019 Annual Report.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 19
Table 10: Underwriting results for National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea (premium, claims and loss ratio) (2010–2018).
Item 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total
Gross 155,245 183,289 221,093 217,015 222,288 271,918 265,389 253,417 247,277 235,512 2,272,443
Premium (000 
NAKFA)
Net Premium 111,317 118,672 136,692 147,044 159,605 190,587 196,986 182,935 177,059 165,837 1,586,734
Earned (000 
NAKFA)
Net Claims 34,491 50,781 47,073 55,790 64,734 53,175 57,685 43,445 27,824 33,735 468,733
Incurred (000 
NAKFA)
Loss Ratio (%) 31% 43% 34% 38% 41% 28% 29% 24% 16% 20% 30%
Source: National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea 2019 Annual Report and Financial Statements.
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability 
In recognizing the importance of the agricultural sector to Eritrea, the National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea 
offers a livestock insurance policy covering injury and death of livestock due to the following:
• accidental injury/illness
• permanent total disability of the animal
• calving and transport risks
The National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea plans to extend its business in the agricultural sector in the future to 
include the following:
• indemnifying farmers against any unforeseen losses
• provision of products already available in urban areas to those in rural areas
• providing cover for agricultural loans granted by banks and other financial institutions
Table 11: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Eritrea.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index insurance Greenhouse Forestry
R & D* n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Livestock insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
R & D* n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Source: Authors.
No further details of the National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea’s indemnity-based livestock insurance program 
are available. It is likely, however, that coverage is very low and restricted mainly to commercial livestock enterprises.
The National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea has been consistently profitable since its inception in 1992. 
Nevertheless, it faces important challenges including (i) lack of qualified and experienced manpower, (ii) the absence 
of insurance legislation (the National Insurance Corporation of Eritrea as the sole monopoly insurer is mainly free to set 
its own terms and conditions), (iii) the Bank of Eritrea has an important role to play in supervising the activities of the 
insurance industry; (iv) the majority of Eritreans lack knowledge and awareness of the role of insurance and (v) the main 
products in the market (motor vehicle, fire and accident, marine and aviation) fail to address the insurance needs of rural 
people who make up 75% of the population (Rena 2007).
20 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Interest from public and private stakeholders
The government participated in the IGAD-organized regional conferences on IBLI and expressed its interest in 
the concept. In the expert questionnaire received from the Ministry of Agriculture, it indicated that it was “extremely 
interested” in rolling out IBLI in Eritrea given the severe impacts of recurrent droughts on pastoralists. To date it has not 
been possible to elicit the potential interest of the insurance sector in participating in any IGAD regional IBLI insurance 
program.
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 12: Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas in Eritrea.
Type of financial inclusion data 
Share of pastoralists with bank account (%) n.a.
Share of pastoralists with access to mobile phone (%) n.a.
Pastoral areas with particularly good financial services Western lowlands
Pastoral areas with particularly limited financial services Eastern lowlands
Source: Estimates by experts, from questionnaires.
Access to financial services is extremely limited. A government-run microfinance program, the Saving and Microcredit 
Program operating under the Ministry of National Development, also extends services to rural areas. As per the Ministry 
of Information, the Saving and Microcredit Program extends credit to 5,770 clients, almost 50% of whom are women, 
and is accessible by 47% of all villages in Eritrea. It has an outstanding loan portfolio of Nkf 29 million (USD 1.9 million) 
(Government of Eritrea 2017). Internet access is poorly developed and government controlled. Rural areas are particularly 
penalized because of the poor network.
Beneficiary registries
As per estimates from expert questionnaires, there are no beneficiary registries active in Eritrea. FAO and UN 
OCHA operate an ‘emergency food and agriculture program’ in the eastern and western lowlands, targeting 20,000 
beneficiaries and distributing farm implements, small ruminants, vaccinations and animal feed that may have further 
information on beneficiaries. 
Other services
Table 13: Access to additional services for pastoralists in Eritrea.
Pastoralist access  Pastoralist access  
to public services to private services
Livestock registration n.a. n.a.
Livestock vaccination n.a. n.a.
Livestock extension (e.g. husbandry, sanitation) n.a. n.a.
Livestock inputs (vaccines, drugs) n.a. n.a.
Forage and feeds supplements n.a. n.a.
Source: Estimates by experts, from questionnaires.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 21
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility 
assessment of IBLI in Eritrea through a regional 
IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 14: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Eritrea.
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral At 15–17%, livestock production contributes significantly to Eritrea’s GDP. 
livestock for economy Virtually all livestock production is conducted through nomadic or semi-nomadic 
systems, thus highlighting the importance of pastoralists for the country overall.
Impact of drought on livestock There is not much quantified evidence on the impacts of drought on pastoralist 
populations in Eritrea. In its communication with the DIRISHA project team, the 
Ministry of Agriculture confirmed that drought-related impacts on pastoralists 
were “huge”. 
Pastoralist demand for n.a.   No information to this effect could be obtained. There is no previous experience 
livestock insurance of pastoralist populations in Eritrea with insurance. 
Effective distribution channels Financial sector outreach infrastructure to pastoralist communities is weak. There 
for micro-level IBLI are no private financial sector products or services offered to rural communities. 
As per government information, the public Saving and Microcredit Program 
reaches about half of rural communities. There are no mobile money schemes 
active in Eritrea and there is no information on pastoralist access to bank accounts 
or mobile phones.
Existing pastoralist beneficiary For this study, no existing pastoralist beneficiary registries could be identified. 
registries
Pastoralist financial literacy Given the low extension levels of financial services to pastoralists in Eritrea, 
pastoralist financial literacy is expected to be very low. Significant investments 
would need to be made in building capacity and awareness of pastoralists on 
insurance products.
Legal and regulatory insurance All financial activities are tightly controlled by the government. There is no 
environment experience with index insurance and this would have to be approved by the 
respective government bodies. All answers the project team received on 
expert questionnaire identified insurance regulation as one of the key expected 
challenges on rolling out an IBLI-based program in Eritrea. 
Insurance market There is only one insurer active in Eritrea, the government-run National Insurance 
development and interest from Company of Eritrea. There is no private market. The interest of the National 
insurers in IBLI Insurance Corporation of Eritrea in IBLI could not be assessed as part of this 
report.
Interest from insurers in IBLI n.a. No information could be obtained to this effect.
Finance available for premiums Eritrea forms part of the envisaged World Bank Horn of Africa Initiative but has 
not yet indicated its willingness to dedicate financing to the initiative. There is no 
previous experience with the government subsidizing agricultural insurance in 
Eritrea.
Interest from government The government participated in the IGAD-organized regional conferences on IBLI 
stakeholders in IBLI and expressed its interest in the concept. In the expert questionnaire received 
from the Ministry of Agriculture, it indicated that it was “extremely interested” 
in rolling out IBLI in Eritrea given the severe impacts of recurrent droughts on 
pastoralists.
22 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
C. Ethiopia
Table 15: Summary of livestock and insurance in Ethiopia.
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability Micro-level IBLI since 2012; modified meso- (macro-) level IBLI since 2018.
IBLI planning The Government of Ethiopia is studying the role of IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from (Cecchi et al. 2010)
Livestock Livestock  
No. of pastoralists  MPI rating in 
contribution production index  
(% of total population) rural areas
to GDP (2004–06 = 100)
14.7 M (15%)15 0.54716 15–17%17 12018 
(2015) (2016) (2017) (2017)
Livestock breakdown19 (2018)*
Total TLUs Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
70.8 M 1.3 M 62.6 M 33.0 M 31.7 M 
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral areas n.a. (no information)
HelloCash (Belcash); Sendwave; M-Birr (Ambassa/Lion Bank and Hibret/United Bank); CBE Birr 
Mobile cash
(Commercial Bank of Ethiopia); Sahay Mobile Banking (Rays Microfinance Institution)
Oromia Insurance Company (underwriting IBLI); Oromia Insurance Company; Nyala Insurance Share 
Insurance companies
Company, Ethiopian Insurance Corporation; Africa Insurance (all underwriting SIIPE)
Other Ethio-Telecom, the most important telecom provider for pastoralists
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance  Insurance legislation is the Proclamation No. 746/2012, a Proclamation to Provide for Insurance 
 Business. National Bank of Ethiopia is the insurance supervisory authority.
 
law/regulation Recently, the National Bank of Ethiopia issued a directive that allows financial institutions (namely 
banks and microfinance institutions) to take moveable items, including livestock, as collateral when 
extending loans to agricultural producers.
Livestock insurance Several insurers in Ethiopia offer a range of traditional indemnity-based livestock insurance products 
products for livestock and poultry. Micro-level IBLI was launched by one local insurer in 2012 in selected zones 
of Oromia Region (Borena), and modified meso-level social protection cover was launched in 2018 by 
a pool of four insurers under the SIIPE program in selected woredas of Somali Region.
15.UNECA 2017
16.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2020a).
17.Guthiga et al. 2017
18.FAOSTAT 2020a
19.FAOSTAT 2020c
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 23
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government partners Ministry of Agriculture/Agricultural Transformation Agency; Livestock and Fishery Marketing 
Department within the Ministry of Agriculture; Ministry of Peace; National Meteorological Agency; 
Pastoral agro-pastoral bureaus; cooperative offices
Livestock sector Ethiopian Meat and Dairy Industry Development Institute; Ethiopian Meat Producer Exporters 
associations Association; Ethiopian Animal Feed Industry Association; National Export Council
Most important WBG, USAID, AfDB, UK FCDO, FAO, WFP, Mercy Corps, CARE, Project Concern International, 
development partners Catholic Relief Services Ethiopia
* FAO data based on imputation methodology 
TLU conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1 
USAID = United States Agency for International Development
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Ethiopia
Ethiopia remains one of the poorest countries in the region despite its fast-growing economy. The country ranks 173th out 
of 189 countries on the Human Development Index (UNDP 2019a). Continuous strong economic performances averaging 
annual GDP growth of 9.8% between 2008/09 and 2018/19 led to large poverty reduction in both urban and rural areas 
(World Bank 2020b). Only 1.8% of the labour force is unemployed, but 86% of employment is categorized as vulnerable. 
There is a significant divide between the rural lowlands and urban areas in terms of socio-economic development. 
Some 78% of the population lives in rural areas (FAOSTAT 2020c). Pastoral and agro-pastoral households, representing 
12–14% of the population, have low literacy rates, low levels of formal education, and lack access to water and sanitation 
compared to urban households (IGAD 2020a).
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
The agriculture sector provides employment to the majority of Ethiopians, but productivity levels are low. The 
sector provided 67.1% of total employment and used 37.5% of total land area in 2017 (FAOSTAT 2020c). The livestock 
sector is a critical source of income to farmers, creating job opportunities and strengthening food security (ICPAC and 
WFP 2018). It contributes 35.6% to agricultural GDP and 16.5% to the overall GDP. Despite having the largest cattle 
population in Africa, the level of productivity and commercialization is low (Guthiga et al. 2017). The broader agriculture 
sector is represented by subsistence rain-fed farming systems with low productivity levels caused by ecological changes 
and farmers’ limited access to financial services, production technology, and market linkages (Babikir et al. 2015). 
Figure 12: Numbers of major livestock species in Ethiopia (1993–2018).
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Camels Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c.
Millions
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
24 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
The main livestock production systems are defined by the availability of water and the topography of pastoralist 
regions. Pastoral farming systems have adapted to areas with sparse vegetation, fragile soils and scarce water. This 
system is defined by seasonal migration in response to availability of grazing as well as varying compositions of herds 
with different species of livestock. Agro-pastoral systems enjoy more stable access to water and maintain a semi-nomadic 
livelihood which includes crop farming, even though it plays a less significant role than livestock given limited and volatile 
rainfall. Highland farming systems exist in mountain ranges and plateaus of altitude above 1,500 meters. Livestock play 
a particular important role in higher-altitude areas, as crop yields are lower and more volatile. Other livestock systems 
include forest-based, waterside, and market-oriented production (Babikir et al. 2015). 
Figure 13: Number of cattle in Ethiopia (2014/15). Figure 14: Number of goats in Ethiopia (2014/15).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018
Market access for livestock producers
There are no formal health certifications or permit regulations in the domestic livestock markets, leading to 
lower market barriers for informal pastoralists but increased risk of diseases that would jeopardize livestock 
exports. There is no issuance of sanitary permits at the farm or pastoralist production level nor pre-purchase health 
inspection or certification at the primary markets or along transport routes. Traders and exporters at secondary markets 
often engage private veterinarians to oversee and control livestock purchases to protect animals in holding grounds 
and along stock routes. In case trade-relevant diseases emerge, the inspecting veterinarians inform the government 
veterinary inspector, who notifies the Veterinary Services Directorate if cases are confirmed (IGAD 2016). The Ministry 
of Agriculture in close collaboration with its development partners has attempted to utilize digital technology to 
enhance livestock production and productivity. One such intervention is the Livestock Identification and Traceability 
System, which is an attempt to gather information on livestock (e.g. origin, health status and type of husbandry 
practice) destined for export.
Cross-border trade including livestock is a major income source for rural households but is underlaid with 
heavy regulations. Informal trade is an important source of income for pastoral and non-pastoral households, 
particularly in areas where alternative employment opportunities do not exist. While the government strives to curb 
informal exports through regulation, it still allows small-scale trading with Djibouti, Kenya, Somalia and Sudan. 
These regulations, for instance with Kenya, define the radius within which cross-border trade is permitted and 
the types of commodities allowed to be traded. Livestock, especially in the southern and southeastern pastoral 
rangeland, are among the major products that are unofficially exported (UNECA 2017). Sheep and goats have 
historically been the most relevant trade livestock species in terms of number and value, but cattle trade has 
increased in importance in recent years (IGAD 2013).
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 25
Livestock stakeholders have access to market information and financial services, but access is restricted to certain 
markets. The national livestock market information system collects and provides data on volumes of animals supplied 
and average value in each age group, sex and grade of animal. It also provides early warning information. The system 
monitors 47 livestock markets across Ethiopia to provide information on prices and volumes of different livestock types 
using simple technology (feature or smartphones). This notwithstanding, integrated market information services as well 
as livestock-focused banking services are available only at Moyale, Wuchale, Humera and Almahal. No other financial 
services are available at the other cross-border markets (IGAD 2013).
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
Changing climate patterns and decreasing rainfall amounts and predictability put livestock at risk. Weather and 
climate projections indicate increasing temperatures and incidents of dry spells, directly impacting livestock as aridity 
increases and water availability decreases. Pastoralists will need to reconsider their migration patterns and composition 
of livestock species to cope with the changing environment (ICPAC and WFP 2018). More details are listed under 
Section II.
Land degradation is a main reason for low and declining agricultural productivity, continuing food insecurity 
and rural poverty. Twenty-nine per cent of the total land area is classified as degraded (UNDP 2019a). Problem drivers 
include rapid population increase, severe soil loss, deforestation, low vegetative cover, and unbalanced agricultural 
production systems. The problem is particularly severe in the northern, central, and northeastern regions, with denser 
population causing increased pressure on natural resources (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Intra- and inter-ethnic conflict around borderlands. More than 90% of pastoralists in Ethiopia (Afar, Somali and 
Borena regions) share borders with similar ethnic groups separated by colonial time international borders. Internally, in 
the regions that house pastoralists, the respective administrative boundaries are contested. Thus, territorial claims and 
counterclaims as well as competition over scarce grazing and water resources often engender intra-ethnic as well as inter-
ethnic conflicts (Debelo 2019). Conflicts have heavily affected formal and informal cross-border trade and restricted travel 
patterns of pastoralist communities (UNECA 2017).
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
Ethiopia has a variety of climates, ranging from tropical in the lowlands and Rift Valley regions to cooler 
temperatures in the northern and southern mountain ranges. Most parts of the country have a warm and 
tropical climate, with hot and semi-arid climate zones dominating the northeastern lowland regions. Mean annual 
temperatures range between 15°C and 20°C in the highlands and between 25°C and 30°C in low-lying regions. 
Rainfall patterns vary considerably across the country with western, northwestern and parts of the central regions 
receiving over 1000 mm and pastoral areas in southeast and northeastern region receiving below 500 mm of rain 
annually. Rainfall data from 1981 to 2015 indicate declining annual rainfall in parts of central and southern regions 
(ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Most of the country experiences a bimodal rainfall regime with two distinct rainy seasons followed by dry seasons, 
which vary in their timing from north to south (see Figure 17). Pastoral areas mostly experience Belg/Gu rains from 
February/March to June and then Kiremt/Deyr rains in the latter part of the year. Overall, low rainfall and high variability in 
pastoral areas cause unfavourable conditions for livestock production (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
26 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 15: Mean annual rainfall over Ethiopia (1981–2010). Figure 16: Coefficient of variation for Ethiopian seasonal rains 
February–May (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Figure 17: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Ethiopia.
Source: FEWS NET 2020a.
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Ethiopia is heavily exposed to the impact of climate change and natural hazards, with droughts being responsible 
for the largest crises. The country ranks 68th globally on the WorldRiskIndex, which ranks countries by their exposure 
(low) and vulnerability (very high) to natural hazards (BEH and IFHV 2020). It further ranks 157th out of 181 countries on 
the ND-GAIN Exposure Ranking in 2018, which measures the degree to which a system is exposed to significant climate 
change from a biophysical perspective (ND-GAIN 2020). Droughts represent the key hazard to the Ethiopian population, 
with major events occurring in 1999, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2011 and 2015 (ICPAC and WFP 2018). There is also a 
high risk of flooding around Lake Tana and in valleys in the highlands, where heavy seasonal downpours lead to water 
surges in dry river beds or flood plains, potentially putting settlements and infrastructure at risk (ICPAC and WFP 2018). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 27
The National Disaster Risk Management Commission has mapped the vulnerable areas by collecting woreda disaster risk 
profile data in 445 woredas, developing profiles for 340 woredas and uploading them on an official national website.20
Figure 18: Number of events by disaster type in Ethiopia (1961–2020).  
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
70 80 90 00 10 0
-19
2
1 1-1
9
1-1
9
1-2
0 -20 -20
96 97 98 99 00
1 11
1 1 1 1 2 20
Hy drological (eg. floods) Geophysical (eg. earthquakes)
Biological (eg. diseases) Climatological (droughts)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Figure 19: Number of affected people by disaster type in Ethiopia (1961–2020).
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
70 80 90 00 0 0
-19 -19 -19 -20 0
1 02
61 71 81 91 01
-2 1-2
19
1
19 19 19 20 20
Hy drological (eg. floods) Geophysical (eg. earthquakes)
Biological (eg. diseases) Climatological (droughts)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral sector 
The increasing number and intensity of droughts heavily impacts the Ethiopian livestock sector. Climate change as 
well as the unpredictability and generally decreasing amounts of rainfall hinder water availability and sustainable growth 
of forage for livestock, leading to declined health conditions, lower production of animal products, and potentially higher 
death rates, which threaten the livelihoods of pastoralist herders (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Some pastoralists started engaging in income diversification as well as alternative fodder production. Pastoralist 
households located in the Somali region of the country pursue diversified livelihoods, for instance cultivation of wheat, 
fishing and poultry, as well as irrigated farming of vegetables, rice and sugar cane. Some pastoralists have also started to 
get involved in the production of livestock fodder to counteract their dependence on rain-fed grazing for their livestock 
(UNECA 2017). Some pastoralist communities also migrate between Djibouti, Ethiopia and Somalia depending on the 
rain season (Babikir et al. 2015).
20.The website www.profile.dppc.gov.et was not accessible during the writing of this report.
Millions
28 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
The impact of droughts on livestock populations and other agricultural production systems consequently affects 
the food security of the Ethiopian population. Since the 1950s, 12 major drought-induced food security crises have 
occurred, highlighting the impact of climate-related risks on food security. The 2015 drought caused widespread hunger, 
with an estimated 10 million people (10% of the total population) requiring food aid (IGAD 2020a). Data from 2008 to 
2015 suggest that the Oromia and Somali regions had the highest number of people in need of humanitarian assistance, 
which spiked during and following droughts, suggesting a direct influence of climate events on food insecurity of 
households (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
The impact of COVID-19 on pastoralists is severe and has been exacerbated by compounding shocks, leading 
to worsened food security outcomes. Most poor households in eastern regions will most likely continue facing 
crisis outcomes (IPC Phase 3) through mid-2021 (FEWS NET 2020a). By 5 October 2020, the country had conducted 
1,272,352 tests, confirming 75,368 cases, of which 42,964 were still active and 31,204 had recovered. Some 1,198 
people had died from the virus (IGAD and WHO 2020). Pastoralists were most impacted by market closures and 
movement restrictions that stayed active for five months, impacting their ability to earn income from alternative sources. 
Indeed, even with markets open, market activity is expected to be lower due to continued border closures, transportation 
challenges and disrupted religious festivals, with additional negative impacts on pastoralists. The Ministry of Agriculture 
also reports that fewer livestock extension services were delivered, that through the market closures, input supplies such 
as livestock vaccines were limited, particularly in remote pastoral areas, and that food prices had risen. As per a Mercy 
Corps study of Somali region from August 2020, livestock-keeping households lost 20-40% of their income between 
March and May 2020 as markets were closed. As a result, their food consumption was reduced, loan repayments to 
microfinance institutions were delayed, and average sales of retailers were lower (Mercy Corps 2020b). In addition, 
pastoralists were impacted by compounding shock events, including excessive rains, floods and locust infestations of the 
rangelands.21
Humanitarian assistance 
Figure 20: Incoming international aid funding as to Ethiopia tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 1,400,000,000
USD 1,200,000,000
USD 1,000,000,000
USD 800,000,000
USD 600,000,000
USD 400,000,000
USD 200,000,000
USD 0
Incoming funds (total) Incoming funds (food security)
Incoming funds (agriculture)
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020 .
21.Compiled from answers to expert questionnaires of various respondents.
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 29
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing practices
Donor projects that focus on the enhancement of the pastoralist and 
livestock sector
Table 16: Most important donor programs in Ethiopia focusing on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector.
Organization Project Title Cost/Contribution Duration
World Bank Ethiopia Rural Productive Safety Net Project Total: USD 1.9 billion, of which IDA: USD 2017–2020
438 million  
Government of Ethiopia: USD 621 million
UK FCDO Productive Safety Net Program Phase 4 USD 405 million 2014–2020
World Bank Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience USD 74 million (for Ethiopia) 2014–2021
Project 
(multiple recipient countries)
AfDB Drought Resilience and Sustainable USD 8.9 million (for Ethiopia) 2014–2021
Livelihood Program for the Horn of Africa 
(multiple recipient countries)
IFAD/ Lowlands Livelihood Resilience Project Total: USD 451 million, of which  2019–2025
World Bank IFAD: USD 90 million 
IDA: USD 350 million
USAID Feed the Future Resilience in Pastoral Areas – USD 31.3 million 2020–2024
North (Afar, Somali)
(USD 7.1 million emergency response 
fund)
USAID Feed the Future Resilience in Pastoral Areas – USD 25.8 million (USD 5.8 million 2020–2024
South (Oromia, SNNPR) emergency response fund)
Source: Expert questionnaires.
IDA = International Development Association.
Table 17: Other important donor programs in Ethiopia focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector.
Organization Project Title Cost/Contribution Duration
World Bank Second Agricultural Growth Project Total: USD 365.5 million 2015–2023
WB: USD 350.0 million
UK FCDO Building Resilience in Ethiopia USD 352 million 2017–2020
IFAD Rural Financial Intermediation Program III Total: USD 305.79 million 2019–2024
IFAD: USD 39.99 million
AfDB Basic Services Transformation Program (incl. Initial: USD 262 million; 2016–2020
supplementary financing) supplementary: 
USD 127 million
IFAD Rural Financial Intermediation Program II Total: USD 248.05 million 2011–2020
IFAD: USD 100.06 million
World Bank Livestock and Fisheries Sector Development Project Total: USD 176.2 million 2018–2024
WB: USD 170.0 million
World Bank Ethiopia Resilient Landscapes and Livelihoods Project Total: USD 129 million, of which IDA: 2018–2024
USD 100 million
+ USD 13 million additional financing
World Bank Emergency Locust Response Program  USD 63 million (for Ethiopia) 2020–2023
(multiple recipient countries)
30 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Organization Project Title Cost/Contribution Duration
FAO Pursuing Pastoral Resilience through improved animal USD 11.5 million 2014–2020
health service delivery in pastoral areas of Ethiopia
FAO Global Network Against Food Crises Partnership USD 4.8 million 2018–2021
Program – Country Investment Ethiopia
FAO Emergency livelihoods assistance to vulnerable USD 2.0 million 2020
herders in desert locust infestation risk areas
FAO Support livelihoods of drought affected households USD 1.7 million 2018–2020
and resilience building of vulnerable groups in Warder 
and Kebredahar Woredas of Ethiopia`s Somali Region
FAO Improved rural livelihoods through support to USD 1.6 million 2019–2022
Moringa Value Chain development in SNNPR Region
Source: Various.
Existing drought risk financing practices
Ethiopia has a well-established drought response system, including significant financial arrangements, to be able 
to respond to disasters such as droughts quickly and effectively. Key elements of the Ethiopian national disaster risk 
financing framework are the following.
• The Productive Safety Net Program is an unconditional cash transfer program that provides regular support to a 
core caseload of 8 million poor and vulnerable people everywhere in Ethiopia, including in the pastoralist areas. 
The program has a ‘scalability’ mechanism that enables it to expand horizontally in case of drought and rapidly add 
additional beneficiary households to its payments roster. This system has been tested thoroughly and successfully. 
Most impressively, after the severe 2016/17 drought, an additional 10.2 million people received Productive Safety 
Net Program support to buffer the negative impacts of the shock. The Productive Safety Net Program contains a 
federal contingency budget that provides scalability resources in case of need. Additionally needed financing for 
large scale-ups is provided by the Ministry of Finance via budget reallocations or raised via humanitarian appeals 
(Drechsler et al. 2017).
• In addition, the Government of Ethiopia also keeps a strategic grain reserve through the Emergency Food Security 
Reserve Administration, which is kept to a minimum size and used strictly for emergency response only (unlike other 
countries that use their strategic grain reserve, mostly unsuccessfully, as a price stabilization mechanism). In 2011, 
it kept a target stock of 407,000 metric tonnes of grain (Shahidur and Lemma 2011).
• Finally, the Government of Ethiopia works with a number of donors on a series of smaller risk financing 
and insurance pilot programs – for example, WFP implements its R4 rural resilience initiative in Ethiopia, a 
comprehensive package of drought insurance, financial services and training for participating farmers. Other such 
programs include SIIPE and IBLI programs.
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
The current legal basis for the insurance industry is Proclamation No 746/2012, a proclamation to provide for 
insurance business, which replaced the Licensing and Supervision of Insurance Business Proclamation No 86/1994, the 
pioneering insurance law in post-socialist Ethiopia. The legal system in Ethiopia is based upon a mixture of French civil 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 31
law and local variations. The National Bank of Ethiopia is the insurance supervisory authority: the supervision of banks and 
insurers is governed by National Bank of Ethiopia Establishment (as amended) Proclamation No 591/2008, 11 August 
2008 (AXCO 2020a).
Microinsurance is permitted by (i) an insurer licensed to cover other classes of insurance, (ii) a specialist 
microinsurer and (iii) a microfinance company. For these last two categories, new legislation came into effect in 
February 2015 under the Licensing, License Renewal and Product Approval for Microinsurance Providers Directive No 
SIB/1/2015. Weather index microinsurance is in its infancy with a number of pilot schemes in operation (AXCO 2020a). 
Brokering and agency-based selling insurance are not allowed for microinsurance operations.
There are no operating requirements set out for takaful (Islamic) insurance. Islamic banking has started in Ethiopia 
but there is no takaful risk transfer in the country and the regulator has stated that it will address operating requirements 
in the event that it is approached for such a licence (AXCO 2020a). From an IBLI perspective this is a potential issue since 
many pastoralists in the eastern and southern regions of Ethiopia are Muslims and their preferences are to purchase takaful 
insurance.
Status of non-life insurance market
In 2017, the Ethiopian non-life insurance industry ranked at 95 in the world in terms of premium income. South 
Africa is the largest non-life insurance industry in Africa and has a world ranking of 21, followed by Morocco at 46, Algeria 
at 56 and Kenya at 63. In 2017 the total market premium was 7,494 million Ethiopian Birr (ETB) (USD 314 million), of 
which the largest was non-life premium accounting for ETB 6,873 million (USD 288 million), while life insurance, personal 
accident and health only accounted for 8% of total premium. The insurance market has grown at an average of 14% per 
annum over the past five years – well above the inflation rate (AXCO 2020a)
There are 17 licensed insurers operating in the Ethiopian market, nine of which are composited, writing both life 
and non-life insurance. The major company in the market is the state-owned Ethiopian Insurance Corporation, which 
was established in 1976 when the industry was nationalized. It had a monopoly of the insurance market in the country until 
1994, when the market was reopened. The top five insurance companies in Ethiopia are Ethiopian Insurance Corporation, 
Africa Insurance Company, Awash Insurance Company, NIB Insurance Company and Nile Insurance Company. 
Information on market share of premium dates back to 2011 when the Ethiopian Insurance Corporation had a 41% market 
share and the top five companies at the time (unnamed) had a 75% market share. Non-life business is dominated by motor 
vehicle (56% of total premium) and marine, aviation and transit (14%) (AXCO 2020). 
Insurance market penetration is very low in Ethiopia, equivalent to 0.4% of GDP and only USD 2.99 per capita in 
2017. Insurance penetration was considerably higher in Kenya (2.64% of GDP, with expenditure of USD 40.7 per capita). 
Reasons for the very low insurance penetration in Ethiopia include the fact that most people are not aware of insurance 
and 85% of the population live in rural areas where insurance outreach is still very low. The advent of microinsurance is 
seen as key to unlocking the life and non-life markets (AXCO 2020a). 
Ethiopian Reinsurance (Ethiopian Re), the first local reinsurance company, was set up in the first half of 2016. 
Mandatory treaty cessions are required at a minimum of 25% for life and non-life insurers. Furthermore, there is a 5% 
per policy compulsory cession. Facultative offerings must be made to Ethiopian Re, which has the right of first refusal 
under law. Ethiopian Re is a shareholder in Africa Re, which is guaranteed a 5% cession on any outward reinsurance. 
Most Ethiopian insurers reinsure with Africa Re, and Ethiopian Re also uses Africa Re for its retrocession arrangements. 
Ethiopia is also a member of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) but the 10% cession (to 
PTA Re/ZEP-RE) that is usually applied to insurers operating in COMESA countries does not appear to be uniformly 
applied in Ethiopia.
32 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Several international reinsurers support the Ethiopian insurance market, especially for parametric or index 
crop and livestock index insurance. For many years, Swiss Re was the lead reinsurer of the largest share of the R4 
microinsurance weather index insurance program, but in recent years an international reinsurance broker has placed 
this business with a large panel of mainly European specialist agricultural reinsurers. Africa Re leads the reinsurance of 
the Oromia Insurance Company insured IBLI program in Oromia Province and SCOR reinsurance company leads the 
reinsurance of the SIIPE program. 
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability 
In the past 15 years there have been significant innovations in Ethiopia in both micro-level and meso-/macro-level 
index-based crop and livestock insurance products and programs targeted at small poor farmers and vulnerable 
pastoralists. Traditionally a handful of Ethiopian insurers including Ethiopian Insurance Corporation, the state-owned 
insurer, and Nyala Insurance Share Company, a private insurer, offered indemnity-based crop, livestock and poultry 
insurance products and programs on a limited basis. The introduction of index-based insurance has revolutionized the 
agricultural insurance market.
Table 18: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Ethiopia.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index insurance Greenhouse Forestry
Low uptake Low uptake Medium uptake Low uptake Low uptake n.a.
Livestock insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
Low uptake Medium uptake Low uptake Commercial scale-up n.a. Low uptake
Source: Authors, updated from Mahul and Stutley 2010b.
Crop index insurance initiatives
In 2006/07 the Government of Ethiopia purchased a macro-level sovereign risk drought index insurance cover 
which was designed to support financing of humanitarian food aid emergency response. The rainfall-deficit product 
was designed by WFP and placed directly with Axa Re as a derivative cover with a total sum insured of USD 7.1 million 
and premium of USD 09.93 million ,which was financed by USAID. No payouts were triggered in 2006/07 and the 
government declined to renew cover (Mahul and Stutley 2010b). The Government of Ethiopia at this time elected to 
invest heavily in a national drought and flood early warning system, termed Livelihoods, Early Assessment and Protection, 
to trigger timely cash or food payouts from contingency funds/social protection programs such as the Productive Safety 
Net Program to effected populations.
In 2011 WFP and Oxfam launched the R4 program with vulnerable farmers located in drought-prone areas of 
Tigray and Amhara provinces: the program includes a micro-level weather index insurance cover which protects 
against drought. R4 is closely aligned with the Productive Safety Net Program in these provinces. R4 is based on four 
pillars: (i) risk reduction whereby participating farmers provide their labour on public sector drought-reduction works; (ii) 
creation of risk reserves through the promotion of savings groups; (iii) prudent risk-taking through access to seasonal crop 
credit to invest in improved seeds and fertilizers; and (iv) risk transfer through a satellite drought weather index insurance 
product designed by the International Research Institute for Climate and Society.22 R4 is a voluntary insurance program 
which is implemented by the Relief Society of Tigray and insured by Africa Insurance Company and Nyala Insurance Share 
Company. Oxfam America and WFP finance the bulk of the drought premiums, but insured farmers are expected to 
contribute towards the costs of their weather index insurance policy under the Insurance for Assets program by providing 
their labour on risk reduction works. In the past decade, R4 has scaled up in Ethiopia and in four other African countries: 
22.Earth Institute, Colombia State University.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 33
in 2019, R4 reached over 87,000 farming households (about 450,000 people) in Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Senegal 
and Zambia, and in 2018, around USD 1.5 million of insurance payouts was distributed through the initiative in Ethiopia, 
Kenya, Malawi, Senegal and Zambia to compensate for weather-related losses.23
Index-based livestock insurance initiatives 
Micro-level IBLI
In 2012, ILRI assisted the Oromia Insurance Company to launch a micro-level IBLI program with pastoralists located 
in Borena zone of Oromia Province. This followed on from the earlier success of the IBLI program in Kenya, which was 
designed as a livestock predicted mortality drought insurance index cover. In Ethiopia the IBLI product was based on 
satellite index based on the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), and the cover was initially designed as a 
livestock asset replacement policy, covering the replacement cost of the animal, and subsequently (since 2016) modified 
for asset protection. Various international organizations supported field operations, contract design, product pricing, 
extension and awareness creation through donor-funded projects to bolster the private sector commitment shown by 
Oromia Insurance Company. Donors have also subsidized the operational overheads of the program to keep the price 
of the IBLI product down to an affordable level: in practice the premium charged to pastoralists has been based on the 
actuarially fair price or the calculated pure loss cost premium rate. Oromia Insurance Company works closely with local 
cooperatives and microfinance institutions in the delivery of IBLI to pastoralists in Borena zone and uses village insurance 
promoters to raise awareness of the product, while Oromia Insurance Company sales agents ultimately sell the product to 
pastoralists. 
Over the past eight years, Oromia Insurance Company has sold IBLI to over 16,000 pastoralists with nearly 60,000 
insured TLUs and a total sum insured of ETB 113 million: over this period total premium has amounted to ETB 11.0 million 
against drought payouts of ETB 12.9 million. There have been four major drought years with payouts exceeding paid 
premiums: 2013/14 (loss ratio, 168%); 2015/16 (loss ratio, 309%); 2016/17 (loss ratio, 522%) and 2019/20 (loss ratio, 
233%) and the overall loss ratio of 117% indicates that Oromia Insurance Company has lost money over the eight years it 
has underwritten IBLI. The company is, however, highly committed to meeting its social corporate responsibility to assist 
marginalized buyers of insurance.
Figure 21: IBLI: Number of insured pastoralists and livestock in Ethiopia (2012–2019).
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Policyholders Insured cattle Insured camels Insured shoats Total  insured livestock
Source: Oromia Insurance Company .
23.https://www.wfp.org/r4-rural-resilience-initiative
34 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 22: IBLI Ethiopia uptake and underwriting results (2012/13 to 2019/20).
7,000,000 600%
522%
6,000,000 500%
5,000,000
400%
4,000,000 309%
233% 300%
3,000,000
168% 200%
2,000,000
1,000,000 100%
0% 5% 1% 10%
0 0%
2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Axis Title
Total premium Total claims Loss ratio
Source: Oromia Insurance Company.
Note: The Oromia Insurance Company insurance year covers the Hagaya rainy season (October to December), followed 
by the Ganna season (March to June) in the subsequent year.
Table 19: IBLI Ethiopia uptake and underwriting results (2012/13 to 2019/20).
No. of insured Number Number Number Total number Total  
Total sum Total claims 
Year (policy of insured of insured of insured insured premium 
insured (Birr) (Birr)
holders) cattle camels shoats livestock (Birr)
2012/13 627 831 20 1,025 1,876 5,172,500 467,547 0
2013/14 509 511 12 731 1,254 3,578,900 341,260 574,687
2014/15 1,445 1,001 40 2,536 3,577 8,434,800 803,919 40,280
2015/16 1,296 539 17 2,403 2,959 2,903,500 281,374 869,015
2016/17 2,195 3,125 161 4,210 7,496 12,285,000 1,203,423 6,284,785
2017/18 4,963 10,542 1,167 9,811 21,520 42,336,000 4,126,157 41,700
2018/19 2,968 4,236 310 5,247 9,793 16,881,500 1,657,930 158,380
2019/20 2,357 5,768 357 4,662 10,787 21,420,000 2,094,337 4,886,785
Total 16,360 26,553 2,084 30,625 59,262 113,012,200 10,975,947 12,855,632
Source: Oromia Insurance Company.
Evidence from ILRI’s multi-year impact evaluation of the IBLI program in Ethiopia (and Kenya) indicates 
considerable improvements in their resilience to drought risk and social and welfare benefits for pastoralists who 
have insured their livestock. These impacts include a reduction in distress sales of livestock during severe droughts, 
improved household consumption and nutrition, herd maintenance through timely purchases of livestock fodder and 
water and veterinary services and increased productivity and sales of milk and incomes (Janzen and Carter 2013; Jensen, 
Barret and Mude 2015; Taye et al. 2019).
In Ethiopia, micro-level IBLI has experienced a number of key challenges including difficulties in achieving scale 
and financial sustainability. In the peak year, 2017/18, Oromia Insurance Company achieved a total of 4,963 policy 
sales and 21,520 insured animals, but uptake has declined in subsequent years. Pastoralists tend to insure only very few 
head of animals – an average of 3.6 animals or 2.0 TLU per policy – and this means that the average premium earned on 
a policy has been only ETB 671 or about USD 18. This is inadequate to cover the administrative and operating costs of 
the IBLI product. Under this study, Oromia Insurance Company have kindly provided actual operating and administration 
cost data for the past eight years, which show that for every ETB 1 in collected premium, the administrative and operating 
expenses have amounted to ETB 1.11 and their combined ratio (paid claims plus administrative and operating expenses 
Value of premium and claims (ETB)
Loss ratio
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 35
divided by premium) at end 2020 is 2.29, implying that for every ETB 1 in collected premium the company is incurring 
ETB 2.29 in claims and expenses. While the company is willing to accept these losses in the short term because of social 
corporate responsibilities, clearly this is financially unsustainable in the medium to long term and more cost-effective 
distribution channels for the IBLI product urgently need to be identified and put in place. 
Figure 23: IBLI administrative and operating expenses for Oromia Insurance Company, Ethiopia 2012/13 to 2019/20.
Oromia Insurance Company costs, expenses and loss ratios
Total paid premiums (ETB) 10,975,947
Administrative and operating expenses:  
     - Cooperative administration expenses (ETB) 588,151
     - Village insurance promoters commissions (performance related) (ETB) 1,237,793
     - Oromia Insurance Company administration and operating costs (ETB) 10,400,000
Total administrative and operating expenses (ETB) 12,225,944
Administrative and operating expenses: premium ratio 1.11
Paid claims (ETB) 12,855,632
Loss ratio 1.17
Combined ratio 2.29
Source: Oromia Insurance Company 2021.
Further information on the technical design of the IBLI Ethiopia product is contained in Volume III to this report, ‘A 
Regional Approach to Drought Insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development Countries: Technical Feasibility 
Assessment’. Further details on IBLI performance, lessons, challenges and impacts are contained in Volume I to this 
report, ‘A Regional Approach to Drought Insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development Countries: Main 
Report – Operational Feasibility Assessment’. 
Modified meso-level social protection cover – Satellite Index Insurance for Pastoralists in Ethiopia
SIIPE is an initiative of WFP and the regional government of Somali Region Ethiopia. Somali Region is an important 
pastoral region of southeastern Ethiopia, which is very exposed to drought. SIIPE is an NDVI drought index designed to 
trigger timely payouts to vulnerable pastoralists to purchase livestock feed supplements to keep their animals alive (asset 
protection) in times of severe drought. SIIPE is closely aligned to the Productive Safety Net Program, which provides 
conditional food and cash transfers to chronically poor households throughout Ethiopia, including a high proportion of 
the pastoral population in Somali Region. SIIPE beneficiaries are selected on the basis that they have between 5 and 11 
TLUs, and it also insures 5 TLUs per beneficiary. Currently WFP finances the costs of premiums in full, but it is examining 
the introduction of an insurance-for-assets approach whereby pastoralists provide their labour to cover part or all of 
their premium costs.24 The SIIPE program is insured by a co-insurance pool of four companies: the Ethiopian Insurance 
Corporation, Africa Insurance Company, Oromia Insurance Company and Nyala Insurance Share Company. SCOR Zurich 
is the lead reinsurer for SIIPE.
SIIPE was launched in the Gu season 2018 with 5,001 pre-selected vulnerable pastoralists (25,005 TLUs in four 
woredas in Somali region) and has now in 2020 scaled up to seven woredas and 15,504 beneficiaries and 77,520 
insured TLUs. Over the three years, SIIPE has made drought payouts in one year only (2018) (loss ratio 81%) and the loss 
ratio after three full years of operations is 23%. SIIPE is planning to scale up to about 12 woredas and 25,000 insured 
beneficiaries in 2021.
24.IIPE is a five-year WFP funded project. The total budget for SIIPE is USD 5.6 million and is co-financed by the Government of Sweden and the Swiss Agency for 
Development and Cooperation (C4ED 2019). 
36 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 24: Number of beneficiary households and tropical livestock units insured under Satellite Index Insurance for Pastoralists in 
Ethiopia.
90,000
80,000 77,520
70,000
60,000
50,000
39,080
40,000
30,000 25,005
20,000 15,504
10,000 5,001 7,816
0
2018 2019 2020
Insured pastoral households Insured Tropical Livestock Units (TLU)
Source: WFP Rome and Addis Ababa.
Figure 25: Satellite Index Insurance For Pastoralists in Ethiopia underwriting results (2018–2020).
SIIPE: Undwerwriting Results 2018-20 (Birr)
35,000,000 81% 90%
30,000,000 80%
70%
25,000,000
60%
20,000,000 50%
15,000,000 40%
30%
10,000,000
20%
5,000,000
0% 0% 10%
0 0%
2018 2019 2020
Total Premium (Birr) Total Claims Payouts (Birr) Loss Ratio %
Source: WFP Rome and Addis Ababa.
Table 20: Satellite Index Insurance For Pastoralists in Ethiopia: uptake and underwriting results (2018–2020).
No. No. Insured No Total Average Total Claims 
Total Sum Loss Ratio 
Year Insured Pastoral HHs Insured Premium Premium Payouts 
Insured (US$) %
Woredas (Beneficiaries) TLU (US$) Rate (%) (US$)
2018 4 5,001 25,005 2,544,844 342,426 13.5% 0 0%
2019 4 7,816 39,080       97,508 81%
2020 7 15,504 77,520         0%
Total 7 28,321 141,605 2,544,844 342,426 13.5% 97,508 23%
Source: WFP, Rome and Addis Ababa.
Further details on SIIPE performance, lessons, challenges and impacts are contained in Volume I to this report, ‘A Regional 
Approach to Drought Insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development Countries: Main Report – Operational 
Feasibility Assessment’. 
Loss Ratio (%)
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 37
Interest from public and private stakeholders
The Government of Ethiopia has voiced its interest in a regional IBLI-based approach at previous regional IBLI 
conferences. The 2019 IGAD workshop on livestock insurance was hosted in Ethiopia. In the expert questionnaires 
for this study, government representatives indicated on average that they were ‘interested’ in implementing IBLI in 
Ethiopia at larger scale. Development partners have also shown major commitment to supporting the scale-up of the IBLI 
and SIIPE programs and in supporting premium financing. There is a need to incorporate IBLI and SIIPE into Ethiopia’s 
national drought risk management strategy and plans for pastoralists located in drought-prone regions. 
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 21: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Ethiopia (2017).
Financial inclusion data for Ethiopia’s population (% of population; age 15+) 
Total Rural
Financial institution account 34.8 32.4
Borrowed any money in the past year 41.2 42.8
Borrowed from a financial institution or used a credit card 10.7 11.2
Borrowed from a savings club 7.5 8.0
Coming up with emergency funds: not possible 42.3 43.3
Credit card ownership 0.3 0.3
Financial institution account 34.8 32.4
Made or received digital payments in the past year 11.9 10.4
Main source of emergency funds: sale of assets, rural 21.2 23.8
Mobile money account 0.3 0.3
No deposit and no withdrawal from an account in the past year 5.7 5.4
Received government transfers in the past year 7.2 7.3
Source: World Bank 2020f.
In Ethiopia, there are a few microfinance institutions that provide specialized financial services to pastoralist 
regions. Their services include, among others: Sharia-compliant saving and credit; mobile banking; agent-based banking 
to buy and sell goods and services; and cash transfers. The respective microfinance institutions are:
• Somali Microfinance Institution S. Co, servicing Somali region. 
• Afar Microfinance Institution S. Co, servicing Afar Region.
• Omo Microfinance Institution S. Co, servicing SNNPR Region.
• Rays Microfinance Institution, servicing Oromia and Somali regions.25
Meanwhile, the presence of formal banking institutions in pastoral areas is still very low due to the very limited 
infrastructure and security concerns (ICPALD 2016).
25.Expert questionnaire response from USAID Ethiopia. USAID supported the establishment of these microfinance institutions and built their capacity to improve their 
outreach to pastoralist communities.
38 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
While some financial institutions exist, the overall level of financial inclusion of pastoralists is still very low, with 
large differences across different geographies. Almost all respondents to the expert questionnaires estimated that 
only 0–10% of pastoralists were using bank accounts. Similarly, respondents estimated that on average only 11–30% 
of pastoralists in Ethiopia had access to a mobile phone. There seem to be significant regional differences, with 
questionnaire respondents estimating that Borena zone and parts of Somali region enjoy relatively better access to 
financial services and Afar and SNNPR regions (especially South Omo) having particularly poor access to financial services. 
In addition, where financial services are offered, they seem not to necessarily to meet pastoralists’ needs – a 2016 ICPALD 
study found that credit is often not extended in a Sharia-compliant fashion, which makes it unusable for Muslim pastoralist 
communities (ICPALD 2016). This is confirmed by further research showing that financial inclusion of pastoralists in 
southern Oromia, Somali and Afar remains very low and that despite new products being developed, these rarely match 
the needs of pastoralists (Geleta 2017). Finally, there is a much higher usage of formal financial services of participants 
further up the livestock value chain, i.e. not the herders themselves (ICPALD 2016).
Table 22: Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas in Ethiopia (2020).
Type of financial inclusion data 
Share of pastoralists with bank account (%) 0-10
Share of pastoralists with access to mobile phone (%) 11-30
Pastoral areas with particularly good financial services Borena zone and Somali Region
Pastoral areas with particularly limited financial services Afar region; SNNPR (especially South Omo)
Source: Estimates by experts, from questionnaires.
Beneficiary registries
Table 23: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Ethiopia.
Government programs Target regions No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
Ministry of Agriculture/Productive SNNPR, Afar, Amhara, The Productive Safety Net Program has 8 million 
Safety Net Program Somali, Oromia, Tigray, regular beneficiaries and the capacity to scale up 
Harari, Dire Dawa rapidly to many additional millions (e.g. in total 18 
million in 2017).
Ministry of Agriculture (veterinary Afar 3,000
inputs distribution through voucher 
schemes in collaboration with 
private Veterinary Pharmacies to 
flood affected community)
Donor programs No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
SMFI registry (for e-payment) Somali 15,504
WFP registry (SCOPE) Somali 15,504
Source: Various.
Public sector beneficiary and livestock registries in Ethiopia are relatively strong. The Productive Safety Net 
Program has a comprehensive database of beneficiaries in place and is able to scale up to many more during times 
of drought. After the 2016/17 drought, the Productive Safety Net Program scaled up to an additional 10 million 
people to provide support to more than 18 million people. There is also significant experience on working with the 
program’s database to target vulnerable pastoralists for IBLI purposes. The WFP-funded SIIPE program in Borena 
zone in Oromia Region is working closely with the Productive Safety Net Program registry and has thus been able 
to gather important experience that could be used for any future modified macro-level IBLI program targeting 
pastoralists. 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 39
In addition, there are a number of international partner programs providing grant payments to pastoralists. As 
part of this study, the suitability of these programs to serve as baseline beneficiary registries could not be determined. 
Grant programs targeting pastoralists include, for example, programs by Mercy Corps, Save the Children, FAO and WFP 
(ICPALD 2016).
Other services
Table 24: Access to additional services for pastoralists in Ethiopia.
Pastoralist access  Pastoralist access  
to public services to private services
Livestock registration Low n.a.
Livestock vaccination Low n.a.
Livestock extension (e.g. husbandry, sanitation) Medium n.a.
Livestock inputs (vaccines, drugs) Low n.a.
Forage and feeds supplements Low Low
Source: Estimates by experts from questionnaires.
Key public institutions working on veterinary services for pastoralists include the following:
• National Veterinary Institute
• National Animal Health Diagnostic and Investigation Centre
• Ethiopian Veterinary Association 
• Veterinary Drug and Animal Feed Administration and Control Authority
• National Institute for the Control and Eradication of Tsetse Fly and Trypanosomiasis
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility 
assessment of IBLI in Ethiopia through a 
regional IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 25: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Ethiopia
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral The livestock sector is of major importance to the Ethiopian economy overall, 
livestock for economy contributing an estimated 15-17% of GDP. An estimated 15% of the population or 
close to 15 million people are pastoralists in Ethiopia. 
Impact of drought on livestock The devastating impacts of drought on the livestock sector in Ethiopia and on 
pastoralists in particular have been well-documented. 
Pastoralist demand for Pastoralist demand for IBLI products could not be determined specifically 
livestock insurance for this study. There is, however, growing experience with IBLI and the SIIPE 
programs in Southern Ethiopia. Although IBLI uptake has been slow, valuable 
lessons have been learned. In some areas, there are now high numbers of 
repeat purchases of IBLI every season. Greater investments in capacity building 
and awareness of pastoralists on IBLI will however be needed in order to 
significantly increase pastoralists’ understanding of and ultimately demand for 
the IBLI product. 
40 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Status Comments
Effective distribution channels Some basic prerequisites are in place already: The Oromia Insurance Company 
for micro-level IBLI has been marketing and underwriting the micro-level IBLI product in the IBLI 
target areas and has thus been able to build a network for distribution. In the 
current IBLI and SIIPE target areas, mobile money services are relatively widely 
available, including for pastoralists. However, Oromia Insurance Company has 
suffered severe losses on the micro-level IBLI program and will thus not be able 
to sustain the current distribution model – innovations will be needed. Financial 
services including mobile money are also not equally available across pastoralist 
areas in Ethiopia. There might thus be a rationale for a cluster-based approach 
for any future program, focusing first on areas with relatively well functioning 
financial services and mobile money access.
Existing pastoralist beneficiary The Productive Safety Net Program is a Government of Ethiopia flagship program 
registries that has a strong beneficiary database in place in all regions of the country. In 
collaboration with the SIIPE program, this database has already been leveraged 
successfully to register beneficiaries into a modified macro-level IBLI program 
which could be repeated in any potential follow-up program. In addition, there 
seem to be a number of donor cash distribution infrastructures in place, including 
by WFP, Mercy Corps, and Save the Children. These might likewise be suitable to 
base beneficiary registration off them.
Pastoralist financial literacy 8 years of capacity building and awareness creation services have been delivered 
to pastoralists in IBLI target area. However, the IBLI and SIIPE experience so far 
has shown the serious challenges in building pastoralist understanding and 
awareness of financial concepts and of IBLI. Significant further investments will be 
needed for any follow-up program in Ethiopia.
Legal and regulatory insurance As the IBLI product has been marketed in Ethiopia now since 2012, there are no 
environment immediate insurance regulatory concerns at this stage. 
Insurance market The Ethiopian insurance market has active participation of many insurers that 
development also underwrite crop and livestock insurance as part of their non-life insurance 
portfolio. Ethiopian insurers have been able to gather experience with the IBLI 
and SIIPE programs. There is a strong interest in the market to continue working 
with pastoralists, however, there will need to be changes to the operating 
model as the current IBLI micro-level approach faces severe profitability 
challenges.
Interest from insurers in IBLI Given experience with IBLI so far, there is a strong interest among Ethiopian 
insurers to make the product work at the micro level and there is also strong 
interest in expanding the SIIPE program. Insurers are worried about sustainability, 
however.
Finance available for premiums Ethiopia is part of the World Bank Horn of Africa Initiative. However, the 
Government of Ethiopia has so far not committed or requested any World Bank 
financing for this regional IBLI initiative, or made available any other financing for 
this. 
Interest from government The Government of Ethiopia has voiced its interest in a regional IBLI-based 
stakeholders in IBLI approach at previous regional IBLI conferences. The 2019 IGAD workshop on 
livestock insurance was hosted in Ethiopia. In the expert questionnaires for 
this study, government representatives indicated on average that they were 
“interested” in implementing IBLI in Ethiopia at larger scale.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 41
D. Kenya
Table 26: Summary of livestock and insurance in Kenya.
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability Micro-level IBLI since 2010; modified macro-level IBLI since 2015.
IBLI planning Government of Kenya is studying role of IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from (Cecchi et al. 2010)
No. of pastoralists  MPI rating in Livestock Livestock  
(% of total rural areas contribution production index  
population) to GDP (2004–06 = 100)
4.43M (10%)26 0.65127 12%28 11629
(2015) (2017) (2017) (2017)
Livestock breakdown30 (2018)*
Total TLUs Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
28.8 million 3.3 M 19.6 M 26.7 M 19.5 M
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral Equity Bank (banking partner for Hunger Safety Net Program); Kenya Commercial Bank; Co-
areas Operative Bank; First Community Bank
Mobile cash Mobile cash: M-PESA (Safaricom); Airtel Money (Airtel); Sendwave
Insurance companies APA Insurance (underwriter KLIP, underwriter IBLI); Takaful Insurance of Africa (formerly underwriting 
KLIP, IBLI)
Other Agent for Inclusive Insurance Development
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance Insurance in Kenya is governed by the Insurance Act of and its latest amendment No 11 of 2019. The 
law/regulation insurance industry is supervised by the Insurance Regulatory Authority.
Livestock insurance Kenya has a dynamic agricultural insurance market which offers a wide range of traditional crop and 
products livestock insurance products and services as well as crop and livestock index insurance. Micro-level 
IBLI was launched by one local insurer in 2010 in Marsabit County, since when this cover has spread 
to many ASAL (arid and semi-arid land) counties. Modified macro-level social protection cover was 
launched in 2015 by a pool of seven insurers under KLIP which is a Public-Private Arrangement (PPA) 
under which the Government of Kenya fully finances the premiums of vulnerable pastoralists: KLIP has 
scaled up to cover about 20,000 pastoralists in eight ASAL counties. 
26.(UNECA 2017)
27.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2017).
28.(Guthiga et al. 2017)
29.(FAOSTAT 2020c)
30.(FAOSTAT 2020c)
42 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Other relevant partners for IBLI
State Department of Livestock, Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries (operates KLIP); 
Government 
National Drought Management Authority; Ministry of Devolution and ASALs (leading Hunger Safety 
partners
Net Program)
Livestock sector Kenya Livestock Marketing Council; Kenya Livestock Producers Association; Kenya Feed 
associations Manufacturers Association
Most important WBG, UK FCDO, IFAD, European Union, FAO
development 
partners
*FAO data based on imputation methodology, estimates, and government data 
Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Kenya
Poverty in Kenya has declined over the last decade but remains high compared to peer countries, with pastoralist 
areas by far the worst affected. Kenya ranks 147th of 189 countries in the Human Development Index (UNDP 2019a). 
The share of the population living below the national poverty line fell from 46.8% in 2005/06 to 36.1% in 2015/16, but 
is still considered high relative to other lower-middle-income countries. Considerable geographic inequities remain with 
regard to health care, education and access to water and sanitation services (World Bank 2020g). Seventy-three per 
cent of the population lives in rural areas and only 57.6% of rural households have access to electricity (UNDP 2019a). 
Pastoralist communities in the ASALs are by far the most disadvantaged in Kenya, scoring far below the national average 
on development indicators across the board (Cabot Venton et al. 2012; IGAD 2020).
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
Kenya’s economy heavily depends on rain-fed agriculture, with the majority of the population pursuing 
agriculture livelihoods. Agriculture contributes 34.2% to GDP and comprises 57.8% of employment (FAOSTAT 2020c). 
The livestock sector contributes 42% to the agricultural GDP (Guthiga et al. 2017). The main export partner for livestock 
has been Mauritius, whereas meat products are mostly exported to the United Arab Emirates, Iman, Qatar, Bahrain and 
bordering countries (IGAD 2013). 
Figure 26: Numbers of major livestock species in Kenya (1961–2017).
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Camels Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c. 
* National livestock census in 2006 led to a significant increase in recorded livestock numbers.
Millions
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007*
2009*
2011*
2013*
2015*
2017*
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 43
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
The Kenyan livestock sector includes two production systems: traditional pastoralism and more intensive 
commercial systems. The pastoral system is based on extensive grazing on natural pastures and forages involving the 
migration of pastoral households in counties such as Turkana, Wajir, Garissa, Kajiado, Narok, Isiolo and Marsabit (ICPAC 
and WFP 2018). Commercialized industrial livestock systems are also increasing (Thornton et al. 2007).
Tenure rights needed for pastoralist households’ grazing purposes are managed at the community level. Article 
63/1 from the Constitution (2010) recognizes the right of communities to govern and decide on questions related to 
tenure rights and development. The Trust Land Act further considers community land that is not owned but available for 
county councils to oversee (UNECA 2017).
Figure 27: Number of cattle in Kenya (2014). Figure 28: Number of goats in Kenya (2014).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Market access for livestock producers
Kenya has a thriving trade network with its neighbouring countries. Main terrestrial cross-border markets exist at 
the borders with Tanzania, Uganda, South Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia. Most of them are connected to each other and 
to additional inland markets via trunk roads, except for markets in the eastern and northwestern areas given poor road 
networks. Border inspection points exist in several border locations and are operated by the official veterinary authority 
but with modest staff and limited training and operating standards (IGAD 2013). 
Livestock markets are often difficult to access for buyers and producers alike. Households in the northern and eastern 
region depend on food purchases at markets. However, access for both customers and producers in these regions are 
often hindered by difficult terrain, poorly maintained roads, insecure travel and inadequate transportation modes (ICPAC 
and WFP 2018).
Kenya’s information and communications technology sector is one of the most advanced in the IGAD region, but 
rural areas tend to be underserved. The share of mobile cellular subscribers increased by 43.5% to 86.1% of the total 
population from 2010 to 2017 alone (AfDB, AUC and UNECA 2019). Some 70.5% of households have mobile money 
subscriptions, but only 46% have access to broadband internet, with many rural areas lacking any access (World Bank 
2020g).
The Kenyan livestock sector has animal health certification requirements, but enforcement is limited at the 
production level. Kenya’s veterinary network operates two central veterinary laboratories (Kabete and Embakasi), 
six regional investigation laboratories, and some satellite veterinary laboratories across the country (IGAD 2013). 
44 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Kenyan livestock traders require a ‘no-objection’ permit, which is a traditionally paper-based system that is currently 
transferred to a mobile phone communication system between originating and destination veterinarians to decrease 
efforts and cost for permit seekers. In addition, a ‘movement’ permit certifies parasite treatments, vaccinations, and 
freedom from diseases facilitated by an online issuance portal. In an effort to enhance the livestock sector business 
environment, the government decreased the number of licenses and permits required, including abolition of the 
livestock traders license, enabling market participation of traders without prior vetting or clearance from veterinary 
authorities (IGAD 2016).
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
Varying and extreme climate patterns in combination with high concentrations of livestock herds in most drought-
prone areas put animals and livelihoods at risk. Pastoralists suffer from low, unreliable rainfall and potentially lasting 
droughts, leading to an insufficient availability of water, pasture and forage for their livestock. In contrast, occasional 
extreme rainfalls cause flash floods to occur. Both hazards may lead to land erosion, death of livestock herds, missing 
income and increased food insecurity among pastoralist households (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Kenyan livestock producers face animal health concerns, aggravated by inadequate availability of veterinary 
services. Pastoral areas commonly experience pests and diseases including rinderpest, anthrax and East Coast Fever. The 
occurrence of livestock diseases is exacerbated by recurrent severe droughts, as they weaken the animals and thus lower 
their disease resilience. Veterinary services required to address these health hazards are limited and difficult to access for 
pastoralists, given regional security concerns and their travel-based lifestyles (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Poor pasture quality, limited forage and overstocking are causing frequent inadequate fodder supply for 
livestock. Most ASALs have poor soil quality and are covered by bare land or low-quality pastures of tuft grasses, 
providing limited nutritional value. Pastoralists attempting to mitigate risks by keeping large numbers of livestock 
are contributing to overgrazing, soil erosion and environment degradation (ICPAC and WFP 2018). Locust invasions, 
for instance experienced in Marsabit and Turkana in 2020, further decrease available pasture for livestock (FSIN 
2019).
The increasing degradation of grazing land areas causes a severe negative impact on the environment, livestock 
and pastoralist livelihoods. Forty per cent of the total land area is classified as degraded (UNDP 2019a). Land 
degradation is caused by factors including growing population numbers, land use for economic development and 
climatic impacts. The resulting effects including soil erosion, pasture productivity and reduced ground cover, have direct 
adverse effects on livestock and broader poverty and food insecurity measures of pastoralists. Land degradation occurs 
mostly in the central and western areas due to more intense agricultural production in these regions (ICPAC and WFP 
2018).
Government mitigation measures, increased value chain costs, and decreased mobility of stakeholders in 
response to COVID-19 severely impacted the livestock sector. The COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 caused several 
economic concerns, including reduced domestic private and corporate spending of about 50%, decreased 
international demand for key export products, including coffee horticultural products, and a 75% decrease in 
vegetable and fruit exports (Deloitte 2020). The Government of Kenya was among the first to establish strict 
COVID-19 prevention and mitigation efforts, starting in March 2020. International land border closures and 
domestic movement restrictions directly impacted the trade activities in the livestock sector. After a political 
backlash, these restrictions were repealed. Yet, additional costs for traders related to the additional transportation, 
holding and fodder expenses occurred, leading to a significant reduction in the frequency and volume of trade. 
Overall, ILRI estimated that these factors lead to an estimated 40% volume reduction of livestock sold from February 
to April (Mercy Corps 2020a). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 45
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
Kenya has a warm and humid climate along its coastline and savannah grasslands inlands. The ASALs make up 89% 
of the total land area. Thirty-eight per cent of the population and 70% of the national livestock herd live in arid counties 
(IGAD 2020a). The western region is dominated by forested and hilly areas, whereas the northeastern regions are arid 
and semi-arid. The southwestern region includes the fertile grasslands of the Kenya highlands (Babikir et al. 2015). The 
central highland regions are substantially cooler than the coast, ranging from an average temperature of 15 ̊C compared 
with 29 ̊C at the coast. Of the total land area, 18% has high to medium agricultural potential, with the remaining area 
being arid and semi-arid land and therefore categorized to be of limited potential (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Figure 29: Mean annual rainfall in Kenya (1981–2010). Figure 30: Coefficient of variation for Kenyan March–May  
seasonal rains (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Figure 31: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Kenya.
Source: FEWS NET 2020b
Overall, vegetation conditions remain poor in the northeastern regions causing critical problems for pastoralists 
that depend on natural vegetation for livestock forage. The rainfall distribution is defined by two rainy seasons: long 
rains from March to May and short rains from October to December for most parts of the country, with pastoral areas 
receiving less than 100 mm of rain in most months. The climate is influenced by the inter-tropical convergence zone and 
ranges from permanent snow on Mount Kenya to desert areas at Chalbi desert in Marsabit County in the northern region 
(ICPAC and WFP 2018).
46 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Kenya is significantly experiencing the effects of climate change and increasing occurrences of natural disasters. 
The country ranks 40th out of 181 countries in the WorldRiskIndex score (high), with a high exposure to and very high 
vulnerability to natural disasters (BEH and IFHV 2020). It further ranked 159th out of 181 countries on the ND-GAIN 
Exposure Ranking in 2018, which describes the degree to which a system is exposed to significant climate change from a 
biophysical perspective (ND-GAIN 2020). 
Kenya’s main natural hazards are droughts and floods. The country experienced drought conditions in the years 1983, 
1984, 1993, 2000, 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2016, with 2009 to 2011 categorized as severe to extreme drought conditions. 
Floods affect low-lying regions of the country such as the coastal strip and river valleys that are unevenly distributed in the 
country’s drainage basins. Regions in the northern and eastern regions are especially susceptible to both droughts and 
floods, despite some of them recording an average rainfall of 300–500 mm annually compared to 1600–2000 mm in the 
western and central highlands. 
Figure 32: Number of events by disaster type in Kenya (1961–2020).
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
70 0 0 0 0 0
-19 -19
8
-19
9 00 1 2
1 -2 -2
0 -20
96 97
1 1
98 99
1 01 1
1 1 1 1 20 20
1
Meteorological (eg. storms) Hydrological (eg. floods)
Biological (eg. diseases) Climatological (drought)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Figure 33: Number of affected people by disaster type in Kenya (1981–2020).
 40,000,000
 35,000,000
 30,000,000
 25,000,000
 20,000,000
 15,000,000
 10,000,000
 5,000,000
 -
70 80 90 00 10 20
1-1
9 -19 9 0 0 0
6 71 81
-1
91
-2 1-20 11
-2
19 19 19 19 20 20
Meteorological (eg. storms) Hydrological (eg. floods)
Biological (eg. diseases) Climatological (drought)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral sector 
Kenya’s livestock sector carries the majority of economic costs inflicted by drought. Reliable data on economic 
losses in the agriculture sector due to droughts are scarce and limited to costs assessments of recent events (ICPAC 
and WFP 2018). Drought conditions between 2008 and 2011 created an estimated overall loss of USD 12.1 billion. The 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 47
livestock sector accounted for 72% of that loss, putting the livelihoods of pastoralists at severe risk (World Bank 2018a). 
The loss resembled the cost of animal deaths due to droughts and diseases and additional costs such as increased 
need for veterinary services, water and fodder. A post-disaster needs assessment indicated that the highest costs due 
to livestock deaths between 2008 to 2011 occurred in the Rift Valley, followed by the eastern and northeastern regions 
(ICPAC and WFP 2018). Impacts were generally worse in places where poverty levels were already higher (IGAD 
2020a). 
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
Poverty and food insecurity are acute in pastoralist areas. Food insecurity results from various factors, including 
economic shocks, market inaccessibility, and reduced food production due to climatic shocks (ICPAC and WFP 
2018). Some 2.6 million people, mainly located in arid and semi-arid counties, experienced a crisis or emergency 
food insecurity level in 2018 (IPC Phase 3 or higher), mainly driven by climate shocks, conflict and economic shocks 
requiring urgent humanitarian assistance (FSIN 2019). Other events during the beginning of 2020 such as flooding, 
population displacements, desert locusts and outbreaks of livestock diseases led to acute food insecurity (IPC 
2020). 
COVID-19 further exacerbated existing food access concerns in 2020. Staple food prices in rural areas were 
negatively affected by COVID-19 restrictions. (FEWS NET 2020c). By the end of September 2020, 547,946 tests were 
conducted, confirming 38,529 cases of which 12,910 were still active and 24,908 had recovered. Some 711 people 
had died from the virus (IGAD and WHO 2020). During the months of March, April, May and June 2020, movement 
was restricted by authorities and markets closed either by design or out of concern for public health. This affected 
pastoralist welfare significantly. The effect of the pandemic on employment also affected pastoralist communities 
adversely.31
Humanitarian assistance 
Figure 34: Incoming international aid funding to Kenya as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 700,000,000
USD 600,000,000
USD 500,000,000
USD 400,000,000
USD 300,000,000
USD 200,000,000
USD 100,000,000
USD 0
Incoming funds (total) Incoming funds (food security)
Incoming funds (agriculture)
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020.
31.From answers to expert questionnaires. 
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
48 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing practices
Table 27: Government programs focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Kenya.
Title Description Duration
KLIP Modified-macro level IBLI for vulnerable pastoralists in eight Kenyan ASAL 2015 to date
counties. Volume: USD 241 million.
Agricultural Sector The overall goal is to contribute to the transformation of crops, livestock n.a.
Development Support and fisheries production into commercially oriented enterprises that ensure 
Program II sustainable food and nutrition security.
National Agricultural and Rural The project development objective is to increase agricultural productivity 2017–2022
Inclusive Growth Project and profitability of targeted rural communities in selected counties, and 
in the event of an eligible crisis or emergency, to provide immediate and 
effective response.
Source: Ministry of Agriculture 2020.
Table 28: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Kenya.
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
World Bank Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project USD 77 million 2014–2021
(multiple recipient countries) (for Kenya)
World Bank Kenya Social and Economic Inclusion Project (KSEIP) USD 1,346 million, 2019–2023
of which IDA: 
USD 182.5 million
IFAD Upper Tana Catchment Natural Resource Management Project Total: USD 87.4 million 2012–2022
IFAD: USD 46.6 million
World Bank Kenya Climate Smart Agriculture Project Total: USD 279.7 million 2017–2022
WB: USD 250.0 million
World Bank Emergency Locust Response Program  USD 43 million 2020–2023
(multiple recipient countries) (for Kenya)
European Union Ending Drought Emergencies: Support to Resilient Livelihoods USD 45.4 million, of 2018–2022
and Drought Risk Management which European Union: 
USD 37 million
European Union Ending Drought Emergencies: Support to Resilient Livelihoods USD 35 million, of 2016–2020
and Drought Risk Management which European Union: 
USD 27.8 million
FAO Restoration of ASALs of Kenya through bio-enterprise USD 4,157,341 2018–2023
development and other incentives under the Restoration 
Initiative
FAO Integrated actions for innovative food systems across rural- USD 2.1 million 2018–2021
urban communities
FAO Reducing Distress Migration Through Local Value Chain USD 1.5 million 2017–2021
Development
Existing drought risk financing programs
The Government of Kenya has experimented with a multitude of different drought risk financing instruments. 
Today, Kenya is using the following:
• National disaster risk financing strategy: In 2018, Kenya was the first African country to adopt a national 
disaster risk financing strategy. The strategy that was drafted and adopted by the National Treasury outlines a 
comprehensive mix of pre-arranged financing instruments providing resources to finance the response to severe 
droughts. The framework is shown schematically in Figure 35 (Government of Kenya 2018; 2019).
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 49
• Contingency funds: There are a number of different contingency funds being operated in Kenya that provide 
finance for drought response. They are funded by a series of different donors, with a particularly prominent role 
for the European Union. Drought response funds are generally coordinated by the National Drought Management 
Authority under the Ministry of Planning and ASALs. For more than a decade, the government has debated the plan 
of launching a publicly financed National Drought Contingency Fund (but it has so far not been launched. 
• Contingent credit: In 2018, the Government of Kenya concluded a contingent credit agreement with the World 
Bank under its ‘Catastrophe Deferred Drawdown Option’ program. Upon the occurrence of a disaster, including 
drought, the government would be able to take out a concessional loan with a total volume of up to USD 200 
million. The full loan volume was disbursed in 2020 to provide rapid liquidity enabling the government to respond 
to COVID-19 and has not been renewed so far. 
• Contingent grant: The National Drought Management Authority has also arranged a contingent grant arrangement 
with the World Bank and UK Aid under the World Bank ‘Kenya Social and Economic Inclusion Project. Under the 
condition of making certain financial commitments, the government receives grant payments from the World Bank 
and the UK FCDO in the case of a drought for delivery to vulnerable pastoralist populations using the scalable 
Hunger Safety Net Program, a cash transfer program active in eight Kenyan ASAL counties.
• Agricultural insurance: There are also a number of publicly supported agricultural insurance schemes active in 
Kenya which provide resources to agricultural producers during severe droughts and thus lower the Government 
of Kenya’s fiscal drought exposure. They main schemes include (i) the Kenya Livestock Insurance Programme (KLIP), 
which is fully funded by the Government of Kenya and provides payouts to vulnerable pastoralists; (ii) the IBLI 
program, which is funded by different donors and provides payouts to micro-level pastoralist policyholders during 
severe droughts; (iii) the WFP-funded R4 rural resilience program, a comprehensive package of drought insurance, 
financial services, and trainings delivered to crop farmers; and (iv) the Comprehensive Insurance Program, a crop 
insurance program for emerging farmers that is partially subsidized through government resources and has reached 
a critical size of more than 400,000 farmers (Kenya News Agency 2020).
• Sovereign insurance: Finally, the Government of Kenya is a member of the African Risk Capacity and purchased 
sovereign drought insurance from 2014 to 2016. The policy purchase was not renewed as no payout was received 
in 2016 despite serious drought conditions in Kenya’s ASALs. However, the government continues to be in 
negotiation with African Risk Capacity on purchasing cover under another product that is designed specifically for 
the Kenyan rangelands (Government of Kenya 2020).
Figure 35: Kenya’s disaster risk financing framework.
Source: World Bank.
50 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
The Insurance Act Chapter 487, which was passed in 1985 and made effective from 1 January 1987 and Insurance 
Regulations of 1986 control insurance in Kenya. There have been numerous amendments to the Insurance Act over 
time, including the most recent Insurance (Amendment) Act No 11 of 2019. The Kenyan legal system is based on English 
common law (AXCO 2020b).
The insurance industry is supervised by the Insurance Regulatory Authority of Kenya. The Insurance Regulatory 
Authority was formed in 2007 as an autonomous state corporation responsible for supervising, regulating and promoting 
the development of the insurance industry in Kenya (AXCO 2020b). Over the past decade the Insurance Regulatory 
Authority has been extremely supportive of the numerous crop and livestock micro-level index insurance pilots that have 
been introduced into Kenya.
Microinsurance and index insurance were added to the list of permitted insurance business in 2019. Under the 
Insurance (Amendment) Act No 11 of 2019, microinsurance and social insurance schemes have been added to the 
definition of permitted insurance business, and index-based insurance is also specifically admitted (AXCO 2020b). 
As such, Kenya is the first country in East Africa specifically to approve index insurance as a permitted class of non-life 
insurance business. 
A takaful governance framework was added to the Insurance Act in 2016 to serve the minority but economically 
active Muslim population, which amounts to around 11% of the population. The Insurance Regulatory Authority issued 
takaful guidelines in 2018. Most takaful insurance is transacted through window operations plus there is one takaful 
specialist insurer, Takaful Insurance of Africa (AXCO 2020b) 
Reinsurance regulations require local insurers to make compulsory reinsurance cessions of 20% to Kenya Re, the 
state-controlled reinsurer, 10% to ZEP-RE and 5% to Africa Re (AXCO 2020b). In practice Kenya Re may decide to 
decline to take up the compulsory cession.
Status of non-life insurance market
The Kenyan insurance market ranked 57th globally in 2018, its non-life insurance market ranked 63rd and its 
personal accident and healthcare premium ranked 46th. In 2018, the total market premium was Kenyan shilling (KES) 
216.2 billion (USD 2.1 billion), of which life insurance was the biggest sector, accounting for 40.4% of total premium, 
closely followed by non-life premium (39.5%) and personal accident and health insurance (20.1%). Kenya has the second 
largest non-life insurance market in sub-Saharan Africa after South Africa. Gross written non-life premiums in 2018 totalled 
KES 85.4 billion (USD 817.77 million). Between 2014 and 2016 the Kenyan insurance market increased at more than 10% 
per annum, but since 2017 premium growth has been very sluggish at about 2% due to intense competition and rate 
cutting by Kenyan insurers (AXCO 2020b). 
There were 56 licensed insurance companies in 2020, of which 31 were non-life insurers only, and a further eight 
were composite (life and non-life) insurers, including one takaful operator, Takaful Insurance of Africa Ltd. The 
leading five non-life insurers in 2018 were Jubilee Insurance Company Ltd, CIC General Insurance Ltd, APA Insurance 
Company Ltd, UAP Insurance Company Ltd. and Britam Insurance Company Ltd. These top five companies accounted 
for 37.5% of total non-life insurance premium (AXCO 2020b). Four of the five top non-life insurance companies are also 
actively involved in underwriting crop and livestock insurance: Britam is currently not a major agricultural insurer. 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 51
The Kenyan non-life insurance market is currently over supplied, creating fiercely competitive price- driven trading 
conditions with declining profitability.
Insurance market penetration in Kenya is high relative to other East African countries, equivalent to 2.43% GDP 
and only USD 42.45 per capita in 2018.  This compares with 0.69% of GDP and USD 5.43 per capita in Uganda and 
0.53% of GDP and USD 5.43 per capita in Tanzania in 2018. Raising insurance penetration is a long-term policy goal of 
both the Insurance Regulatory Authority and the Association of Kenyan Insurers (AXCO 2020b). 
Official regulatory reporting does not disclose the market premium for agricultural lines, though the Association of 
Kenya Insurers reports KES 716.2 million (USD 6.86 million) in written premiums in 2018, a 13% decline on the KES 822.7 
million (USD 7.88 million) written in the previous year. Livestock cover accounted for 62% of the total, and crop insurance 
38% (AXCO 2020b). The authors of this DIRISHA report estimate total Kenyan market agricultural insurance premiums in 
2019 at about USD 7.5 million to USD 10 million, of which KLIP premiums amounted to about USD 2.4 million.
African Risk Capacity is licensed to operate in Kenya and between 2014/15 and 2015/16 the Government of Kenya 
purchased sovereign risk drought index insurance. There were no drought payouts in these two years and since then 
government has declined to purchase further drought cover from African Risk Capacity.
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability 
The agricultural insurance market in Kenya traditionally only served the interests of a small number of commercial 
farmers and agri-business companies involved in large-scale export-oriented crop, greenhouse and livestock 
production. The past 15 years have, however, seen major development of microinsurance and index insurance 
crop and livestock insurance products for small-scale emerging farmers and vulnerable pastoralists. Traditional 
indemnity-based crop insurance covers offered by the private commercial insurers include multi-peril crop insurance, 
named peril fire and hail crop insurance, specialist greenhouse insurance for floriculture and intensive horticulture crops 
and forestry insurance and machinery breakdown covers. Traditional indemnity-based livestock insurance covers are 
available for dairy and beef cattle, horses, pigs, poultry and pets and insure against mortality and accidental injury and 
named diseases. 
Crop index insurance initiatives
Some of the first crop weather index insurance programs in Kenya were launched in 2009 by the Syngenta 
Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture under the Kilimo Salama initiative, a private-sector led crop index-based 
weather insurance program that insured Kenyan smallholder farmers against rainfall deficit (drought) and excess rain. The 
programs were underwritten by UAP Insurance Company, one of Kenya’s largest insurance companies, and Safaricom, 
the largest mobile network operator in Kenya (Syngenta 2010). At the same time, the World Bank through its Commodity 
Risk Management Group was developing similar weather index insurance products for Kenya’s maize, banana, wheat 
and sorghum farmers. Most of these pilots did not pass to commercial scale-up and encountered significant basis risk; 
however, they put crop weather index insurance firmly on the map and led to government support particularly in areas of 
weather data and crop production and yield data strengthening (Bankable Frontier Associates 2013). 
Since 2014 there has been a major expansion of micro-level crop area yield index insurance in Kenya with direct 
linkage to crop credit insurance. Crop producers in Kenya face numerous risks including weather-related perils of drought 
and flood, but also crop pests and diseases, which can reduce average production and yields in staple crops such as 
maize by as much as 40%. Starting in 2014 the World Bank assisted the Kenyan Government and a consortium of leading 
private sector insurers to introduce area yield index insurance into Kenya: area yield index insurance is a suitable product 
for smallholder farmers and provides more comprehensive cover than weather index insurance. The State Department of 
52 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, conducted major strengthening of crop area, production and 
yield estimations systems and procedures to provide the basis of an area yield index insurance program. Commercial banks 
and microfinance institutions including the One Acre Fund, were brought into the program to act as distribution channels for 
crop credit insurance and the Government of Kenya agreed to support the program through the provision of 50% premium 
subsidies. The Kenya Agricultural Insurance and Risk Management Program was launched in 2016 and today in 2020 is 
insuring nearly half a million Kenyan smallholder farmers: as such it has achieved commercial scale-up. The bundling of crop 
credit with insurance and input supply and assistance with output marketing has proved a high value proposition for Kenyan 
farmers and may ovide pointers in future for scaling up the parallel micro-level IBLI program.
Table 29: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Kenya.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index insurance Greenhouse Forestry
Low uptake Medium uptake Medium uptake Commercial Scale-up Low uptake Low uptake
Livestock Insurance Products Available
Indemnity-Based Index-Based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
Low uptake Medium uptake Low uptake* Commercial Scale-up Low uptake Low uptake
Source: Authors.
Livestock index insurance initiatives
Micro-level IBLI
In 2010, ILRI, in conjunction with various development partners launched the first micro-level IBLI in Africa for 
smallholder nomadic pastoralists based in northern Kenya. The IBLI design project represented a technical agreement 
between ILRI, the Ministry of Development of Northern Kenya, Cornell University, Syracuse-University and the BASIS 
Program at University of Wisconsin. The project was funded by the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID), 
USAID, the World Bank and the Financial Sector Deepening Trust. In addition, the Global Index Insurance Fund provided 
financial assistance for premium subsidies. In 2010, at the launch of the IBLI initiative, ILRI’s commercial implementation 
partners included UAP Insurance Company as the local insurer with reinsurance support provided by Swiss Re’s Corporate 
Solutions, with product distribution managed by Equity Insurance Agency, which is part of Equity Bank (ILRI 2013).
The first IBLI product in Kenya was designed as an asset replacement cover designed to replace livestock that die 
during droughts. It used NDVI satellite imagery to measure the conditions of grazing lands, which was then fed 
into an algorithm that predicted livestock losses. The program was launched in Marsabit in 2010 and in its first year 
UAP insured nearly 2,000 pastoralists and 6,000 TLUs. Since then IBLI has struggled to achieve scale-up: in 2012 UAP 
exited the business and APA Insurance Company and Takaful Insurance Company took over the program. Takaful offered 
Sharia-compliant IBLI and invested heavily in staffing, systems and procedures and scaled up the program in the central 
and eastern ASAL counties such as Wajir and Isiolo, which are mainly Muslim pastoral, between 2014 and 2017. APA, 
however, withdrew from underwriting IBLI by 2016. Over the past decade IBLI has insured nearly 32,000 pastoralists and 
61,000 TLUs in the arid and semi-arid counties of Kenya. In 2015/16 the IBLI program was converted to asset protection 
cover to bring this into line with the government-subsidized KLIP.
The underwriting results of the voluntary IBLI micro-level program in Kenya have been very poor over the past 
five years and insurers and their reinsurers have lost money. Between 2015 and 2019 Takaful Insurance Company 
experienced major underwriting losses in four out of the five years with an overall loss ratio32 of 176% and as high as 615% 
in 2016. It is noted that for much of this period weather in Kenya and the Horn of Africa was adversely affected by the 
ENSO El Niño phenomenon and which caused extreme droughts in La Niña years.
32.The overall loss ratios presented in this section represent the ‘long-term average loss ratio’, which is equivalent to the sum of the claims for all years divided by the sum of 
the premiums for the corresponding years. Underwriters also refer to the ‘average loss ratio’, which is the average of the annual loss ratios for all years.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 53
Figure 36: Demand by pastoralists for voluntary IBLI (2010–2020).
 20,000
 18,000
 16,000
 14,000
 12,000
 10,000
 8,000
 6,000
 4,000
 2,000
 -
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Insured TLU Policies (insured pastoralists)
Source: ILRI 2020.
Figure 37: Kenya Takaful Insurance Company IBLI underwriting results.
30,000,000 700%
615%
25,000,000 600%
500%
20,000,000
400%
15,000,000 298%
300%
224%
10,000,000
200%
119%
5,000,000
41% 100%
0 0%
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Year
Premium Claims Loss ratio (%)
Source: Takaful Insurance Company.
Evidence from ILRI’s multi-year impact evaluation of the IBLI program in Kenya (and Ethiopia) indicates 
considerable improvements in their resilience to drought risk and in social and welfare benefits for pastoralists 
who have insured their livestock. These impacts include a reduction in distress sales of livestock during severe 
droughts, improved household consumption and nutrition, herd maintenance through timely purchases of livestock 
fodder and water and veterinary services and increased productivity and sales of milk and incomes (Janzen and Carter 
2013; Jensen, Barret and Mude 2015; Taye et al. 2019).
In Kenya, micro-level IBLI has experienced a number of key challenges, including difficulties of achieving scale 
and financial sustainability. At its peak in 2017, more than 7,250 micro-level policies were sold by Takaful, but by 2020 
demand had declined to a point where Takaful suspended sales of the product and closed down its IBLI operational unit.33 
Pastoralists in Kenya (and in Ethiopia) tend to insure only a very few head of animals – an average of only 1.9 TLU per policy 
– and this means that the average premium earned on a policy has been totally inadequate to cover the administrative and 
operating costs of the IBLI product. Under this study, Takaful Insurance Company has kindly provided actual operating 
and administration cost data for the past five years, which show that in Kenya between 2015 and 2019 for every KES 1.0 
of IBLI premium collected by Takaful, it cost the company KES 1.29 in IBLI operating expenses and, with the addition of 
the very high claims (loss ratio 1.76 or 176%), the combined ratio was equivalent to 3.02 (indicating for every KES 1.0 
of premium the company was incurring KES 3.02 in claims and operating expenses), or in other words the business has 
33.Under their former CEO, Mr H. Bashir, Takaful invested heavily in promoting and underwriting micro-level IBLI and at its peak the company employed more than 60 village 
insurance promoters. However, following his departure from the company, the new management has reduced its commitments to IBLI.
Premium and claims (KES)
Loss ratio (%)
54 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
been very unprofitable for Takaful and this is the major reason the company withdrew from the micro-level IBLI market in 
2020. While the company is willing to accept these losses in the short term because of social corporate responsibilities, 
clearly this is financially unsustainable in the medium to long term and more cost-effective distribution channels for the IBLI 
product urgently need to be identified and put in place. 
Table 30: Kenya Takaful Insurance Company administrative and operating expenses (2015–2019).
Takaful Insurance Company costs, expenses and loss ratios 
Total paid premium (KES) 50,787,429
Total administrative and operating expenses (KES) 64,003,331
Administrative and operating expenses: premium ratio 1.26
Paid claims (KES) 89,524,449
Loss ratio 1.76
Combined ratio 3.02
Source: Kenya Takaful Insurance Company.
Further information on the technical design of the IBLI Kenya product is contained in Volume III to this report, ‘A Regional 
Approach to Drought Insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development Countries: Technical Feasibility 
Assessment’. Further details on IBLI performance, lessons, challenges and impacts are contained in Volume I to this 
report, ‘A Regional Approach to Drought Insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development Countries: Main 
Report – Operational Feasibility Assessment’. 
Macro-level Social Protection Cover: Kenya Livestock Insurance Program 
Kenya suffered huge multi-billion-dollar losses to the livestock sector in the droughts of 2008 to 2011, which led 
to widespread death of animals belonging to pastoralists located in the northern ASAL counties due to lack of 
pasture and grazing. In 2012 a GIZ-funded agricultural insurance situation analysis recommended that the Government 
of Kenya used satellite pasture drought NDVI index insurance as a large-scale social protection cover to support its drought 
risk financing strategy and which would be designed to make timely payouts as droughts developed in order to permit 
pastoralists to purchase fodder, feed supplements and water to keep their core breeding animals alive (Stutley et al. 2013).
In parallel with the micro-level IBLI products, in the short rains 2015/16, livestock asset protection insurance was 
launched with 5,000 vulnerable pastoralists in two counties in Kenya through a government-led public-private 
arrangement agreement known as the KLIP and supported by ILRI and WBG. The program has progressively 
expanded and, in the 2019 season, KLIP provided fully funded insurance coverage to 18,000 pastoral households, 
representing 120,000 beneficiaries, across eight counties of northern Kenya, and is planned to scale to 45,000 
households across 16 counties by 2022 (Kyuma, 2019). The 2016/17 drought was among the worst in Kenya in the past 
20 years, and KLIP paid out to pastoralists USD 7 million (ILRI 2019). 
KLIP is built on a public-private arrangement approach that includes local private insurance companies, the State 
Department of Livestock, and the Insurance Regulatory Authority. Research organizations and development partners 
are also supporting the program. The overall objective of KLIP is to reduce the risks of livestock mortality due to drought, 
and to build the financial resilience of vulnerable pastoralists and enhance sustainable food security. Under KLIP, private 
insurance companies underwrite the insurance product and the Kenyan Government fully subsidizes insurance coverage 
for 5 TLUs to a selected range of beneficiaries, thus being the policyholder under the scheme. The target beneficiaries 
of KLIP are pastoral communities whose livelihoods are mainly dependent on livestock and are prone to the effects of 
recurrent droughts. The sum insured is based on the feed requirements to keep 1 TLU alive for 12 months or KES 14,000 
per TLU: with 5 TLUs covered each beneficiary can stand to receive maximum drought payouts of KES 700,000 (about 
USD 700 per year). In the case that payouts are triggered, insurance companies transfer them directly to the beneficiaries, 
using either mobile money or banks. 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 55
Box 1: Kenya design features for macro-level NDVI pasture drought index 
insurance cover for nomadic pastoralists in the ASAL regions
Macro-level cover purchased by the Government of Kenya as part of its national drought risk management strategy for 
the most vulnerable livestock producers as defined (cattle, sheep and goats, camels etc.). Cover is designed to provide 
regular (monthly) payouts to livestock producers in periods of extreme drought and pasture degradation as measured 
by the NDVI index in order to purchase supplementary feed for their animals. It is anticipated that if livestock producers 
have cash in hand, this will stimulate local traders to supply livestock fodder in times of extreme drought.
Insured (policyholder): The Government of Kenya and county governments responsible for payment of premiums.
Cover period: Six months: March to May (long rains) and October to December (short rains); the cover is designed 
to insure pasture and grazing during the normal growing season period only and not in the dry seasons. The cover 
period would be refined and agreed in each agroclimatic region of Kenya in conjunction with ILRI.
Insured unit: County sub-divisions as identified by a technical partner, e.g. ILRI.
Insured interest: Cover is for all classes of livestock based on TLUs.
Sum insured: The sum insured is based on the monthly nutritional requirements of one TLU. This is currently set 
at four hay bales per month per TLU currently valued at about KES 250 per hay bale or KES 1,000 per month. For a 
six-month cover period the sum insured per TLU would equal KES 6,000. The daily nutritional requirement is to be 
confirmed with Department of Livestock specialists.
Contract pay-out parameters: The monthly threshold triggers and exit triggers would be defined and agreed with 
Department of Livestock specialists and calibrated with past historical drought events to ensure that moderate to 
severe droughts which will result in forced livestock sales and potentially starvation resulting in death is projected. 
Beneficiaries: Approximately 700,000 vulnerable livestock producers located in ASAL regions.
Over the past five years of operation, KLIP insurers and its reinsurers led by Swiss Re have received nearly KES 949 
million in premiums from the Government of Kenya and paid out drought claims of KES 1.1 billion with a long-term 
loss ratio of 115%: 2016/17 was the worst loss year with payouts of KES 528 million and a loss ratio of 321%. It 
reflects local insurers’ and their reinsurers’ commitment to KLIP that they have continued to support the program in spite 
of these losses.
Figure 38: Number of beneficiaries and tropical livestock units insured under Kenya Livestock Insurance Program.
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000 18,012 18,012 18,01214,010
10,000 5,012
0
2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Beneficiaries (insured pastoralists) Insured Tropical Livestock Units (TLUs)
Source: Fava et al. 2020.
56 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 39: Kenya Livestock Insurance Program underwriting results (2015–2020).
600,000,000 320.9% 350.0%
500,000,000 300.0%
250.0%
400,000,000
300,000,000 160.8%
200.0%
150.0%
200,000,000
71.0% 100.0%
100,000,000 50.0%
6.3% 0.4%
0 0.0%
2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Total  premium (KES) Total  claims (KES) Loss ratio (%)
Source: Fava et al. 2020.
Table 31: Kenya Livestock Insurance Program underwriting results (2015–2020).
No  No No insured Total sum Total premium Total claims 
Year Loss ratio (%)
counties beneficiaries TLUs insured (KES) (KES) (KES)
2015/16 2 5,012 25,060 350,840,000 56,134,440 3,525,789 6.3%
2016/17 6 14,010 70,050 980,700,000 164,460,000 527,834,300 320.9%
2017/18 8 18,012 90,060 1,260,840,000 246,557,230 175,107,406 71.0%
2018/19 8 18,012 90,060 1,260,840,000 240,877,703 387,214,716 160.8%
2019/20 8 18,012 90,060 1,260,840,000 240,882,350 1,000,000 0.4%
Total   73,058 365,290 5,114,060,000 948,911,723 1,094,682,211 115.4%
Source: Fava et al. 2020.
An independent impact study of KLIP led by the German development agency (GIZ) (C4ED 2018) shows it is cost-
effective to use insurance to respond to severe weather shocks. Self-reported satisfaction with the program was high 
and most beneficiaries reported using at least part of the payouts for their livestock (maintenance, restocking, production 
equipment) and for household needs. In addition, qualitative evidence of community spill overs, such as sharing payouts 
with neighbours, was observed. Despite the short life of the program, households with insurance subsidized by KLIP 
experienced slightly lower levels of food insecurity and greater awareness of insurance in general (ILRI, 2019).
Over the past five years of operations, KLIP has faced a series of challenges which centre on the following.
• Insurance contracts are tendered out to underwriters every year, which acts as a major disincentive to private sector 
infrastructure investment.
• Government of Kenya funds 100% of KLIP premium costs, but lacks budget to scale up the program. It is unclear 
whether the Kenyan scheme will be sustainable in the medium to long term.
• There has not been sufficiently clear policy guidance on how long the selected beneficiaries should be eligible for 
fully subsidized premiums.
• KLIP has acted as a disincentive to individual pastoralists purchasing micro-level voluntary IBLI.
• For KLIP, the registration of beneficiaries and handling of claims has been a major challenge.
• KLIP has had challenges to align effectively with other drought risk financing initiatives in Kenya (see Volume I for 
more detail of the challenges facing KLIP).
Premium and claims (KES)
Loss ratio (%)
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 57
Interest from public and private stakeholders
The KLIP has been a widely hailed success. It has also been an effective way for the Government of Kenya to reach remote 
populations and take a share of drought risk off its balance sheets. At the same time, there is a strong desire from Kenyan 
officials to turn the full-subsidy scheme into one that only receives partial (e.g. 50%) support. This wish would need to be 
addressed in any follow-up IBLI-based program. 
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 32: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Kenya (2017).
Financial inclusion data for Kenya’s population (% of population; age 15+)
Total Rural
Financial institution account 81.6 81.2
Borrowed any money in the past year 64.4 64.5
Borrowed from a financial institution or used a credit card 19.2 19.2
Borrowed from a savings club 19.7 20.8
Coming up with emergency funds: not possible 48.6 49.3
Credit card ownership 5.7 5.1
Financial institution account 55.7 55.0
Made or received digital payments in the past year 79.0 78.7
Main source of emergency funds: sale of assets (% able to raise funds) 6.4 6.7
Mobile money account 72.9 72.6
No deposit and no withdrawal from an account in the past year 3.6 3.6
Received government transfers in the past year 12.3 12.3
Source: World Bank 2020f.
Despite that the digital revolution is farthest advanced in Kenya among IGAD countries, pastoralist communities 
remain underserved by financial institutions. Access to finance remains a major issue in remote pastoralist areas 
in Kenya (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics 2016). In many areas, financial institutions are not present at all. Some 
commercial banks have opened branches in pastoralist areas, including Kenya Commercial Bank, Equity Bank Limited, Co-
operative Bank Limited and First Community Bank, the latter also offering Sharia-compliant financial products. However, 
their offices are few and concentrated only on major towns such as Isiolo town, Marsabit town and Moyale town, 
which tend to be hundreds of kilometres apart. Besides the long distances required for pastoralists to reach them, their 
product portfolio is often unsuited to the typical pastoralist client profile, who often cannot offer collateral. Microfinance 
institutions are trying to fill the gap, mostly operating through Saccos and village loan and saving groups. However, issues 
with collateral persist and financial literacy severely constrains the use of even available financial services (Ouma 2017). 
ILRI research shows that pastoralist credit demand tends to be very low (Gesare et al. 2015). 
One encouraging trend is the increasing access of pastoralists to mobile phones and the growth of mobile money 
systems. As per Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2016), mobile ownership in rural areas in Kenya increased from 
41.6% in 2009 to 71.3% in 2016. Indeed, in pastoral areas, one respondent to the expert questionnaires estimated that 
access to a mobile phone was greater by 50% today. There are a number of mobile money schemes in Kenya, including 
M-PESA by Safaricom, Airtel Mobile by Airtel, and Sendwave. These all offer opportunities for growing financial inclusion 
in pastoralist areas.
58 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Beneficiary registries
Kenya has recently made great advances in consolidating beneficiary data under one Single Registry. The 
Government of Kenya has consolidated beneficiary data of over more than 1.3 million Kenyan households under 
one single data platform, the Single Registry for Social Protection. The platform consolidates data from management 
information systems of the country’s largest social cash transfer programs – the Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable 
Children, the Hunger Safety Net Program, the Older Persons Cash Transfer, the Cash Transfer for Persons with Severe 
Disabilities and WFP’s Jenga Jamii. The explicit purpose of this database is to serve as a registry for designing and 
managing safety nets.34 It can be accessed online and could be a useful starting point for identifying beneficiaries of any 
potential future modified macro-level insurance program. 
Table 33: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Kenya.
Government programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries (households)
Single Registry for Social Protection All of Kenya 465,000 from WFP registry 
839,000 from Kenya National Safety Net Program
Hunger Safety Net Program Marsabit, Mandera, Turkana and 375,000 
Wajir
KLIP Garissa, Isiolo, Marsabit, 18,000 
Mandera, Samburu, Tana River, 
Turkana and Wajir
VI. Summary: Feasibility Assessment of a 
livestock insurance market through a regional 
IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 34: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Kenya.
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral The livestock sector is of key importance for the Kenyan economy, providing about 
livestock for economy 12% of GDP and with more than 4 million people or 10% of the population being 
pastoralists. 
Impact of drought on Droughts have recurrent devastating impact on pastoralist populations in Kenya. This 
livestock was most visible during the 2008–2011 droughts that caused more than USD 12 billion 
in losses and damages, more than 70% of which was borne by the livestock sector, and 
pastoralists in particular. 
Pastoralist demand for There has now been more than 10 years of experience with retailing micro-level IBLI 
livestock insurance in Kenya. It has become very clear that demand from pastoralists has been limited 
due to a variety of factors: limited financial literacy and ability to pay being essential 
ones. However, agricultural insurance is a challenging product to retail anywhere. 
There has been demand from some pastoralists, and arguably more challenges have 
been with distribution and capacity building rather than with the lack of demand from 
pastoralists once they would be trained on the potential benefits of the product.
Effective distribution IBLI product distribution has been a major challenge for Kenyan insurers and not 
channels for micro-level been a profitable business. As a result, the current underwriter, Takaful Insurance of 
IBLI Africa has exited the market altogether, leaving no one to underwrite IBLI during the 
2020/21 season. Major innovations will be required to upgrade the effectiveness of 
distribution. Positives are the relatively strong access of pastoralists to mobile phones 
and the availability and growing use of mobile money systems. 
34.https://mis.socialprotection.go.ke:20307/ 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 59
Status Comments
Existing pastoralist In recent years, the Government of Kenya has made great progress in consolidating 
beneficiary registries its various beneficiary databases in one Single Registry for Social Protection. This 
could serve as an entry point for the identification of beneficiaries of any new potential 
modified macro-level IBLI product going forward.
Pastoralist financial literacy Through IBLI programs, 10 years of capacity building and awareness-creation activities 
have been provided to pastoralist communities in the four northern Kenyan counties: 
Mandera, Marsabit, Turkana and Wajir. However, as anywhere else in the ASALs, 
financial literacy among Kenyan pastoralists is very limited. The IBLI experience has 
shown the huge needs for investments in capacity building and awareness creation 
should the goal be to create a commercial and sustainable micro-level IBLI market. 
Arguably, the overall program structure, especially both the annual tenders of KLIP and 
its lack of an incentive structure for pastoralist capacity building, has not supported 
relevant efforts effectively. These issues would need to be addressed under any future 
program ensuring large-scale investments in enhancing pastoralist knowledge and 
acceptance of the IBLI product.
Legal and regulatory The IBLI product has been retailed for the past 10 years, thus there are no regulatory 
insurance environment insurance challenges of immediate concern.
Insurance market The Kenyan market is the most advanced in East Africa and there is now a series of 
development insurers with experience in underwriting, retailing and administrating IBLI products. 
While interest of the Kenyan insurance sector in continuing the IBLI program is still 
high, some are getting tired of the lack of profitability. 
Interest from insurers in IBLI There is strong engagement by some players in agricultural insurance. Given 
experience with IBLI so far, there is a strong interest among Kenyan insurers to make 
the product work at the micro level. However, some players, notably Takaful Insurance 
of Africa, are getting frustrated with the lack of progress on voluntary micro-level sales 
and have recently exited the market.
Finance available for Kenya is member of the World Bank Horn of Africa Initiative and has requested 
premiums financing from the World Bank to invest in the IBLI initiative. In theory, this money could 
be used to finance or co-finance premium payments under a future regional IBLI-based 
program. However, no definitive decisions have been made. 
Interest from government KLIP has been a widely hailed success. It has also been an effective way for the 
stakeholders in IBLI Government of Kenya to reach remote populations and take a share of drought risk off 
its balance sheets. At the same time, there is a strong desire from Kenyan officials to 
turn the full-subsidy scheme into one that only receives partial (e.g. 50%) support. This 
wish would need to be addressed in any follow-up IBLI-based program. 
60 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
E. Somalia
Table 35: Summary of livestock and insurance in Somalia.
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability None.
IBLI planning IBLI Feasibility study conducted 2019 (WBG AND ILRI 2019). 
The Government of Somalia is studying role of IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Map amended from (Cecchi et al. 
Livestock and pastoralism sector
2010)
No. of pastoralists MPI rating in rural areas Livestock Livestock  
contribution production 
(% of total to GDP index 
population) (2004–06 = 
100)
6.7 M (60%)35 0.65136 40%37 10938
(2015) (2017) (2017) (2017)
Livestock breakdown39 (2018)*
Total TLUs Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
17.1 M 7.2 M 4.7 M 11.5 M 10.6 M
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral areas Amal Bank; Dahabshil Bank; the International Bank of Somalia; Premier Bank; Global Tech Bank; 
and Salaam Somali Bank (targeting community saving and loan groups)
Mobile cash 11 money transfer businesses registered with the Central Bank of Somalia
Insurance companies First Somali Takaful and Re-Takaful Insurance Company (FISO Takaful Insurance); Takaful 
Insurance of Africa; Horn Insurance
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance  Currently no insurance law or regulation; sector regulated by Ministry of Finance.
law/regulation 
Livestock insurance  Very limited; some crop and livestock indemnity-based products are offered by FISO Takaful 
products Insurance. There is no IBLI insurance in 2020.
35.(UNECA 2017).
36.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2017).
37.(Guthiga et al. 2017).
38.(FAOSTAT 2020c).
39.(FAOSTAT 2020c). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 61
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government partners Ministry of Livestock, Forestry and Range (at IBLI conferences); Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs 
and Disaster Management (at IBLI conferences)
Livestock sector NAFAQO Butchers and Slaughter Association; Somaliland Meat Development Association; 
associations Somaliland Pastoral Forum 
Most important UK FCDO, European Union, FAO, WBG, USAID, WFP, Swiss Development Cooperation (SCD) 
development partners (interested in livestock insurance), Building Resilient Communities in Somalia (BRCiS) NGO 
consortium, Somali Resilience Program (an NGO consortium)
*FAO data based on imputation methodology. 
TLU conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Somalia
Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world. Sixty-nine per cent of the population is estimated to be poor, with 
more than 50% experiencing severe multidimensional poverty in their health, education and standard of living (UNDP 
2019b). There are several geographical differences in terms of poverty and access to basic services, with rural populations 
being disproportionally negatively affected. Around half of the Somali population lives in rural areas, having steadily 
declined from 83% in 1960 (World Bank 2020i). Nomadic pastoralists and agro-pastoralist communities make up 26% 
and 23% of the total population, respectively. (United Nations Population Fund 2014). 
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
Somalia’s economy heavily relies on the agriculture sector, which accounts for an estimated 75% of total GDP 
(MoPIED 2019). The livestock sector is the largest provider of livelihoods, employing 65% of the labour force (Crane et al. 
2018). It further contributes 60% of agricultural GDP and 93% of export earnings (World Bank 2018b). The total national 
stock of livestock animals is currently estimated at 56 million (MoPIED 2019). This includes 7.2 million camels, 4.8 million 
cattle, 11.5 million goats and 10.6 million sheep. The total domestic number of TLUs as estimated by FAO was 13.6 million 
in 2018 (FAOSTAT 2020c). 
Figure 40: Numbers of major livestock species in Somalia (1961–2017).
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
Camels Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c40.
40.These figures are based on FAO imputation methodology and estimates as well as official and unofficial data.
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
62 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
Somalia has one of the largest livestock populations in the world, partly due to large areas suitable for grazing, 
fodder production and free movement of herds (World Bank 2018b). The livestock sector is dominated by traditional 
pastoral and agro-pastoral production systems, depending on local geography, climate and labour markets. Northern 
and central regions are mainly pastoral due to arid and semi-arid conditions, characterized by limited cropping activities 
and high mobility of people and herds. Agricultural or agro-pastoral production systems prevail in the south, as land tends 
to be more fertile due to higher rainfall and access to water from the rivers Juba and Shebelle. Overall, productivity levels 
remain low, given the lasting impact of the civil war and missing investments (MoPIED 2019).
The broader livestock value chain includes input stakeholders, including animal health services and fodder 
providers, but both sectors have limited resources and lack quality standards. Livestock traders that market livestock 
include small-scale traders that purchase, fatten and resell animals in local markets, large traders with more capital and 
better logistical facilities that provide to larger markets and clients, as well as brokers that facilitate transactions within and 
outside local markets (FAO and WBG 2018). Overall, value additions to animal products through modern meat and milk 
processing and distribution techniques offer substantial economic potential but remain untapped, restricted to traditional 
product needs on local markets (MoPIED 2019). 
Table 36: Former livestock development programs and services in Somalia.
Project Name Timeframe Implementer Donor Budget 
(USD)
Building Resilience to Enhance Adaptable 2013–16 World Concern Private 0.26 million
Development in Somaliland Donations
Consumption Smoothing and Enhancing 2014–17 World Concern WCDO
Livestock-based Livelihoods
Distribution of Productive Animals in Nugal 2014 Kaalo Aid and Development, FAO
and Bari Regions of Puntland PULPA, 
Ministry of Livestock and Animal 
Husbandry 
Shakir Company
Livelihood Support to Pastoral Agro- 2011–14 Village committees US 49.97 
pastoral and Riverine Households in Local authorities million
Southern Somalia NGOs
Puntland Livelihood Support Program 2010–11 VSF Germany SDC 0.84 million
Reinforcing Animal Health Services in 2014 to date AU-IBAR European 5.4 million
Somalia (RAHS) Union
Safe Water for Communities and their 2012–15 American Relief Agency for the Private 0.05 million
Livestock Horn of Africa donations
Somali Pastoral Dairy Development Project 2010–14 VSF Germany European 2 million
II Union
Support to Pastoral Livelihood 2010–13 FAO European 2.42 million
Development (Phase II). Promoting an VSF Germany Union
internationally competitive Somali meat 
industry
Sustainable peri-urban milk value chain 2013–16 ICIPE European 4 million
development in Somaliland Union
Source: Guthiga et al. 2017.
Market access for livestock producers
The livestock sector depends heavily on exports, which have risen by a factor of almost 10 over the past three 
decades (MoPIED 2019). In 2015, 5.3 million livestock were exported, a 32.5% increase from 4 million in 2011. The 
majority of export markets are in the Gulf region, with Saudi Arabia accounting for 65% of 2015 exports, followed by 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 63
neighbouring countries such as Yemen and Oman (FAO and WBG 2018). Besides livestock, exports of related products 
such as milk, fish and hides and skins have become more important (World Bank 2018b). Factors determining the export 
volume of livestock include the occurrence of religious holidays and imposed livestock import bans in key trading partner 
countries (Musa, Wasonga and Mtimet 2020).
The Somali livestock trade sector suffers from high information costs between different value chain members. 
The Livestock Marketing Information System, implemented by the Somaliland Chamber of Commerce, Industries and 
Agriculture, provides current market information to livestock producers, traders, government and development partners. 
Collected and disseminated data include weekly traded volumes, prices for different grades of livestock species, and 
export trader numbers (Mugunieri et al. 2014).
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
The Somali livestock sector faces severe and inter-connected weaknesses and vulnerabilities. The significance 
of these risks is further amplified, as the sector accounts for the majority of livelihoods, economic growth and food 
consumption in the country.
The sector’s vulnerability to the impact of climate change and national disasters affects its economic situation. 
One economic consequence is the effect of changing weather patterns on market prices. The price of livestock is largely 
determined by its physical conditions, which in turn heavily depends on rainfall patterns and resulting grazing availability. 
For instance, improved livestock conditions after two consecutive favourable rainfall seasons led to a 6–32% increase 
above the five-year average of goat prices on local markets in 2019/20 (FEWS NET 2020f). Further information of how 
climatic risks affect pastoralists’ livelihoods are explained in Section II.
Rural livelihoods further suffer from man-made impacts on the environment, as governance of environmental 
regulations for natural resources is either absent or failing. The significant number of total domestic livestock, currently 
estimated at 56 million, exhausts limited natural resources such as rangelands, vegetation cover and water, which are vital 
for nomadic and semi-nomadic livestock production systems (MoPIED 2019). Unsustainable charcoal production methods 
in the absence of environmental governance structures are causing severe land degradation and soil erosion. These risks 
and strains are further amplified by the effects of climatic change and extreme weather events, as high livestock numbers 
and density combined with more frequent and extreme droughts decrease available recovery times of rangelands (World 
Bank 2018b). 
Animal diseases, mostly transboundary, are common in the Somalian livestock sector, exacerbated by recurrent 
drought. Diseases include peste des petits ruminants, contagious caprine pleuropneumonia, and contagious bovine 
pleuropneumonia (FAO and WBG 2018). Climate change also negatively affects the health of livestock, as it increases the 
risk of vector-borne diseases and their spread into previously unaffected areas located at higher altitudes (Thornton et al. 
2007). The exposure of animals to recurrent severe drought and thus forage shortages also makes them more prone to 
diseases as their resilience is lowered.
The predominance of the livestock sector for the Somalian economy bears several risks, as it increases 
dependence on a few key export markets. Non-standardized and poorly enforced quality, hygiene, and health 
certification standards make the sector vulnerable to potential import restrictions of these countries (FAO and WBG 2018; 
World Bank 2018b). International livestock trading is also exposed to broader health shocks. Somali livestock exports in 
2020 are anticipated to decrease by 25–35% due to supply chain disruptions, closure of markets and border trading, and 
the broader economic downturn related to the COVID-19 pandemic (FEWS NET 2020f). 
The sector suffers from underdeveloped and fragmented markets, limited value addition, restricted access to 
crucial inputs, and low skill levels of the available labour force (Haji and Shirdon 2020). Overall, the limited and 
64 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
largely informal organization of the value chain lacks coordination and integration among its key stakeholders. The 
related dairy sector also suffers from a lack of milk preservation processes, inefficient marketing channels, an inadequate 
transportation infrastructure, and a resulting absence of economies of scale (FAO and WBG 2018).
Environmental concerns are negatively affecting the relationship between nomadic pastoralists and agro-
pastoralists. Decreasing water volumes for crop planting and livestock production, given dilapidated water 
management infrastructure and services, increases the competition between the two rural social groups for resources 
vital for their livelihoods (World Bank 2018b). Missing or idle rangeland governance leads to increased conflict and 
insecurity over the control of rangelands and access to the water sources, grazing areas and trees on the rangelands 
(FAO and WBG 2018).
The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic hit the pastoralists sector of Somalia especially hard. Pandemic-related 
border closures reduced international demand for livestock and meat and significantly reduced remittances sent by 
Somalians living abroad. Remittances, which account for 24% of GDP, are predicted to be reduced by 50% during global 
COVID-19 lockdowns (UN OCHA 2020). Border lockdown measures from Kenya, and Saudi Arabia’s announcement to 
prevent international travellers entering the country for the hajj (a religious pilgrimage) significantly reduced international 
demand for livestock products (Mercy Corps 2020a). While there is no official data on the number of tests conducted, the 
total number of confirmed cases stood at 3,588 by 5 October 2020, with 543 active cases, 2,946 people recovered, and 
99 fatalities (IGAD and WHO 2020).
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
The climate of Somalia is mainly arid to semi-arid, with predominantly thorn-bush savanna and semidesert 
landscapes. Most of the country is flat, with few natural barriers to restrict the mobility of livestock herds (MoPIED 
2019). The annual rainfall is bimodal, with the major Gu rains from April to July and the minor Deyr rains from September 
to November, separated by the dry seasons Jilaal from January to March and Hagaa from July to September (FSNAU 
2020). 
Figure 41: Mean annual rainfall over Somalia (1981–2010). Figure 42: Coefficient of variation for Somalia April–June seasonal 
rains (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 65
Figure 43: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Somalia.
Source: FEWS NET 2020b.
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Somalia is confronted with droughts of increasing frequency and severity. Over the last decade, the region has 
suffered from more frequent and severe droughts, drastically straining pastoralists’ resilience mechanisms and humanitarian 
response systems (IGAD, 2019). As per EM-DAT data, since 2000, Somalia has experienced nine major droughts, affecting 
more than 18 million people, or on average 1.7 million people every time (see Figure 43 and Figure 44). 
Figure 44: Occurrence of droughts in Somalia (1961–2019). Figure 45: Number of people affected by droughts in Somalia 
(1961–2019).
4 9,000,000
8,000,000
3 7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
2
4,000,000
3,000,000
1
2,000,000
1,000,000
0 0
Source: EM-DAT (www.emdat.be). Source: EM-DAT (www.emdat.be)
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral 
sector 
Droughts in Somalia tend to have devastating consequences.
• The severe drought of 2010/2011 had devastating consequences in Somalia leading to famine and the death of 
260,000 Somalis by starvation. Half of the starved people were children under five. At the height of the crisis, May 
to August 2011, some 30,000 people died every month. There was widespread livestock death (FSNAU and FAO 
2013).
1961-65
1966-70
1971-75
1976-80
1981-85
1986-90
1991-95
1996-00
2001-05
2006-10
2011-15
2016-19
1961-65
1966-70
1971-75
1976-80
1981-85
1986-90
1991-95
1996-00
2001-05
2006-10
2011-15
2016-19
66 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
• Somalia’s most recent major drought in 2016/17 resulted in estimated damages and losses of over USD 3 billion, 
or 50% of GDP, largely in relation to the death of livestock (World Bank 2018). Almost 6.5 million livestock, 12% 
of the total population, died due to reduced pasture and water availability as well as lower resistance to diseases. 
Damage directly resulting from livestock deaths was USD 350 million, and related damage due to, for instance, 
lower milk output and body weight of surviving livestock was estimated to be USD 1.2 billion (FAO and WBG 2018). 
Rural households in Somalia mostly rely on self-insurance to cope with shocks, given inadequate risk management 
and mitigation systems and the absence of formal safety nets. One strategy to mitigate drought risks is through the 
adjustment of herd compositions by, for instance, focussing on hardy browsers such as camels and goats. This enables 
households to cope with pasture shortages from increased pasture land competition, missing environmental practices, 
and increasing temperatures. However, poorer households are especially unable to pursue this strategy as they cannot 
afford the shift to more expensive livestock species (FAO and WBG 2018).
Pastoralists are often forced to deplete assets and food stocks due to increasing food and water prices combined 
with decreasing demand and falling wages in rural labour markets. The 2016/17 drought led to the internal 
and cross-border displacement of almost one million Somalians, requiring humanitarian aid from government and 
international organizations (WBG 2019a). Pastoralist households further often fall back to allocate a majority of their 
livestock revenue to debt repayments from borrowing during such drought seasons (FEWS NET 2020f).  
Livelihood diversification strategies of pastoralists are also shaped by new technologies, market dynamics, as well 
as land and water governance considerations. One approach is the diversification of livelihoods from pure pastoralism 
to combined farming activities. However, this strategy is often hindered by a lack of knowledge, experience, equipment 
and capital. Other strategies include managing or enclosing grazing areas, cultivating fodder or transporting herds to 
distant pasture areas to cope with dry seasons and droughts. Each of these interventions, however, comes with financial, 
social, ecological and resource governance implications (Crane et al. 2018).
Figure 46: Livestock grazing and migration patterns in Somalia.
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
Some 6.2 million people, half of the Somali population, experienced acute food insecurity during the 2016/17 
drought, based on the IPC scale for food insecurity. Some 2.4 million Somalis required humanitarian assistance to avert 
loss of livelihoods and reduced acute malnutrition (IPC Phase 3), and 866,000 people required urgent food assistance to 
avert a famine (IPC Phase 4) (WBG 2019a). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 67
Droughts place the food security of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists especially in danger. From 2007 to 2014, about 
40% of Somalis were subject to food stress, food crises or food emergencies. Rural, nomadic and displaced communities 
remain at the highest risk of food insecurity given low levels of education, agricultural dependence for food and income, 
limited assets, and large household sizes. By the end of 2017, rural households in the drought-affected areas experienced a 
16% decrease in food consumption and 17% increase in the probability of experiencing hunger (WBG 2019a). 
Humanitarian assistance
The international community, represented by humanitarian agencies and international donor organizations, has 
been the leading provider for disaster preparedness, management and response. After the 2016/17 drought, USD 
1.4 billion of aid funds were disbursed, 96.5% from international agencies and the remaining 3.5% from domestic NGOs 
(MoPIED 2019). These interventions, in combination with easing climatic and weather conditions, decreased the number 
of Somalis facing acute food insecurity from 6.2 million in 2017 to 4.4 million in early 2018 (WBG 2019a).
Figure 47: Incoming international aid funding to Somalia as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 1,600,000,000
USD 1,400,000,000
USD 1,200,000,000
USD 1,000,000,000
USD 800,000,000
USD 600,000,000
USD 400,000,000
USD 200,000,000
USD 0
Incoming Funds (Total) Food Security Agriculture
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020.
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing initiatives
Table 37: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Somalia.
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
UK FCDO Somalia Humanitarian and Resilience Program 2018–2022 USD 353 million 2017–2022
European Union Various projects focused on resilience building USD 135.6 million 2016 to date
FAO Improving and Sustaining Food Security in Rural Somalia USD 67 million 2019–2021
World Bank Somalia – Water for Agro-pastoral Productivity and Resilience USD 42.0 million 2019–2023
UK FCDO Somaliland Development Fund Phase II Program USD 33.6 million 2017–2024
FAO Resilient Fisheries and Livestock Value Chain for Inclusive and USD 16.2 million 2020–2023
Sustainable Growth in Somalia 
FAO Somalia Crisis Response Project USD 10 million 2020–2022
FAO Resilient, Inclusive and Competitive Agriculture Value Chain USD 8.0 million 2019–2022
Development in Southern and Central Regions of Somalia
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
68 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
FAO Building Resilience in Middle Shabelle USD 6.5 million 2019–2021
FAO Sustained Humanitarian Assistance to Drought-Affected Rural USD 5.4 million 2018–2020
People in Somalia
FAO Protecting Lives and Livelihoods Impacted by Desert Locust In Rural USD 3.8 million 2020–2021
Somalia
Existing drought risk financing initiatives
The Government of Somalia currently does not pursue any drought risk financing schemes but some initiatives 
have been implemented by international partners. Following the tragic events of 2011, many initiatives were launched 
in Somalia trying to ensure better planning to respond to drought emergencies. For example, DFID operated a USD 48 
million Internal Risk Facility, an emergency contingency fund, in Somalia from 2013 to 2017 (LaGuardia and Poole 2016). 
FAO’s Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit has been operating the Early Warning Early Action program since 2014, 
which monitors 19 ground-collected and remote-sensed indicators from different actors, including on climate, prices, 
nutrition, health and population movements. Hard ‘alarm’ and ‘alert’ thresholds have been agreed on by the humanitarian 
community, which are shared with the UN Humanitarian Country Team (Hillier 2017). And the Somali Resilience Program, 
an NGO consortium led by World Vision International, set up a multi-donor contingency fund in 2018 which disburses 
emergency assistance based on pre-agreed triggers (Somali Resilience Program 2018).
Agro-met and earth observation data management
FAO provides several agricultural-, pastural- and livestock-focused earth observation data indicators. Seasonal data 
indicators that focus on the state of grassland for livestock include the Agricultural Stress Index and the Mean Vegetation 
Health Index; vegetation indicators include the NDVI, the Vegetation Condition Index, and the Vegetation Health Index; 
and precipitation indicators show the difference between the current and long-term average water volumes (FAO 2020).
Within the federal government, livestock health and vaccination agencies keep some basic public data on the domestic 
herd size and state. The Ministerial Emergency Disease Task Force unit maintains key data on livestock and wildlife populations 
as well as maps on livestock distribution, stock movement routes, and watering and holding grounds. The National Disease 
Emergency Commission administers a system for the gathering, dissemination and analysis of epidemiological data in an 
emergency disease control program (Ministry of Livestock, Forestry and Range, 2016). The Somalia National Development Plan 
9 highlights the need to design and implement an early warning system that would leverage existing systems including those 
within or from the Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit and the IPC (MoPIED 2019).
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
The legal and institutional framework of Somalia is still fragile, and the federal government is only partly capable 
of providing and ensuring relevant fiscal, justice and governance responsibilities. The Somali National Development 
Council defined ‘Improved Security and the Rule of Law’ as one of three national priorities as part of the National 
Development Plan 9. It also defined the ‘development and enactment of investment, insurance and copyright law’ as a 
key constraint to be tackled to boost economic growth. Interventions for its business environment strategy include the 
development of legal, policy and regulatory frameworks, including the development of company, intellectual property 
and insurance laws (MoPIED 2019). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 69
There is currently no insurance law or federal regulation in Somalia, with the insurance industry regulating itself 
and the Ministry of Finance given the role to oversee the sector. The current state of the Somali insurance sector has 
been restricted since the overthrowing of the Barre regime in 1991. The Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Commerce 
have been working towards establishing a legal framework in recent years as part of a broader economy framework 
(AMISOM 2015). The Ministry of Commerce of the State of Somaliland initiated drafting an insurance companies bill, but it 
has not been formally submitted to nor considered by parliament (Somaliland Law 2020). 
Status of non-life insurance market
The inception of the First Takaful and Re-Takaful Insurance Company (FISO Takaful Insurance) in 2014 was the first 
national insurance company launch since the collapse of the central government in 1991 (Goobjoog News 2019). 
The company is registered and regulated as per Sharia law under the Somali Ministry of Commerce and offers takaful 
coverage products.41 It offers a broad range of insurance coverage, including motor, travel, public liability and property 
(FISO Takaful Insurance 2020). 
Agriculture insurance availability 
The availability of agriculture insurance products is very restricted: FISO Takaful Insurance lists indemnity-based 
micro-level crop and livestock insurance products on its website, but there is no information on actual sales of 
these products to farmers/herders. It is likely these products are being researched and developed by FISO Takaful 
Insurance as opposed to being commercially launched into the markets. FISO Takaful Insurance’s crop insurance policy is 
limited to protection against loss or damage from perils (including natural fire, disease, floods, hailstorms) and livestock 
risks (for livestock death due to accidents, injury, illness/disease, or humane destruction if certified from a veterinarian) 
(FISO Takaful Insurance 2020). The Kenyan insurance provider Takaful Insurance of Africa has announced plans to 
introduce the IBLI product into the Somali market.
Table 38: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Somalia.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index Greenhouse Forestry
insurance
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Livestock Insurance Products Available
Indemnity-based Index-based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
n.a. R & D n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Source: Authors.
The World Bank commissioned an ILRI study in 2019 into the feasibility of implementation of IBLI solutions for 
pastoralists in Somalia. This study shows a strong justification and a good potential in terms of potential uptake and 
socio-economic impacts for the implementation of drought index-insurance for livestock schemes, and the technical 
conditions are suited to offering IBLI-based cover in upwards of 70% of the area of Somalia which is comprised of 
rangelands (ILRI and World Bank 2019). There are, however, major institutional, financial and insurance market, 
operational, and financial-related challenges to developing and implementing micro-level IBLI programs given the 
lack of rural infrastructure and insecurity, and any entry point is more likely to be for macro-level IBLI social protection 
covers.
41.Takaful (or Islamic) insurance is ‘a cooperative scheme, where in which the participants pay a premium in the form of donation or Tabarru in a common pool in return for 
the ability to cover that pool upon a valid claim’ (FISO Takaful Insurance 2020).
70 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Interest from public and private stakeholders
The National Development Plan 9 states the possibility of introducing a crop insurance to address the risk of livestock and 
crop diseases, but does not mention any other specific insurance measures focused on the agriculture sector (MoPIED 
2019). The Government of Somalia has expressed its major interest on various occasions in receiving technical and 
financial assistance from the World Bank to develop IBLI products and programs, either under the Horn of Africa Initiative 
or the IGAD regional initiative.
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 39: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Somalia (2014).
Financial inclusion data for Somalia’s population (% of population; age 15+)
Total Rural
Financial institution account 38.7 31.9
Borrowed any money in the past year 57.0 60.0
Borrowed from a financial institution or used a credit card 2.1 1.3
Borrowed from a store by buying on credit 18.3 17.4
Coming up with emergency funds: not possible 49.3 52.7
Credit card ownership 0.6 0.5
Financial institution account 7.9 4.0
Made or received digital payments in the past year 38.3 31.5
Mobile money account 37.1 30.4
Received government transfers in the past year 4.0 2.9
Source: World Bank 2020f.
The mobile money sector is fairly well established, with monthly mobile money transactions estimated to be worth 
USD 2.7 billion. Mobile money penetration rates range from 83% in urban areas to 55% of rural populations. The five 
main mobile Network Operators are Hormuud (South Central), Golis (Puntland), Telesom (Somaliland), Somtel (South 
Central, Puntland and Somaliland), and Nationlink (South Central, Puntland and Somaliland). There are 11 money transfer 
businesses registered by the Central Bank of Somalia with agents across the country, with one mobile money service 
dominating in each region: EVC Plus (by Hormuud) in South Central, Sahal (by Golis) in Puntland, and Zaad (by Telesom) 
in Somaliland (Altai Consulting and World Bank 2017).
Despite good mobile connections, financial services extended to pastoralists in Somalia remain relatively weak. 
Most financial sector institutions in Somalia are relatively young, mostly established during the last few years. Many of 
these banks rely on clan structures for accountability and typically only have enough capital to survive. Given the severe 
exposure and vulnerability to a range of shocks, they tend to pursue conservative lending strategies and, e.g., require 
financial guarantees from borrowers, proof of financial identity (although no national IDs exist in Somalia) and a credit 
history. The portfolio of financial services to the poor, i.e. pastoralists in rural areas, is limited. If they can, pastoralists 
mostly access finance informally, borrowing from friends, relatives, neighbours or moneylenders (Calhoun et al. 2020). 
If pastoralists in Somalia interact with the financial sector, they mostly do so via community saving and loan 
groups. Individual pastoralists tend not to have bank accounts but many such groups do. Consortiums active in 
Somalia that support community saving and loan groups include the Building Resilient Communities in Somalia (BRCiS) 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 71
consortium; the Danwadaag Durable Solutions Consortium; the Enhancing Integration of Displacement Affected 
Communities in Somalia and Somaliland Durable Solutions Consortium; the NAGAAD Network; and the Somali Resilience 
Program. Many of the Somali commercial banks have created financial services specifically catering to community saving 
and loan groups, including, e.g., Amal Bank, Dahabshil Bank, the International Bank of Somalia, Premier Bank, Global 
Tech Bank, and Salaam Somali Bank. There are also microfinance institutions that specifically cater to such groups, 
including KIMS, MicroDahab, and the International Bank of Somalia (Calhoun et al. 2020).
Beneficiary registries
Some institutions have created beneficiary databases to deliver cash transfers. The largest is the WFP SCOPE 
database, which covers 5.5 million registries or 1.2 million households. The WFP SCOPE database is used by a number 
of humanitarian NGOs providing cash transfers in Somalia. The European Commission on Humanitarian Aid and Civil 
Protection has also started to work with the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection to create a registration platform that 
gathers biometric data of beneficiaries. The Government of Somalia is also, with support from the World Bank, working on 
designing a digital ID system that aims to include 1 million people. Finally, insurance companies such as Takaful Insurance 
of Africa use smart cards for the registration of client policyholders (WBG and ILRI 2019).
Table 40: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Somalia.
Government programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
European Commission on Humanitarian Aid and Civil Unclear Unclear
Protection/Ministry of Labour and Social Protection
WBG/Government of Somalia digital ID system Unclear 1 million people (target)
Donor programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
WFP SCOPE All of Somalia 5.5. million registered beneficiaries  
(1.2 million households)
Private sector programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
Takaful Insurance of Africa smart card registration Unclear Unclear
Source: Various.
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility 
assessment of IBLI in Somalia through a 
regional IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 41: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Somalia.
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral The national economy depends to a large extent on the pastoralist sector, which 
livestock for economy provides 40% of GDP and around 60% of employment. 
Impact of drought on The devastating impacts of droughts on pastoralists in Somalia have been well 
livestock recorded, with catastrophic impacts last suffered in 2010/11 and 2016/17. 
Pastoralist demand for There is little firm evidence on the demand of pastoralists for insurance, but FISO 
livestock insurance advises that pastoralists bordering Kenya have heard of IBLI (mainly via radio) and 
are interested in the product. However, evidence from other countries in the region 
suggests that demand is limited and raising it will require significant investments in 
capacity building and insurance awareness creation. 
72 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Status Comments
Effective distribution There is a high penetration of mobile money solutions among potential clients. 
channels for micro-level IBLI While financial service provision to individual pastoralists remains weak, there 
seems to be a relatively good Somalia-wide coverage of community saving and loan 
groups, which interact with the financial services industry. These could potentially 
be leveraged for distributing IBLI products. The great drawback on potential 
distribution is the security situation which makes face-to-face interactions with 
potential clients for insurers impossible in many places. Mobile sales could provide 
a remedy. Another entry point could be a modified macro-level IBLI program which 
does not rely on individual sales.
Existing pastoralist Institutional capacity in Somalia is very weak. There are a number of existing 
beneficiary registries databases of households in the country including of WFP, the government and the 
private sector that are already being used by institutions to deliver cash transfers. 
The development of further such registries is underway. 
Pastoralist financial literacy As confirmed by a recent study, financial literacy among pastoralists is low (Calhoun 
et al. 2020). Significant efforts will be required to build policyholders’ understanding 
and acceptance of potential insurance-based solutions
Legal and regulatory So far, there is no insurance law in Somalia but it is being drafted by the government. 
insurance environment There has also not been any experience with index insurance products in the country 
so far. Sharia law applies and this would have to be considered by any new IBLI 
product. Regulation of the financial sector is also weak. 
Insurance market The insurance sector in Somalia is nascent, with only few insurers active and even 
development fewer on agricultural insurance. An opportunity could be that Takaful Insurance of 
Africa, which has sold IBLI policies in Kenya over the last decade, is expanding its 
operations into Somalia. There could be an experience and expertise transfer for the 
Somali market. 
Interest from insurers in IBLI For a recent index insurance feasibility study, private insurance sector stakeholders 
have signalled strong interest in developing an IBLI program.
Finance available for The Government of Somalia is participating in the World Bank Horn of Africa Initiative 
premiums but has so far neither requested any concrete funding for a regional IBLI initiative nor 
committed any funding of its own. 
Interest from government The very limited capacity of key facilitators among implementing government 
stakeholders in IBLI agencies, private insurance and financial service providers, as well as regulatory 
bodies to facilitate insurance products would need to be strengthened.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 73
F. South Sudan
Table 42: Summary of livestock and insurance in South Sudan.
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability None.
IBLI planning None. The Government of South Sudan is studying role of IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from (Cecchi et al. 2010)
No. of pastoralists  MPI rating in rural Livestock Livestock  
(% of total areas contribution production index  
population) to GDP (2004–06 = 100)
7.32 M (60%)42 0.61543 12.8% n.a.
(2015) (2010) - 33%44 (estimate)
Livestock breakdown45 (2018)*
Total TLUs46 Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
15.1 M n.a. 12.1 M 13.5 M 16.3 M
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral areas n.a. (no information)
Mobile cash NilePay Mobile Money; M-Gurush/Zain; MTN South Sudan
Insurance companies n.a. (no information)
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance  2010 new Insurance Act permits the insurance of “crops, fishing and livestock”. 
law/regulation 
Livestock insurance The insurance sector is very poorly developed. There was no agricultural crop or livestock 
products insurance provision in 2020.
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government partners Ministry of Agriculture; Ministry of Environment
Livestock sector Pastoralists Association; Nile Community Development Organization (NICODO) dairy 
associations associations
Most important UK FCDO, FAO, European Union, WFP
development partners
NGOs Organization for Peace, Relief and Development; Assistance Mission for Africa 
*FAO data based on imputation methodology, estimates, and government data  
Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
42.UNECA 2017
43.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2020b).
44.DFID 2018
45.FAOSTAT 2020c
46.Based on FAO imputation methodology and estimates as well as official data.
74 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in South Sudan
Since gaining independence, South Sudan has been shaped by continuous conflict over natural resources, 
remaining one of the poorest countries in the world. Renewed conflicts in 2013 and 2016 worsened the humanitarian 
situation and undermined the development gains achieved following the secession from the Republic of Sudan in 
2011. Poverty levels remain extremely high, with severe food insecurity and restricted access to basic services (World 
Bank 2020c). It is one of the most vulnerable countries in the world, ranking 186th out of 189 countries on the Human 
Development Index. The unemployment rate is 12.7%, with 87.3% of total employment considered vulnerable. Some 
80.4% of the population lives in rural areas, with only 21.4% of the rural population having access to electricity (UNDP 
2019a). Recent shocks, including severe flooding, locust infestations, the COVID-19 pandemic and lower oil prices, 
further increased needs for humanitarian interventions and exacerbated existing pressures on livelihoods already affected 
by conflicts (World Bank 2020c).
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
South Sudan’s economic output is dominated by its oil industry. The agriculture sector accounts for a significant 
share of livelihoods but suffers from low productivity levels. South Sudan is one of the most oil-dependent countries 
in the world. Oil accounts for almost all of exports earnings, 90% of revenue, and more than one third of GDP. Outside the 
oil sector, livelihoods are concentrated in the agriculture sector, which is still suffering from eroded productivity capacities 
given continuous conflicts (World Bank 2020c). Crop production is primarily pursued in subsistence farming systems with 
low yields. Less than 4% of the total land area is currently being cultivated. Livestock is mainly perceived as a store of value 
by livestock keepers. The sale of livestock., especially small ruminants, offers significant income-generation opportunities 
(Babikir et al. 2015). Production levels of livestock products such as butter and milk remain low (UNDP 2012). The sector 
accounts for 48.9% of total employment (FAOSTAT 2020c).
Figure 48: Numbers of major livestock species in South Sudan (2012–2018).
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c47.
47.Based on FAO imputation methodology and estimates as well as official data. 
Millions
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 75
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
There are three livestock production systems in South Sudan: nomadic, semi-nomadic in combination with 
cultivation, and sedentary, where small livestock are raised in close proximity to villages. Livestock is mainly 
perceived as a form of asset. Levels of livestock products such as milk and meat remain low. The sale of livestock, 
especially small ruminants, offers significant income-generation opportunities for livestock producers of all production 
systems (Babikir et al. 2015). 
Figure 49: Number of cattle in South Sudan (2009). Figure 50: Number of goats in South Sudan (2009).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Market access for livestock producers
Markets are the predominant sales channel for livestock producers, but physical access is often constrained 
by conflict or infrastructure barriers. Effective livestock marketing is essential for pastoralists and breeders to sell 
livestock during the period when they are good physical condition. Physical access to markets for both producers 
and purchasers alike can be hindered by factors including difficult travel terrain, security issues, mode of transport 
available and the lack of and poor conditions of roads. The lack of distribution systems puts pastoralists’ livelihoods 
at risk and prevents efficient movement of food commodities required to connect areas of low food security with 
those with high production or import locations (ICPAC and WFP 2018). The country’s infrastructure network is 
estimated to include 17,000 km of roads. Less than 2% (192 km) are paved; the remaining roads either have gravel 
or earth surfaces (IGAD 2020b). Roads on the main cattle marketing routes are generally in poor condition. Cattle 
owners and traders do not send animals by truck because of the risk of injury or death, instead turning to trekking, 
which can take longer than a month. During this period, livestock can lose weight due to insufficient access to food 
and water (IGAD 2016). 
South Sudan is located within one of the major regional livestock trading zones, but its trade sector is hampered 
by missing livestock facilities and the poor state of the transportation infrastructure. The country is connected 
to Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia through the southern corridor, one of the major livestock trade markets in the Horn of 
Africa. It is also within another trading zone that links it with Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad and Sudan. 
Livestock trade with South, Eastern and Central Darfur continues despite the remaining violent conflicts (UNECA 2017). 
The country’s trade capacity is hindered by poor conditions of stock routes, high insecurity and cattle raids, unauthorized 
charges, and problems in obtaining necessary permits. Livestock infrastructure and veterinary facilities at these crossing 
points tend to be inadequate (IGAD 2016). Neither quarantine stations nor export slaughter houses exist in the country 
(IGAD 2013).
76 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
Pastoralism in South Sudan faces the major problem of most herds being too small and economically non-viable, with 
an average of only 0.87 TLU per capita. From an economic perspective, agro-pastoralism is associated with the ownership of 
at least three Tropical Livestock Units (TLU) per capita, equivalent to about four cattle or 30 sheep or goats per person. However, 
using the Food Security and Nutrition Monitoring Bulletin from May 2018 (WFP 2018), average livestock ownership in South 
Sudan was estimated at only to 0.87 TLUs per capita. This low level of livestock ownership is broadly consistent with the recent 
categorization of 5.4 million people in South Sudan as severely food insecure (IPC phases 3, 4 and 5) (Catley et al. 2005). 
Land degradation occurs in pastoralist areas around the equatorial belt, but the impact is comparatively limited. 
Problem drivers include unsustainable charcoal and firewood production, increased areas for crop cultivation accelerating soil 
erosion, overgrazing due to livestock concentration resulting from climate migration patterns, and new population settlements. 
Overall, land degradation is less of a problem compared to other countries in the IGAD region (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Pastoralists are facing a lack of legislation and land management institutions, resulting in uncontrolled and far-
reaching land dispossession. Part 12 of South Sudan’s Transitional Constitution from 2011 and Chapter 2 of the 2009 Land 
Act recognize communal ownership and customary land rights, with the government holding regulatory powers. In practice, 
development projects from private-sector institutions investing in natural resource and large-scale agricultural schemes have 
displaced a large number of pastoralists from the regions without compensation or proper redress (UNECA 2017).
Rural communities are involved in conflicts over natural resources, especially in oil-rich regions. The Dinka and 
Nuer, two rival pastoralist groups, have competed for grazing land and water access for their cattle in the past. These, as 
well as numerous other pastoralists groups, are located in oil-producing areas, further increasing the potential for conflict 
given the economic importance of this commodity. According to estimates, oil production is expected to decline steadily 
and to become negligible by 2035 (UNECA 2017).
Pastoralists have little access to veterinary services. Access to animal health care and extension services, skills and 
knowledge remains poor. Some community-based animal health services exist but are inadequate. The remoteness of 
rural communities and the poorly developed road network infrastructure compounds this issue (IGAD 2020b).
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
Most of the country has a sub-humid climate, with seasonal climate patters determining land use patterns of crop 
cultivation and livestock grazing. There are five ecological zones, namely the savannah region, the flood region, the 
montane forest zone, the semi-desert zone and the lowland forest zone. Rainfall occurs seasonally between April and 
December, with varying annual rainfall ranging from 200 mm to 2200 mm with risks of seasonal flooding. The dry season 
occurs from January to April, with temperatures increasing from 25C to over 35C. Agricultural seasons are ultimately 
defined on a regional level and depend on the respective rainfall regimes, with southwestern parts having an annual 
growing season of 280 to 300 days compared to 130 to 150 days in northern states (Babikir et al. 2015).
In general, the majority of South Sudan’s land area provides favourable agricultural conditions, with livestock 
keeping as the dominant form of land use. The country’s agricultural potential is based on its favourable soil, water and 
climatic conditions, resulting in around 70% of total land area being suitable for producing a wide range of agricultural 
products. Livestock is the dominant agriculture pursued throughout the country, but especially in dryer areas, given better 
grass quality and fewer livestock parasite issues (Babikir et al. 2015).
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 77
Figure 51: Mean annual rainfall over South Sudan (1981–2010). Figure 52: Coefficient of variation for April–September 
seasonal rainfall in South Sudan (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Figure 53: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in South Sudan.
Source: FEWS NET 2020b.
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
South Sudan is affected by different natural hazards. The country is exposed to climate-related risks including 
droughts and floods that affect various regions at varying times of the year. Floods are a common occurrence 
during the rainy season, especially in low-lying areas along the Nile River and during periods of increased water 
accumulation from streams in neighbouring countries. Among the worst-affected areas are Jonglei, Unity, Warrap, 
Upper Nile and Northern Bahr el Ghazal states and partly Lakes state. Vegetation condition generally remains 
favourable in western regions, with other regions experiencing significant temporal variation determined by rainfall 
and cropping patterns (ICPAC and WFP 2018). Biological hazards include bacterial and viral diseases (EM-DAT 
2020). 
Data on the impact of natural disasters, however, is scarce, partially due to the relatively short time since South 
Sudan’s independence. The country is not ranked in the WorldRiskIndex score because of incomplete data (BEH and 
IFHV 2020). It is not listed in the ND-GAIN Exposure Ranking in 2018 (ND-GAIN 2020). 
78 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 54: Number of events by disaster type in South Sudan (2008–2019).
5
4
3
2
1
0
08 09 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
20 20 20
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Hydrological (eg. floods) Biological (eg. diseases)
Climatological (droughts)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Figure 55: Number of affected people by disaster type in South Sudan (2008–2019).
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019
Hydrological (eg. floods) Biological (eg. diseases)
Climatological (drought)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral sector 
Declining rainfall trends and simultaneous prolonged rainfall seasons adversely affect livestock productivity and food 
security due to reduced water and pasture availability. Data from the National Household Baseline Survey conducted 
in 2009 indicate that drought and floods are the prevailing shocks, affecting 56% of the population (IGAD 2020a). During 
droughts, inadequate moisture to support pasture growth and lack of water results in poor-quality forage, as well as livestock 
out-migration (ICPAC and WFP 2018). This negatively affect livestock production and household food security. The rainy season 
can last up to nine months per year, causing widespread floods, destruction of roads and infrastructure, and reduced market 
access. The wet climate also increases the risk of livestock parasites and diseases such as Rift Valley Fever, ticks and tsetse flies. 
Floods, however, also have beneficial effects, increasing fish and maintaining pastures and water (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
South Sudan has been facing high levels of food insecurity since gaining independence. Main problem drivers 
include stagnating agricultural growth coupled with a significant increase in the population; low infrastructural 
development required for food commodity transport; and economic shocks such as soaring oil prices and depreciating 
exchange rate. Contributing effects of climatic variability and natural hazards, such as droughts and floods, affect both 
Millions
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 79
livestock and crop production. Diseases and pests that emerge during wet conditions can further reduce livestock 
productivity. Conversely, dry conditions can lead to unavailability of pastures and water, which hampers production 
(ICPAC and WFP 2018). As a result, extreme food insecurity persists across the country, with over half of the population in 
need of humanitarian assistance and protection in 2020 (World Bank 2020c).
COVID-19 has had a strongly negative impact on pastoralist livelihoods, given movement restrictions, reduced 
terms of trade, and a lack of veterinary services. Staple food prices reached exorbitant levels in several markets. 
Reasons included a mandatory COVID-19 testing fee of USD 65 for cargo truck drivers transporting food (FEWS NET 
2020d). By 5 October 2020, the country had conducted only 28,672 tests, confirming 2,705 cases of which 102 
were still active and 2,553 had recovered. Fifty people had died from the virus (IGAD and WHO 2020). Movement 
restrictions were not as strict within South Sudan as in neighbouring countries but lockdown restrictions in Uganda and 
Kenya greatly affected livestock trade in South Sudan. There are reports that pastoralists restricted their movements to 
towns, significantly in fear of contracting the disease, hampering market access. Some markets were also closed. Fewer 
veterinary services were extended.48 
Humanitarian assistance 
Figure 56: Incoming international aid funding to South Sudan as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 2,500,000,000
USD 2,000,000,000
USD 1,500,000,000
USD 1,000,000,000
USD 500,000,000
USD 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Incoming Funds (Total) Food Security Agriculture
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020.
III. Existing drought mitigation and response 
financing practices
Table 43: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in South Sudan.
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
UK FCDO Humanitarian Assistance and Resilience in South Sudan 2015–2021 USD 919 million 2015–2021
European Union Strengthening the Livelihoods Resilience of Pastoral and Agro-Pastoral USD 33.9 million 2017–2021
and FAO Communities in South Sudan’s cross-border areas with Sudan, 
Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda
FAO 2020 Emergency Livelihood Response Program, South Sudan USD 25 million 2020–2021
FAO Emergency Livelihood Response Program in South Sudan 2018–2020 USD 24.6 million 2018–2020
48.Answers to expert questionnaires.
80 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
FAO Mitigating cattle-related violence in the tri-state border areas of Tonj, USD 3.5 million 2019–2021
Gogrial and Wau
FAO South Sudan Rural Development: Strengthening Smallholders’ USD 2.3 million 2019–2023
Resilience 
FAO Strengthening the preparedness of vulnerable communities to climate USD 1.1 million 2020–2022
shocks and natural disasters in South Sudan
FAO Revitalizing Marial Lou Livestock Training Institute and support to USD 1 million 2020–2021
vulnerable pastoralists in South Sudan
WFP and Pastoral Food Assistance for Assets 350,000
Organization for 
Peace, Relief and 
Development
FAO and Emergency Livelihoods Response Program 400,000
Organization for 
Peace, Relief and 
Development 
World Bank Southern Sudan Emergency Food Crisis Response Project n.a. 2016
Existing drought risk financing initiatives
No existing drought risk financing initiatives could be identified for the purposes of this study.
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
South Sudan gained independence from Sudan on 9 July 2011 and this was accompanied by a major change 
in insurance law: Sudan is governed by Islamic, or Sharia, law; South Sudan has adopted British law. With 
independence, a new Insurance Act was drafted termed ‘the Law of Southern Sudan: the Insurance Bill 2010’.49 This 
purpose of this new act is to set the rules for the establishment of insurance companies and to regulate the business of 
life and non-life insurance in South Sudan. Article 7 of the new insurance act ‘Classification of Insurance Business’ permits 
‘crops, fishing and livestock insurance’.
Chapter 2 of the insurance bill 2010 also authorizes the establishment of a new insurance regulator termed the 
Insurance Commission/Corporation under the Ministry of Finance, whose roles are to ensure effective administration, 
supervision, regulation and control of the insurance business in South Sudan. 
Status of non-life insurance market
There are seven registered insurance companies in South Sudan: two non-life companies and five composite life 
and non-life insurers. The insurance companies are represented by the Association of Southern Sudan Insurers. The 
leading insurers include UAP Insurance South Sudan, which is a subsidiary of UAP Kenya, New Sudan Insurance Co. Ltd 
and National Insurance Corporation Ltd. Insurance market statistics are not published for South Sudan but according to 
the World Bank, in 2018 insurance and financial services accounted for a very small (1.5%) of commercial service imports.50
49.https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/acc_e/ssd_e/wtaccssd6_leg_53.pdf
50.https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TX.VAL.INSF.ZS.WT?locations=SS
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 81
There is no available data on the size and composition of the insurance and reinsurance market or the levels of 
penetration of insurance. It is, however, likely that most insurance is restricted to products for urban consumers (motor 
insurance, property insurance, personal accident and health insurance, etc.) and that insurance has not yet taken-off in 
rural areas since South Sudan gained independence.
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability 
There is currently no agricultural crop or livestock insurance provision in South Sudan and given the political and 
social uncertainty and insecurity in the country and lack of rural insurance infrastructure this poses a major challenge for the 
introduction of micro-level IBLI. As an entry point, the government could consider purchasing (i) macro-level sovereign risk IBLI 
insurance or (ii) a modified macro-level drought social protection IBLI scheme modelled on KLIP (Kenya) or SIIPE (Ethiopia) lines.
Table 44: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in South Sudan.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index insurance Greenhouse Forestry
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Livestock Insurance Products Available
Indemnity-based Index-based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Interest from public and private stakeholders
Government stakeholders have participated in previous IGAD regional conferences on IBLI. The Ministry of Agriculture replied 
to the expert questionnaire that it was ‘very interested’ in implementing an IBLI initiative. It has not been possible to date to 
engage with private sector insurers to gauge their possible interest in participating in a regional IGAD-level IBLI initiative.
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 45: Financial inclusion data for whole population in South Sudan (2017).
Financial inclusion data for South Sudan’s population (% of population; age 15+)
Total Rural
Financial institution account 8.6 8.1
Borrowed any money in the past year 38.5 36.6
Borrowed from a financial institution or used a credit card 3.4 2.8
Borrowed from a savings club 6.6 6.5
Coming up with emergency funds: not possible 75.5 77.5
Credit card ownership 1.4 1.5
Financial institution account 8.6 8.1
Made or received digital payments in the past year 7.3 7.0
Main source of emergency funds: sale of assets (% able to raise funds 23.0 23.4
Received government transfers in the past year 4.0 3.8
Source: World Bank 2020f.
82 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Table 46: Financial inclusion data in pastoral areas in South Sudan.
Type of financial inclusion data
Share of pastoralists with bank account (%) 0–10
Share of pastoralists with access to mobile phone (%) 11–30
Pastoral areas with particularly good financial services n.a.
Pastoral areas with particularly limited financial services All of the country
Source: Estimates by experts, from questionnaires.
Financial inclusion of pastoralists in South Sudan is very low. There is little recent information available on financial 
inclusion in South Sudan. A 2015 report by Japan International Cooperation Agency held that there were limited financial 
services available targeting the livestock sector, even for commercial actors who were mostly relying on self-financing and 
grant support from NGOs (JICA 2015). The International Finance Corporation found in 2012 that bank penetration, while 
dominated by the two Kenyan banks Equity Bank and Kenya Commercial Bank, was ‘negligible’ (International Finance 
Corporation 2012). Mobile payments are a relatively new service available in South Sudan, with the two services ‘M-Gurush’ 
by Zain/Trinity Technologies and ‘NilePay’ by NilePay Plc/Zain founded only in 2019 (Microcapital 2019; Nextv Africa 2019). 
Beneficiary registries
The largest beneficiary registry in South Sudan is operated by WFP. Through its SCOPE system, WFP had 1 million 
beneficiaries registered by mid-2019 but was then planning to have registered 5 million by 2020. The International 
Organization for Migration operates BRaVE in South Sudan, a biometric beneficiary data management system used to 
strengthen humanitarian responses. In 2019, WFP and the International Organization for Migration started exchanging 
beneficiary data (WFP 2019). The Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries also aims to create a beneficiary registry 
identifying all the livestock owners who have benefited from cash-based transfers in South Sudan since 2013, targeting a 
total of 6.5 million people. However, progress on this initiative is unclear.51
Table 47: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in South Sudan.
Government programs Target areas No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries All of South Sudan 6.5 million people (target)
(cash-based transfer list for livestock owners in 
South Sudan)
Donor programs No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
WFP SCOPE All of South Sudan 1–5 million (target 2020)
International Organization for Migration BRaVE All of South Sudan n.a.
Other services
Table 48: Access to additional services for pastoralists in South Sudan.
Pastoralist access to public Pastoralist access to private 
services services
Livestock registration n.a. n.a.
Livestock vaccination Low Low
Livestock extension (e.g. husbandry, sanitation) Low Low
Livestock inputs (vaccines, drugs) Low n.a.
Forage and feeds supplements n.a. n.a.
Source: Estimates by experts, from questionnaires.
51.Official from Ministry of Agriculture via expert questionnaire.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 83
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility 
assessment of IBLI in South Sudan through a 
regional IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 49: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in South Sudan.
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral Pastoralists make up around 60% of the South Sudanese population and the 
livestock for economy livestock sector provides up to one third of GDP. 
Impact of drought on livestock Drought is a recognized important hazard in South Sudan and the high 
numbers of people affected in the drought years of 2009 and 2016 (>4 
million and >3.5 million, respectively, according to EM-DAT data) show the 
significance of drought for people in South Sudan, of whom pastoralists make 
up the majority. 
Pastoralist demand for n.a. There is no data available on pastoralists’ demand for insurance in South 
livestock insurance Sudan. There is no previous experience with any insurance products. 
Effective distribution channels Product distribution in South Sudan would be very difficult. There is virtually 
for micro-level IBLI no distribution network infrastructure for insurers, the level of financial 
services extended to pastoralists is extremely low, and mobile payments 
are still a newly emerging technology in the country. South Sudan has been 
subject to severe internal conflict for a long time and security concerns are 
likely to persist and make face-to-face marketing of insurance products very 
difficult.
Existing pastoralist beneficiary WFP has a large beneficiary database in-country, which could possibly 
registries be leveraged for a potential regional IBLI program, as does International 
Organization for Migration. There also seems to be a government effort by the 
Ministry of Agriculture to record all beneficiaries of cash transfers since 2013. 
Pastoralist financial literacy Pastoralist financial literacy is expected to be even lower than in other 
countries in the region. There are very few financial services being extended 
to pastoralists in South Sudan, offering them little exposure. In addition, 
the civil war will likely have significantly impeded any advances in financial 
literacy and will possibly also have eroded trust in contract-based financial 
instruments such as insurance. All respondents to the expert questionnaires 
indicated that pastoralists’ knowledge and acceptance of insurance was 
likely going to be one of the greatest challenges in rolling out a regional IBLI 
program in the country.
Legal and regulatory insurance There is an insurance bill governing the insurance sector in South Sudan 
environment based on British law. However, it is unclear to what extent it is being applied. 
There is also no reference to or previous experience with index insurance in 
the country. This would have to be discussed with the insurance supervisory 
authority, the Insurance Commission.
Insurance market The insurance market is very poorly developed. No data on market 
development and interest from penetration is available. There is no agricultural insurance of any kind being 
insurers in IBLI underwritten in South Sudan. No previous experience with index insurance 
could be gathered. 
Finance available for premiums South Sudan is not part of the World Bank Horn of Africa Initiative. No 
financing has thus far been committed to a regional IBLI initiative.
Interest from government Government stakeholders have participated in previous IGAD regional 
stakeholders in IBLI conferences on IBLI and the Minister of Agriculture has previously visited 
ILRI to discuss IBLI opportunities in South Sudan. The Ministry of Agriculture 
replied to the expert questionnaire that it was ‘very interested’ in 
implementing an IBLI initiative. 
84 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
G. Sudan
Table 50: Summary of livestock and insurance in Sudan.
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability None. Various insurers offer indemnity-based livestock insurance.
IBLI planning IBLI Feasibility study is planned for 2021 and will be conducted by Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable 
Agriculture and ILRI.
Government of South Sudan is studying role of IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from (Cecchi et al. 2010)
No. of pastoralists MPI Livestock Livestock  
rating  
(% of total contribution  production index  in rural  
population) to GDP (2004–06 = 100)areas
8.18 M (20%)52 0.35153 21%54 104.155
(2015)       (2014) (2017) (2011)
Livestock breakdown56 (2018)*
Total TLUs Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
45.3 M 4.9 M 31.2 M 31.8 M 40.8 M
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral Agricultural Bank of Sudan Microfinance Initiative; Bank of Khartoum; Savings and Social 
areas Development Bank
Mobile cash Hassa/Bank of Khartoum; Faisal Islamic Bank
Insurance 
13 companies. Market leader is Shiekan Insurance and Reinsurance Company
companies
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance  The main insurance laws in Sudan, the Insurance Supervision Act 2018 and the Takaful and Insurance 
law/regulation Act 2003 are based on Sharia law.
Livestock insurance More than 30 years of traditional livestock indemnity insurance for dairy cattle.  Poultry and 
products aquaculture insurance. To date, no IBLI.
52.UNECA 2017.
53.The multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is composed of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2020c).
54.Guthiga et al. 2017.
55.World Bank 2019.
56.FAOSTAT 2020c
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 85
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government 
Ministry of Agriculture
partners
Livestock sector 
Chamber of Livestock, Meat and Slaughterhouse; Dairy sub-chamber
associations
Most important 
development WFP, IFAD, FAO, WBG
partners
*FAO data based on imputation methodology, estimates, and government data 
Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Sudan
Sudan is considered to be a potential economic powerhouse in eastern Africa but has been held back by 
long-lasting conflict and governance challenges. The country is rich in fertile land and livestock, has a reasonable 
manufacturing base, large oil reserves, and a strategic market location at the intersection of sub-Saharan Africa and the 
Middle East (Babikir et al. 2015). The country, however, has been experiencing international conflicts that weakened 
it political stability and risked the economic situation of its population. The secession of South Sudan in 2011 triggered 
several economic shocks, causing reduced revenue from oil, reduced economic growth, higher inflation, and increased 
fuel prices (World Bank 2020d). The national poverty rate is estimated at 46.5%, with a disproportionally larger shares 
among rural households. Persistent poverty and deteriorating ecological conditions led to ongoing rivalry over scarce 
resources, conflict, and mass migration to urban centres (IGAD 2020a). Sudan ranks 168th out of 189 countries in the 
Human Development Index. Total unemployment is 12.9%, with youth unemployment being 26.7%. Forty per cent of 
total employment is considered vulnerable. The total population is 41.8 million, of which 65.4% are located in rural areas 
(UNDP 2019a). 
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
The agricultural sector is one of the leading pillars of economic output and has increased in importance since the 
secession of South Sudan in 2011. The agricultural sector is one of the leading economic sectors in Sudan, providing 
a substantial share of the non-oil export earnings, and household incomes. Following the loss of the majority of the 
national oil revenue following the secession of South Sudan in 2011, the government started to support this sector 
more actively. It still remains highly vulnerable to climate change and variability, which puts the predominant rain-
fed production systems at risk. The livestock sector plays an important role in achieving food security and sustaining 
livelihoods (ICPAC and WFP 2018). It contributes 60% of the agricultural GDP and 21% of the overall GDP (Guthiga et 
al. 2017).
86 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 57: Numbers of major livestock species in Sudan (1961–2017).
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Camels Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c57 
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
Livestock production systems in Sudan are either pure pastoralism or combined livestock and crop production 
systems. The majority of agriculture producers pursue traditional farming systems (defined by small-scale farmers 
pursuing subsistence crop production) or livestock production or a combination of these two in areas of moderately 
sufficient rainfall. Pastoralism is mostly pursued by semi-nomadic households that spend the rainy season in northern semi-
arid regions and the dry season in the southern savannah areas. Agro-pastoralism is a variation in which households also 
grow crops, but where livestock production remains the main livelihood and source of food (Babikir et al. 2015). 
Figure 58: Number of cattle in Sudan (2011–2015 average). Figure 59: Number of goats in Sudan (2011–2015 average).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Market access for livestock producers
The domestic livestock sector has a network of markets throughout the country with varying levels of veterinary 
services. Primary markets tend to be in close proximity to village markets or livestock producers. A lack of veterinary 
services at these markets prohibits the issuance of movement certifications at this level. Secondary markets tend to 
provide better management, necessary facilities such as fencing, water and feed for animals, and the issuance of health 
certificates by a veterinary office (IGAD 2016). There are secondary markets in each of the states. Tertiary markets 
are located in the central and northern regions of the country. Cattle movement from the west to the centre is done 
by trekking along traditional livestock movement corridors during the winter months, given cool temperatures and 
availability of water and pastures. By contrast, small ruminants are transported throughout the year by trucks (IGAD 2013). 
57.Based on FAO imputation methodology and estimates as well as official and unofficial data. Data from 1961 to 2011 is for former Sudan before the separation with South Sudan.
Millions
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013*
2015*
2017*
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 87
Sudan is located in the central northwestern corridor, one of the major livestock trade markets in the Horn of 
Africa, connecting Egypt with Ethiopia and Eritrea. It also pursues trade with Chad via cross-border markets including 
Seraf Omra and Geneia. Markets like Geneia and Um Dukhun are located at migratory routes used by livestock traders 
from neighbouring countries (UNECA 2017). Main cross-border markets provide different financial services, including 
mobile money transfers, loans for traders, and the use of livestock as collateral (IGAD 2013). They tend to have necessary 
infrastructure and facilities in place, including fencing, water and feed, veterinary facilities and loading ramps. Federal 
veterinary authorities inspect, vaccinate and issue health certificates for livestock destined for export (IGAD 2016).
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
Land degradation is a key concern for pastoralists regions, putting livestock populations and food security and 
peace at risk. Overall, 12% of the total land area of Sudan is considered degraded (UNDP 2019a). Areas with the highest 
levels of degradation are the Red Sea region and Darfur. Contributing factors in Darfur include livestock overgrazing, 
man-made deforestation, reduced vegetation cover due to droughts, and low soil quality. Increased competition over 
shrinking fertile areas further aggravate this trend (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Pastoralists are facing insecure land tenure rights in light of renewed agriculture legislation and a lack of land 
registration in pastoral areas. The Agriculture and Animal Producers’ Legislative Act passed in 2010 eliminated 
traditional representation of pastoralists. The new system ensures that the state can use any land with proven significant 
natural resources, including oil, minerals, gas, forests or agriculture. The lack of land security and frequent land 
appropriation by the national government have intensified prevailing conflicts (UNECA 2017). 
In relation to the insecure land tenure rights, pastoralists have faced increased risk of conflict, given competing 
interests with natural resource extraction and commercial farming production. Pastoral areas are important hubs for 
the production of minerals, gas and oil. This has led to large-scale rangeland concessions in for public or private interests 
(UNECA 2017). Private sector companies pursuing rain-fed semi-mechanized farming further increase the risk of conflict, 
as they compete with pastoralists and contribute to land degradation (Babikir et al. 2015). These competing interests led 
to an increase in pastoralists’ resistance towards government control and private sector interests. The risk of resource-
inflicted conflicts are considerable and have ultimately caused the conflict in the Darfur region to turn into a civil war that 
drew in different local groups and the national government (UNECA 2017).
Decreasing quality and availability of pasture due to the effects of climate change and man-made land degradation 
increases the risk of livestock diseases. Increasing concentration of livestock due to changing migration patterns of 
pastoralists increases the chance of disease outbreaks and reduces meat and milk production due to declining physical 
conditions of livestock (ICPAC and WFP 2018). These factors also increase the mortality risk for livestock.
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
Sudan’s agroclimatic conditions are defined by its ecology, which shifted towards a dryland environment 
following the secession of South Sudan. About 60.2% of the total 181 million hectares of Sudan’s land area is 
categorized as arid and semi-arid (IGAD 2020a). Agricultural potential in these areas is limited, as soil quality tends to be 
poor due to low rainfall and lack of vegetation. Only certain areas of Northern Darfur experience cooler winter months, 
allowing for grass growth (referred to as gizu). Pastoralism, agro-pastoralism and some irrigated agriculture along the 
Nile banks are practiced in these regions. Other ecological regions are different types of savannah regions. Low-rainfall 
88 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
sand-based savannah zones typically experience 300–400 mm of rainfall. Low rainfall, clay-based soil savannah receives 
400–900 mm of rainfall. Both of these regions are characterized by a mixture and pasture and forest areas and are used for 
rain-fed farming and pastoral livestock systems. High-rainfall savannahs experiencing annual rainfall of 800–1300 mm are 
located in parts of South Darfur Nuba Mountains and the southern border (Babikir et al. 2015).
Figure 60: Mean annual rainfall in Sudan (1981–2010). Figure 61: Coefficient of variation for mean March–June seasonal 
rainfall in Sudan (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Figure 62: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Sudan.
Source: FEWS NET 2020b.
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Sudan is facing increased impact of natural disasters, with droughts being the main concern for rural populations. 
The country ranks 61st globally in the WorldRiskIndex score, derived from the exposure (medium) and vulnerability 
(very high) to natural hazards (BEH and IFHV 2020). Sudan further ranks 174th out of 181 countries on the ND-GAIN 
Exposure Ranking in 2018, which describes the degree to which a system is exposed to significant climate change from a 
biophysical perspective (ND-GAIN 2020). The country is prone to drought conditions given its location on the fringes of 
the Sahel, as well as flash floods which carry water from the White Nile in Ethiopia and the East African highlands (ICPAC 
and WFP 2018).
The largest drought on record of the last 50 years was in 1984 but since then there have been many other drought 
events. Drought years since then include 1985, 1989, 1990, 1997 and more recently in 2000, 2003, 2008, 2009 and 
2011. While the northern areas are particularly prone to dryness given their proximity to the Sahara, all regions of the 
country are exposed to drought. Areas worst exposed include North Kordofan, North Darfur, West Darfur, Red Sea, 
Gedaref, North state and White Nile states (Hussein 2020).
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 89
Figure 63: Number of events by disaster type in Sudan (1961–2020).
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
97
0 0 0 0 0 0
-1 -19
8 9
-19 -20
0 1
-20 -20
2
61 71 81 91 01 11
19 19 19 19 20 20
Hydrological (eg. floods) Meteorological (eg. storms)
Biological (eg. diseases) Climatological (droughts)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Figure 64: Number of affected people by disaster type in Sudan (1961–2020).
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
70 80 90 00 10 20
1-1
9
1-1
9 9 0 0 0
6 7 81
-1 1-2 1-2 1-29 0 1
19 19 19 19 20 20
Hydrological (eg. floods) Meteorological (eg. storms)
Biological (eg. diseases) Climatological (droughts)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral 
sector 
The livestock sector faces numerous challenges resulting from the impact of droughts and floods. Climate hazards 
and prolonged dry seasons characterized by low and unreliable rainfall lead to a lack of water pasture for livestock in 
pastoral areas for most of the year. The rainy season from May through November supports pasture and crop production, 
but erratic rainfall can also lead to flash floods that cause livestock death (ICPAC and WFP 2018). A recent study from 
Gedaref State, an agro-pastoral area in Eastern Sudan, showed that drought was the key challenge for households in the 
region (see Figure 65). 
Figure 65: Percentage of respondents identifying selected key problems in sub-localities in Gedaref State, Sudan.
Other (specify)
Conflicts
Livestock rustling
Lack of market
Shortages of water and pastures
Livestock diseases
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Al-Butana Al Mafaza Al Faw
Source: Hussein 2020
Millions
90 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
To cope with growing climatic risks, pastoralists increasingly migrate to sometimes distanced areas with available 
grazing resources during severe droughts (ICPAC and WFP 2018). Since the Sahel drought of the 1970s, Sudanese 
pastoralists have migrated to the Central African Republic in search of water and pastures. The number of pastoralists has 
increased with subsequent drought spells and as people have fled the civil war in Darfur (UNECA 2017). Other key coping 
mechanisms include diversifying livestock herds and the use of savings (see Figure 66). 
Figure 66: Percentage of respondents citing selected drought coping strategies in sub-localities in Gedaref State, Sudan.
Use of savings
Livestock Insurance
Income diversification
Access to extension services
Move to dry season grazing area
Livestock managementadjustments (changes…
Livestock diversification
Mobility
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Butana El Mafaza Al faw
Source: Hussein 2020.
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
Food insecurity and water shortages are two of Sudan’s most pressing challenges resulting from the fragile 
ecosystem and frequent droughts (Babikir et al. 2015). Varying and scarce rainfall, predominantly in the north, have a 
dominant effect on agriculture and food security. Contributing factors are mostly directly or indirectly related to droughts, 
including below-average agricultural production, rising market prices, inaccessibility to markets, poor seasons due to 
climatic reasons, and conflicts and related human displacements (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has been increasing pre-existing food security concerns in 2020. High 
staple food prices and COVID-19 control measures including lockdowns and the closing of transportation facilities have 
caused large numbers of people to require emergency food assistance (FEWS NET 2020e). By 5 October 2020, the 
country had 13,640 confirmed cases, of which 6,040 were still active and 6,764 had recovered. Some 836 people had 
died from the virus (IGAD and WHO 2020).
Humanitarian assistance 
Figure 67: Incoming international aid funding to Sudan as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 2,000,000,000
USD 1,800,000,000
USD 1,600,000,000
USD 1,400,000,000
USD 1,200,000,000
USD 1,000,000,000
USD 800,000,000
USD 600,000,000
USD 400,000,000
USD 200,000,000
USD 0
Incoming funds (total) Incoming funds (food security)
Incoming funds (agriculture)
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020.
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 91
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing initiatives
Table 51: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Sudan.
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
IFAD Livestock Marketing and Resilience Program Total: USD 128.7 2014–2021
million  
IFAD: 31.47 million
European Cross-Border Collaboration Program in Western Ethiopia and Eastern USD 24 million 2018–2021
Union and GIZ Sudan
World Bank Sudan Sustainable Natural Resources Management Project USD 5.5 million   2019–n.a.
Additional Financing (Phase 2)
FAO Promote the provision for legitimate land tenure rights using USD 3.3 million 2016–2020
VGGT58 to conflict displaced communities including small-scale 
rural farmers, pastoralists, and internally displaced persons in Darfur 
region
FAO Enhancing the agriculture and the livestock-based livelihood USD 3 million 2020–2021
situation of the most vulnerable households from the internally 
displaced persons, returnees and host communities
FAO Enhancing food security and livelihoods sector coordination USD 2.8 million 2020
mechanisms and addressing food and nutrition insecurity of the 
vulnerable farming, agro-pastoral and fisheries communities in the 
rural areas of Sudan
FAO Restoring and improving crop and livestock-based livelihoods of USD 2 million 2019–2020
internally displaced persons, returnees, South Sudanese refugees 
and vulnerable resident populations in South Darfur, Central Darfur, 
North Darfur and South Kordofan states
Existing drought risk financing initiatives
There are no major government drought risk financing initiatives active in Sudan. There is a livestock insurance 
program operated by the private sector and the government has subsidized agricultural insurance premiums for many 
years to encourage farmers and pastoralists to buy insurance (see section IV). Sudan has signed a memorandum of 
understanding with African Risk Capacity but has not purchased any cover yet. 
Agro-meteorological and earth observation data management
Sudan’s early warning and forecasts has contributed to building a better information base on changing climate 
and alerting farmers and pastoralist communities to the drought and flood events, ahead of the disaster. This has 
helped the country to implement its National Adaptation Program of Action in collaboration with the Higher Council for 
Environment and Natural Resources and address the climate change phenomena and therefore contribute to building 
resilience of communities in the drought-prone areas in the country. The government has invested some of its resources 
for weather data collection, land-use, crop and livestock sustainable production systems to better understand the suitable 
or appropriate strategies that may be available. Therefore, long-term investment in livelihood protection, safety nets and 
production insurance packages in support of smallholder food production would contribute to boosting the economy 
and development of the drought-prone areas (IGAD 2020c). 
58.Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security.
92 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
Sudan was the first insurance market to conform to Islamic (Sharia) finance law in 1993, which is in place for all 
insurance in Sudan. The main insurance laws in Sudan, the Insurance Supervision Act 2018 and the Takaful and Insurance 
Act 2003, have sought to ensure conformity to Sharia law and strengthen the financial position of insurers in the market 
(AXCO 2020c).
The Insurance Supervisory Authority, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, formed in 1960, issues 
regulations which generally focus on ensuring the financial strength of the insurance market and deal with solvency and 
capital requirements, investments and technical reserves (AXCO 2020c).
Non-admitted insurance is not generally permitted in Sudan. Fronting is permitted subject to approval by the 
Insurance Supervisory Authority, which scrutinizes reinsurance arrangements. Fronting commission levels range broadly 
between 2.5% and 7.5% (AXCO 2020c).
Non-life insurance is subject to stamp duty tax of 10% and an Insurance Supervisory Authority levy of 0.5%. 
Agricultural activities including insurance are exempt from corporation tax (AXCO 2020c).
Takaful insurance and reinsurance
As the Sudanese insurance market is run according to Islamic (Sharia) principles, local insurance policies must be 
takaful compliant. Insurers are required wherever possible to place their reinsurance in ‘retakaful’ markets with takaful-
approved and licenced reinsurers. Currently most general and life insurance in Sudan is reinsured with the state-owned 
Sheikan Insurance and Reinsurance Company and with the National Reinsurance Company, NIC, and ZEP-RE and Africa 
Re,59 which both have retakaful subsidiaries or windows; international retrocessions are then placed with retakaful markets 
in the Middle East and Asian (e.g. Malaysia) markets. Some business is also ceded to European insurers including a share 
of Sheikan’s long-standing crop and livestock reinsurance treaty business (AXCO 2020c).
The planning and design of an IGAD regional IBLI program will need carefully to consider the requirements in 
Sudan for the insurance and reinsurance program to meet takaful and retakaful requirements.
59.Local insurance companies are required by law to make 40% compulsory reinsurance cessions to the National Reinsurance Company, which was formed in 2016.  
Compulsory cessions also apply to ZEP-RE (10%) and to Africa Re (5%) (AXCO 2020).  
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 93
Box 2: Sharia-compliant reinsurance in Sudan (Retakaful)
The insurance market in Sudan is run according to Islamic principles, and thus all insurers try as far as possible to place 
their reinsurances in the retakaful market. Reinsurance placements are under constant supervision by the Higher 
Sharia Board and the Sharia committees of the insurance companies.
In 2010 ZEP-RE opened a retakaful window in Sudan, which increased the retakaful capacity in the local market and 
ensured that all ZEP-RE's acceptances are on a retakaful basis. 
Africa Re (headquartered in Lagos, Nigeria) launched a retakaful subsidiary in 2010 called Africa Takaful Reinsurance Company.
The percentage of treaty reinsurance placed on a retakaful basis in the local market, with Africa Re and with retakaful 
providers in Arab countries and Malaysia is estimated currently to be between 70% and 80% of all reinsurance placed. 
Reinsurance with a conventional reinsurance company is permitted only when adequate retakaful alternatives are 
not available and as long as contributions paid to the reinsurer are minimized and the insurer does not receive 
commission from the reinsurer. 
Compulsory cessions and locally accepted reinsurance business are placed on a direct basis as is some business 
ceded to major European professional reinsurers. 
Source: AXCO 2020c
Status of non-life insurance market
Sudan is ranked 98th in the world in terms of the size of its insurance market premium volume in 2016, the most 
recent year for which figures are available, with a total premium volume of Sudanese Pounds (SDG) 3,062 million (USD 
494 million), of which the non-life insurance market accounted for the bulk (87%) of the total premium, followed by 
personal accident and health (11%); while life (takaful) insurance was insignificant at 2.45% of premiums (AXCO 2020c).
In 2019 the Sudanese insurance market consisted of 13 companies, of which eight were composites, writing both 
non-life and life (takaful) business. The state-owned Sheikan Insurance Company dominates the market and transacted 
31.6% of non-life business in 2016. The top five insurance companies in Sudan are Skeikan, Islamic, Sudanese, United and 
El Nilein; together they accounted for 72% of total market written premium in 2016 (AXCO 2020c).
Insurance penetration is very low in Sudan. The Sudanese 2016 total market insurance premium was equivalent to 
0.48% of GDP or an expenditure USD 12.48 per capita on insurance. This compares to Ethiopia (0.72% of GDP and USD 
20.46 per capita) and to Kenya (2.75% of GDP and USD 39.97 per capita) (AXCO 2020c).
African Risk Capacity is licenced to operate in Sudan and could, if requested by the government, offer sovereign risk 
drought index insurance.
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability 
Indemnity-based livestock insurance in Sudan dates back to the 1960s. The state-owned Sheikan Insurance and 
Reinsurance Company launched its first milking cow livestock policy in 1992 and subsequently expanded the account to 
cover fattened cows, fattened sheep, bloodstock (horses and camels), poultry, police dogs and fish farms (AXCO 2020). 
Crop insurance was launched in 2002 by Sheikan under an area yield index cover for irrigated cotton grown in the Gezira 
irrigation area (Mahul and Stutley 2010b).
94 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Currently, only indemnity-based livestock insurance is available in Sudan in the form of an individual animal mortality 
cover due to accident and diseases for dairy cattle. Poultry and aquaculture insurance are also available but on a very 
restricted basis.
In 2014 the Global Environment Facility and UNDP, launched a weather index insurance pilot program under 
the USD 24.5 million Climate Risk Finance for Sustainable and Climate Resilient Rain-Fed Farming and Pastoral Systems 
project implemented by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Physical Development of Sudan. The project invested 
both in (i) strengthening climatic and flood early warning systems by investing in seven automatic climate stations and six 
automatic synoptic weather stations and 162 rain gauges in six states (River Nile, Gedaref, North Kordofan, South Darfur, 
Kassala and White Nile) and (ii) introducing weather index insurance cover for pastoralists and for farmers in rainfed areas: 
cover was targeted at 45,000 benefitting farmers. Alnafain Insurance Company signed up to provide crop weather index 
insurance in four states: Gedaref, South Darfur, Kassala and White Nile. The project provided financial support in the 
form of premium subsidies to farmers. The program was poorly managed and implemented and at the 2017 mid-term 
review had only succeeded in reaching 1,000 farmers with crop weather index insurance. The program failed to design or 
implement any index insurance pilots with pastoralists (Rijal and Hanafi 2017). 
In December 2020, ILRI and Syngenta Foundation launched a project to assess the feasibility of IBLI in Sudan 
and conducted preparatory work of the launch of a pilot with Ebdaa Bank, a micro-finance institution, as a local 
financial partner. The project is funded by the Swiss Capacity Building Facility and will have a duration of 24 months.  
Table 52: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in South Sudan.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index insurance Greenhouse Forestry
Low uptake n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Livestock Insurance Products Available
Indemnity-Based Index-Based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
Low uptake R & D* n.a. n.a. n.a. Low uptake
Source: Authors, updated from Mahul and Stutley 2010b.
There are currently five to six active agricultural insurance companies in Sudan. Sheikan Insurance Company is the 
largest agricultural crop and livestock insurance company in Sudan and it is reinsured by Partner Reinsurance Company, 
Zurich on a quota share and stop loss treaty basis (AXCO 2020). Other agricultural insurance companies include Islamic 
Insurance Company, Blue Nile, Alnafain Insurance Company, Garalnaby, El Nilein and Ta’wanuya.
According to the latest available data in 2017, agricultural insurance premiums were worth SDG 321 million (about 
USD 48 million at 2017 exchange rates), equivalent to 6.4% of the total insurance market life and non-life premium 
volume (Table 51). 
Table 53: Total insurance premiums (SDG million) in Sudan (2013–2017).
% of 2017  
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
market premium
Agriculture   80.7 173.2 184.3 321.0 6.4%
General (Non-Life) Insurance 1,583.1 1,773.8 2,065.3 2,986.7 4,898.5 98.0%
Takaful (Life Insurance) 54.6 56.7 60.7 74.9 98.0 2.0%
Total Premium (incl. Takaful Life) 1,637.7 1,830.5 2,126.0 3,061.6 4,996.5 100.0%
Source: Sudan Democracy First Group 2019.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 95
Over the four-year period 2014 to 2017, the agricultural insurance market expanded significantly from SDG 81 
million to SDG 321 million. Over this period, Sudanese agricultural insurers achieved profitable underwriting results as 
shown by the long-term average loss ratio of 57% on their crop and livestock portfolios  (AXCO 2020).
Table 54: Total agricultural insurance premiums (SDG million) and loss ratios in Sudan (2013–2017).
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total
Agriculture Premium   80.7 173.2 184.3 321 759.20 
Animal and Agriculture Claims 36.7 35.1 102.6 99.1 194.2 431.00 
Loss ratio %   43% 59% 54% 60% 57%
Source: Sudan Democracy First Group 2019.
The Government of Sudan is highly committed to promoting the adoption of agricultural insurance and has for 
many years provided financial support in the form of 50% premium subsidies. In 2008, only crop insurance policies 
qualified for premium subsidies (Mahul and Stutley 2010b), but it is believed that the 50% premium subsidy has now been 
extended to livestock policies as well.
Interest from public and private stakeholders
Senior representatives from the Government of Sudan attended the June 2019 Addis IGAD/ILRI/World Bank 
‘’Policy Roundtable and Technical Workshop on Index-Insurance for Livestock in the IGAD Region’ on scaling up 
IBLI solutions in the IGAD region and expressed their interest in participating in this initiative. To date it has not 
been possible to elicit the interest from insurance companies in developing and underwriting micro-level and or meso-
level IBLI products and programs for pastoralists in the country. At the government’s request, Syngenta Foundation for 
Sustainable Agriculture and ILRI have planned an IBLI feasibility assessment study in Sudan in 2020–21: funding support is 
being provided by the Swiss Capacity Building Facility and AgFund. 
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 55: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Sudan (2014).
Financial inclusion data for Sudan’s population (% of population; age 15+)
Total Rural
Account 15.3 13.1
Borrowed any money in the past year 45.5 43.8
Borrowed from a financial institution or used a credit card 4.2 3.8
Borrowed from a store by buying on credit 0.9 0.4
Coming up with emergency funds: not possible 43.2 43.9
Credit card ownership 0.4 0.3
Financial institution account 15.3 13.1
Made or received digital payments in the past year 11.9 9.8
No deposit and no withdrawal from an account in the past year 3.6 3.2
Received government transfers in the past year 2.5 2.2
Source: World Bank 2020f.
96 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Financial inclusion for pastoralists is at a fledgling stage in Sudan. Country-wide, microfinance coverage is estimated 
at only reaching 8% of potential clients, leaving around 8 million people or around 20% of the population excluded 
(Ammar, Ahmed and McMillan 2016). Rural areas are largely excluded. IFAD supports the Agricultural Bank of Sudan 
Microfinance Initiative with a grant of USD 925,000 to scale up operations and reach a greater client base, focusing on 
North and South Kordofan. The banks with the greatest branch network active in microfinance and lending to livestock 
holders seem to be the Bank of Khartoum and the Savings and Social Development Bank (Ali 2020).
Beneficiary registries
No existing database of pastoralists could be determined for the purposes of this study. The last population census 
was carried out in Sudan in 2009, while the only census of livestock and agriculture was conducted in 1964. However, 
most recently in December 2020, the government has announced the launch a two-year national census of the country’s 
population, farmlands and livestock costing USD 305 million.60 If implemented successfully, this census could provide a 
national database registry of all pastoralists and agro-pastoralists and their livestock.
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational feasibility 
assessment of IBLI in Sudan through a regional 
IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 56: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Sudan.
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral The livestock sector contributes up to 21% of Sudanese GDP, and up to 20% of 
livestock for economy the Sudanese population are pastoralists. 
Impact of drought on livestock Sudan is exposed to drought in a major way, with pastoralists shouldering a large 
share of the burden. Water shortages have been recorded in field studies as the 
main challenge faced by pastoral communities.
Pastoralist demand for While no IBLI-type products have been rolled out in Sudan thus far, traditional 
livestock insurance commercial indemnity-based products are available in the market to sedentary 
livestock holders, distributed by Shiekan Insurance. The Shiekan livestock 
insurance program has been around for many years and has a consistent client 
base. Studies show some pastoral communities are familiar with livestock 
insurance and about 5% have purchased livestock insurance as a risk mitigation 
strategy (Hussein 2020). However, there is no experience with IBLI livestock 
insurance products targeted specifically at pastoralists.
Effective distribution channels Shiekan Insurance has experience in distributing livestock insurance products, 
for micro-level IBLI albeit not specifically in pastoral regions. Other insurers underwrite agricultural 
insurance programs, although the details of their operations require further 
research. Mobile cash solutions are available in Sudan. The extension of 
financial services to pastoral regions is still low, although there seem to be some 
commercial banks with operations targeted at pastoralists.
Existing pastoralist beneficiary In December 2020, the government announced the launch of a two-year national 
registries census of the country’s population, farmlands and livestock costing USD 305 
million.61 If implemented successfully this census could provide a national 
database registry of all pastoralists and agro-pastoralists and their livestock.
Pastoralist financial literacy Financial literacy among pastoralists is expected to be very low. In pastoral areas, 
there is little experience with financial services and no experience with insurance. 
Significant investments would have to made in capacity building and awareness 
creation of any IBLI products.
60.https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/sudan-launches-census-to-count-population-farmlands/2071052
61.https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/sudan-launches-census-to-count-population-farmlands/2071052
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 97
Status Comments
Legal and regulatory insurance The Sudanese insurance sector is governed by Sharia law and any IBLI product 
environment would have to be marketed in a Sharia-compliant (takaful) way. There is limited 
experience with index insurance products and the Insurance Supervisory 
Authority would have to be involved closely in the development of any IBLI 
product. 
Insurance market Sudan has a moderately developed insurance market, with five to six companies 
development underwriting agricultural insurance. In 2017, insurers collected SDG 321 million 
(USD 48 million) in agricultural insurance premiums, of which possibly 10–20% 
was for livestock insurance (dairy cattle, poultry etc.). The insurance market is 
much less developed in rural pastoral areas. 
Interest from insurers in IBLI n.a. The DIRISHA team did not have an opportunity to interact directly with insurance 
companies in Sudan.
Finance available for premiums The Government of Sudan is very committed to promoting micro-level 
agricultural insurance and for many years the Ministry of Finance has provided 
50% premium subsidies to farmers. 
Interest from government The Government of Sudan has participated in the IGAD regional conferences 
stakeholders in IBLI on drought insurance and has expressed its interest in participating in any IBLI 
initiative. Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture and ILRI have planned 
an IBLI feasibility assessment study in Sudan in 2020–21: funding support is being 
provided by the Swiss Capacity Building Facility and AgFund.
98 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
H. Uganda
Table 57: Summary of livestock and insurance in Uganda
Status of planning and implementation of Index-Based Livestock Insurance
IBLI availability None. The UAIS pool co-insurers offer indemnity-based livestock
IBLI planning An IBLI feasibility study was conducted in 2019 (WBG 2019b).
The Government of Uganda is studying role of macro-level IBLI as part of IGAD regional initiative.
Livestock and pastoralism sector Map amended from (Cecchi et al. 2010)
No. of pastoralists  MPI rating in rural Livestock Livestock  
(% of population) areas contribution to production index 
GDP (2004–06 = 100)
9.2M (23%)62 0.30963 5.2%64 13365
(2015) (2016) (2017) (2017)
Livestock breakdown66 (2018)*
Total TLUs Camels Cattle Goats Sheep
17.6 M n.a. 15.8 M 16.2 M 2.1 M
Key insurance and financial sector institutions 
Banks in pastoral areas Centenary Bank (lending to pastoralist associations); Brac (microfinance institution)
Mobile cash MTN; Airtel; Sendwave
Africa Insurance Company (consortium of 11 insurers underwriting the national agricultural 
Insurance companies
insurance program UAIS); UAP Insurance (underwriting Centenary pastoralist portfolio).
Key insurance schemes and legislation 
Insurance companies in Uganda operate under the terms and conditions of the Insurance 
Insurance Act 2017 (Act 6 of 2017), which was brought into force on 30 March 2018. The insurance 
law/regulation market is supervised and regulated by the Insurance Regulatory Authority, an autonomous 
agency under the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
Livestock insurance Traditional livestock indemnity insurance for cattle, pigs, poultry and fish farming 
(aquaculture) are offered under the government subsidized UAIS. Currently IBLI is not 
products available, but the government is planning to introduce modified macro-level IBLI in 2021. 
62.UNECA 2017.
63.The “multidimensional poverty index is an index between 0 and 1 that is comprised of 10 different indicators on poverty. The higher the index value, the greater the 
poverty (OPHI 2020d).
64.Guthiga et al. 2017
65.FAOSTAT 2020b
66. FAOSTAT 2020c
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 99
Other relevant partners for IBLI
Government partners Office of the Prime Minister; Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries; Ministry 
of Finance, Planning and Economic Development 
Livestock sector associations Uganda Meat Producers Cooperative Union Ltd; Uganda Beef Producers Association; 
Uganda Manufacturers Association (animal feed)
Most important development USAID, FAO, UK FCDO, WBG
partners
NGOs Coalition of Pastoralist Civil Society Organizations; Karamoja Livestock Development 
Forum
* FAO data based on imputation methodology, estimates, and government data
Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) conversion rates: Camel: 1.4 | Cattle: 1.0 | Goat: 0.1 | Sheep: 0.1
I. Socio-economic relevance of livestock 
production and pastoralism 
Socio-economic situation in Uganda
Uganda has experienced several conflicts since gaining independence in 1962, but recently experienced 
sustained economic growth and poverty reduction (Babikir et al. 2015). Uganda has achieved remarkable results 
in reducing poverty over the past decades, reducing the share of Ugandan households living in poverty by half 
between 1992 and 2013 (World Bank 2020e). The country ranks 159th out of 189 countries on the Human Development 
Index. Employment is relatively high, with only 1.7% of the total labour force being unemployed. However, 75.2% of 
employment is considered vulnerable. Rural households, 76.2% of the total population, rank much lower on socio-
economic indicators. Pastoral communities experience especially high rates of infant and maternal mortality, low levels 
of literacy, high poverty rates, sparse access to social services, limited economic opportunities and limited political 
participation (Stark 2011). Only 11.4% of the rural population has access to electricity (UNDP 2019a). 
Economic relevance of the livestock sector 
The agriculture sector is still a key source of livelihoods but the livestock sector is a smaller subset. Agriculture has 
played a significant but declining role in contributing to the economic growth of the country. Other sectors including 
services, industry and tourism have become increasingly important (IGAD 2020d). The agriculture sector still accounts 
for 71.1% of total employment and 71.9% of total land use (FAOSTAT 2020c). Its productivity level, however, remains low 
due to limited technology adaption rates. The majority of producers still rely on traditional and rudimentary methods like 
using hand hoes and unreliable or inadequate rains during the crop cycle (IGAD 2020a). The livestock sector contributes 
18% to agricultural GDP, constituting 5.2% to overall GDP (Guthiga et al. 2017). The sector provides a key source of 
income and household food consumption (ICPAC and WFP 2018). 
The economic importance of the livestock sector, and agro-pastoralism in particular, is much higher in the 
Karamoja region in the northeast of the country. The Karamoja region is by far the poorest region in the country, with 
74% of people living below the poverty line, compared to about 20% nationwide. It is exposed to severe drought, prone 
to conflict, and food insecurity is a major issue – up to 45% of households are considered food-insecure. It comprises 
seven districts: Abim, Amudat, Kaabong, Kotido, Moroto, Nakapiripirit and Napak. Traditionally, Karamoja has been a 
pastoral area but crop production has recently emerged as an important contributor to livelihoods. As per a 2016 survey, 
around half of the households in the region declared themselves to be ‘pastoralists’ or ‘agro-pastoralists’ (see Table 58) 
(FAO 2018).
100 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Table 58: Self-reported livelihoods by district in Uganda
Abim Amudat Kaabong Kotido Moroto Nakapiripirit Napak
Pastoralist or agro-pastoralist (% of total) 32.4 84.0 53.9 59.3 48.2 24.8 40.0
Farmer (% of total) 66.2 9.0 28.8 37.7 48.8 56.3 59.4
Other (% of total) 1.5 7.0 19.4 3.0 3.0 18.9 0.6
Source: FAO 2018
Figure 68: Numbers of major livestock species in Uganda (1961–2017).
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Cattle Goats Sheep Total TLUs
Source: FAOSTAT 2020c67  
* National livestock census in 2008 led to a significant increase in recorded livestock numbers
Livestock production systems and livelihoods
The Ugandan livestock sector is composed of different production systems, with a higher prevalence of modern 
technology methods compared to peer countries in the region. Pastoral systems are practiced in districts with annual 
rainfall below 100 mm, mostly in the Karamoja region in the northeast, but also in some areas in western and central 
districts. Zero grazing systems are more intensive production methods that tend to be located near urban areas to supply 
growing urban demand for milk and other livestock products (Babikir et al. 2015). These modern systems pursue a 
strategy of specialization to maximize output, which is in contrast and competition with pastoralists seeking to diversify 
production systems as a risk mitigation strategy (UNECA 2017).
The distribution of livestock clearly shows the concentration of the sector on the northeast Karamoja region. 
However, there are other pockets, particularly in the southeastern parts, where dairy farming and some agro-pastoralism 
is practiced (see Figure 69).
Figure 69: Number of cattle in Uganda (2008). Figure 70: Number of goats in Uganda (2008).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
67.Based on FAO imputation methodology and estimates as well as official and unofficial data. 
Millions
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009*
2011*
2013*
2015*
2017*
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 101
Market access for livestock producers
Uganda has a comprehensive network of livestock markets but lacks effective market information services. The 
country has eight main overland border posts, at least one secondary market for every sub-county or district, and a tertiary 
market in Kampala. Cross-border markets lack market information services that would benefit traders and customers by, 
for example, providing current market prices, despite the existing Uganda-Foodnet Livestock Market Information System. 
Most markets, however, provide banking, mobile money transfer and money exchange services. By 2013, Uganda had 
no export quarantine station nor slaughter facilities (IGAD 2013).
Domestic livestock movement is controlled by a permit system, but operational constraints of the veterinary 
oversight systems remain. There is a mandatory livestock movement permit system for any movements of live animals 
or livestock products. Decentralized veterinary services and insufficient staffing at diagnostic and quarantine facilities, 
however, prohibit a comprehensive enforcement of such regulatory requirements. Local veterinarians tend to base issuing 
permits on broader, known livestock disease situations instead of a thorough examination of production places during on-
site visits. Pastoralist production systems, which are based on remote extensive livestock production areas, open borders 
and constant migration for water and pasture, further challenge the enforcement of such permits. Permit requirements 
have been increased, including improved identification and animal welfare, and serve as a sanitary permit for domestic 
and international trade (IGAD 2016).
Issues and challenges faced by the pastoral and livestock sector 
Land degradation is a growing concern for Uganda, which in general has more favourable vegetation conditions 
than most of its peer countries. According to estimates, 41% of the total area experiences severe and 12% very severe 
degradation, putting agricultural livelihoods especially at risk (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Some legislation exists to protect land rights of pastoralists, but efforts have not yet been widely adopted, leaving 
pastoralists without secured land tenure. The Land Act of 1998 provides a legal basis for pastoral land rights and to deal 
with land disputes, for instance through the establishment of communal land associations. These associations, however, 
have not been implemented, which creates a lack of tenure security for pastoralists who face the risk of losing land rights 
to private or public land development projects (UNECA 2017).
Ongoing regional conflicts have disproportionally affected rural populations. Several regions in the Horn of 
Africa, including the northeastern Karamoja region of Uganda, have experienced repeated violent conflict over the past 
decades. Violent episodes have led to large numbers of internally displaced persons and refugees, especially among 
pastoralists or people of pastoral origins (UNECA 2017).
Livestock producers face different types of health risks for their herds. Livestock pests occurring in Uganda 
include ticks and the tsetse fly, diseases such as rinderpest, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia and East Coast 
Fever. These health risks put the health of livestock at risk, either reducing its value or even killing animals (ICPAC 
and WFP 2018).
Transformation trends of the livestock production systems favour modern specialization over mixed agricultural 
systems traditionally pursued and favoured by pastoralists. Interventions to modernize livestock production systems 
target the transformation of pastoral systems into commercialized forms, specializing for instance in beef ranching or dairy 
farming. These efforts tend to ignore or further undermine the integration of crop and pastoral production systems. They 
have also sometimes undermined the symbiotic relationship between the systems and their importance to pastoralist 
communities (UNECA 2017).
102 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
II. Impacts of droughts on livestock sector and 
pastoralist livelihoods
Agroclimatic conditions in pastoral regions
Uganda’s natural resources and ecosystem provides advantageous conditions for agricultural and livestock 
production systems in most areas of the country. The national rainfall average is high but varies considerably by area, 
from less than 800 mm in parts of northeast including Karamoja to about 1500 mm in parts of the north, and over 2000 
mm in eastern and western parts (ICPAC and WFP 2018). Most of the country’s land area is occupied by the ‘cattle 
corridor’ which stretches from Karamoja region in the northeast, through the central to the southwest part of the country. 
The area is defined by semi-arid and dry sub-humid conditions and has experienced a higher frequency of dry spells 
and droughts (IGAD 2020d). Rainfall variability is highest in the Karamoja region. Overall, vegetation conditions for 
agricultural production are advantageous except for the northeastern parts, including Karamoja (ICPAC and WFP 2018). 
Figure 71: Mean annual rainfall in Uganda (1981–2010). Figure 72: Coefficient of variation for March–June seasonal rainfall in 
Uganda (1981–2010).
Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018. Source: ICPAC and WFP 2018.
Uganda experiences both unimodal and bimodal rainfall seasons. In bimodal areas of the country, the first rains are from 
April to July and the second rains are from October to December. However, in Karamoja, which is the main pastoral 
livestock region, there is only one rainy season (unimodal) from April to September (see Figure 73).
Figure 73: Typical agricultural and climatic season calendar in Uganda.
Source: FEWS NET 2020b.
Frequency and severity of natural disasters 
Uganda is at risk from several natural hazards. The country ranks 58th in the WorldRiskIndex score, which measures 
exposure (medium) and vulnerability (very high) to natural hazards (BEH and IFHV 2020). Uganda further ranks 166th out 
of 181 countries on the ND-GAIN Exposure Ranking in 2018, which measured the degree to which a system is exposed to 
significant climate change from a biophysical perspective (ND-GAIN 2020).
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 103
Experienced hazards types include epidemics, droughts and famine, floods, landslides, earthquakes and 
hailstorms. Floods and flash floods are becoming more common in many areas, including the central, eastern, and the 
Teso regions. These often coincide with increased rainfall spells including from El Niño events. Drought is a major climate 
risk, especially in the northeastern part of the country (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Figure 74: Number of events by disaster type in Uganda (1966–2020).
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-70 -75 -80 -85 -90 -95 00 -05 -10 -15 0
66 1 6 1
-2
9 97 97 98 98
6 919 6-2
0
00
1 060 01
1 16
1 1 1 1 1 1 9 2 2 2 20
19
Hy drological (e.g . floods) Biological (e.g. diseases)
Meteorological (e.g. storms) Climatological (Drought)
Geophysical (eg. earthquakes)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Figure 75: Number of affected people by disaster type in Uganda (1966–2020).
 3.00
 2.50
 2.00
 1.50
 1.00
 0.50
 -
-70 -75 -80 -85 06 1 6 1 6-9 -9
5 00 -05 -10 -150 -2
0
96 97 97 98 98 99
1 -2 01 06 1 6
1 1 1 1 1 1 96 20 20 20
1 1
20
19
Hy drological (e.g . floods) Biological (e.g. diseases)
Meteorological (e.g. storms) Climatological (drought)
Geophysical (eg. earthquakes)
Source: EM-DAT 2020.
Impact of droughts and other perils on livestock and the pastoral 
sector 
Climatic risks have the biggest effect on the pastoral sector due to inadequate moisture for pasture development 
and restricted access to water needed for livestock feed. Droughts tend to occur from August to November in the 
cattle corridor. Such events lead to water scarcity, which sometimes results in conflicts among pastoralists competing 
over water and pasture for their livestock. Variations in climatic conditions have implications for vegetation condition, 
which is critical for pastoral and agro-pastoral livestock production that relies on natural vegetation for pastures. Karamoja 
has historically been the most affected region. The impacts of droughts are numerous, including the loss of human and 
livestock through starvation. It can lead to increased water and pasture shortage, crop failure, increased malnutrition 
and abnormal livestock out-migration. Erratic rainfall-induced flash floods can also lead to livestock deaths. Livestock 
producers affected by climatic risk increasingly migrate to other regions during the dry seasons (ICPAC and WFP 2018).
Impact on food security and overall well-being 
Uganda has experienced several major droughts that put livelihoods and food security at risk. During the drought in 
1993/94, over 1.8 million people faced a lack of food, water and inadequate pasture. Another drought, which occurred 
in 1998/99, affected over 3.5 million people. In addition to food shortages, large numbers of livestock had deteriorated 
Millions
104 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
in physical conditions or died. Other major drought events occurred in 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2016. The last 
drought led to severe crop losses and decreased pasture areas and water, putting about 10.9 million people into acute 
food insecurity. The most-affected communities were located in the arid and semi-arid areas of the country (IGAD 2020d).
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 particularly affected the food security of livestock-dependent 
households. The income of households that rely on livestock and milk sales remain below average, as sales were limited 
by localized quarantine measures and market closures to limit the spread of COVID-19 (FEWS NET 2020b). By 5 October 
2020, the country had conducted 480,037 tests, confirming 8,129 cases, of which 3,794 were still active and 4,260 had 
recovered. Seventy-five people had died from the virus (IGAD and WHO 2020).
Humanitarian assistance 
Figure 76: Incoming international aid funding to Uganda as tracked by UN OCHA (2000–2020).
USD 400,000,000
USD 350,000,000
USD 300,000,000
USD 250,000,000
USD 200,000,000
USD 150,000,000
USD 100,000,000
USD 50,000,000
USD 0
Incoming funds (total) Incoming funds (food security)
Incoming funds (agriculture)
Source: UN OCHA FTS 2020 
*According to the UN OCHA database, the drop in incoming food security funding in 2008 is explained by WFP making a USD 137 million internal 
transfer (within Uganda) to pay for food security.
III. Pastoralist development programs and 
existing drought risk financing initiatives
Table 59: Government of Uganda programs focusing on the pastoralist and livestock sector
Title Description
Office of Prime Minister (Karamoja Medium-term development framework tailored to address the unique context and 
Integrated Development Program) development challenges in the Karamoja region. The overall objective is to contribute 
towards human security and promote conditions for recovery and development in 
Karamoja (2015–2020, USD 24 million).
Ministry of Agriculture (Market- Holistic value chain approach in the targeted geographical areas to leverage an 
Oriented and Environmentally increase in the overall performance (in terms of production volume, quality, value 
Sustainable Beef Meat Industry in addition, increased employment and environmental sustainability) of the Ugandan 
Uganda) meat value-chain
Ministry of Agriculture (The Goat Make available improved indigenous and exotic (Savannah) goat germplasm to 
Export Project) farmers in the project area which will serve as a springboard for establishing a pilot 
goat export zone in the country.
Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries 2020.
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 105
Table 60: Donor projects focused on the enhancement of the pastoralist and livestock sector in Uganda.
Organization Project title Cost/contribution Duration
World Bank Emergency Locust Response Program (multiple recipient USD 48 million (for Uganda) 2020–2023
countries)
World Bank Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project (multiple USD 40 million (for Uganda) 2014–2021
recipient countries)
IFAD Project for Financial Inclusion in Rural Areas Total: USD 36.39 million 2013–2021
IFAD: USD 29.96 million
UNDP Community Resilience to Climate Change and Disaster Risks USD 23 million 2016–2020
in Uganda
UK FCDO Financial Service Inclusion Program USD 18.4 million 2012–2020
FAO Integrating climate resilience into agricultural and pastoral USD 6.9 million 2019–2024
production in Uganda through a Farmer/agro-pastoralist field 
school approach
FAO Fostering Sustainability and Resilience for Food Security in USD 3.6 million 2017–2022
Karamoja Sub Region 
Existing drought risk financing initiatives
The Government of Uganda has started to explore drought risk financing instruments and has expressed interest 
in exploring further ones. Key risk financing instruments of the Government of Uganda include the following (WBG 
2019b).
• Office of the Prime Minister, Department in Charge of Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Management. This 
department is the key institution in the Government of Uganda coordinating all disaster relief efforts in the country. 
It has no dedicated fund to provide any potential relief from; instead it relies on a budget that can vary from year to 
year. 
• Scalable Safety Net – Third Northern Ugandan Social Action Fund. The Office of the Prime Minister, supported 
by the World Bank, is implementing the Third Northern Ugandan Social Action Fund. The five-year program 
provides temporary labour-intensive public works to poor households, as well as grants to promote income-
generating activities. In the Karamoja region, the labour-intensive public works component is scalable (the ‘disaster 
risk financing component’) and additional beneficiary households can be added rapidly in the event of a major 
drought. Currently, 84,000 households in the Karamoja region are being targeted, for which USD 10 million have 
been set aside. Since inception in 2016, the mechanism has been activated multiple times (Maher and Poulter 
2018).
• Agricultural insurance. In 2016, the Government of Uganda launched the Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme 
(UAIS), which is targeted both at crop and at livestock producers (see Section IV). The program aims both to 
support the resilience of agricultural producers and to de-risk the agriculture sector in general in order to attract 
greater finance extended to the sector. Products are being underwritten by a consortium of 11 Ugandan insurers 
and are distributed by seven participating rural banks. 
• Further interest. The Government of Uganda has expressed its interest in IBLI, both at IGAD regional 
conferences on livestock insurance and through a recent letter to the World Bank, particularly in receiving 
technical assistance to design and implement a modified macro-level IBLI approach building on the Kenyan and 
Ethiopian models. 
106 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
IV. Review of national livestock insurance 
market development
Insurance legal and regulatory framework
Insurance companies in Uganda operate under the terms and conditions of the Insurance Act 2017 (Act 6 of 
2017), which was brought into force on 30 March 2018. The insurance market is supervised and regulated by 
the Insurance Regulatory Authority, an autonomous agency under the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic 
Development, which is tasked with licensing of insurance companies, reinsurance companies, health membership 
organization companies and their intermediaries, loss adjusters and assessors, risk inspectors and valuers. Other 
functions include inspecting and reviewing companies operating in the insurance market, operating a complaints 
bureau, approving policy and proposal form texts, approving minimum premium and maximum commission rates, 
and advising the Government of Uganda on insurance protection and security of national assets and properties. The 
Insurance Regulatory Authority is funded by a 1.5% compulsory levy on insurers’ gross written premiums (AXCO 
2020c). 
Status of non-life insurance market
In 2017, the total gross written premium amounted to Ugandan shilling (UGX) 729 billion (USD 202 million). 
The non- life insurance market accounted for the greater share of total market premium or UGX 570 billion (USD 
152 million). The non-life insurance industry has shown steady growth in recent years, with growth of 12.7% (AXCO 
2020d). 
The number of licensed insurers operating in the Ugandan market in 2017 was 29; of these, 9 were life companies, 
1 was a microinsurer and the remaining 19 were non-life companies. There are no state insurers in Uganda; all are 
private limited companies. There is one reinsurer, the Uganda Reinsurance Company Limited (Uganda Re). In 2017 the 
five largest non-life insurers by premium income were Jubilee, UAP-Old Mutual, Britam, Lion and Sanlam, with a combined 
market share of 68% of total non-life premiums (AXCO 2020d). 
Insurance market penetration is very low in Uganda, equivalent to 0.77% of GDP and only USD 4.71 per capita 
in 2017. The only East African country with a lower insurance penetration rate in 2017 was Tanzania, at 0.64% of GDP; 
insurance penetration was considerably higher in Kenya (2.64% of GDP, with expenditure of USD 40.7 per capita). 
Reasons for the very low insurance penetration in Uganda include the fact that only 1 million people are in salaried 
employment, and that most people are not aware of insurance as a concept. The low penetration rate may change, 
however, with the development of microinsurance and bancassurance (AXCO 2020d). 
The most important class of non-life insurance in 2017 was personal accident and health care (26.7% share of non-
life premium), followed by motor (25.5%), and property (19.0%). Agricultural insurance is included under miscellaneous 
insurance (8.9% share) (AXCO 2020d). 
In 2017, the total non-life premium ceded was UGX 209.38 billion (USD 6.46 million), representing 41.28% 
of 2017 gross written premium income, little changed from 41.12% in 2016. Uganda operates compulsory 
cessions to Uganda Re: 15% of all reinsurance cessions (treaty and facultative, life and non-life) must be offered to 
the company. This is in addition to the existing compulsory cessions that must be offered to African Reinsurance 
Corporation (Africa Re) and Preferential Trade Area Reinsurance Company (ZEP-RE) of 5% and 10%, respectively 
(AXCO 2020d). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 107
Agriculture and livestock insurance availability 
Agricultural insurance in Uganda is a relatively new class of business and has less than 10 years of operational 
experience. During this time there have been two major agricultural insurance initiatives: (i) the private-sector 
implemented Kungula Agrinsurance Scheme, from 2013–15, a coinsurance pool scheme established by eight 
private commercial companies, which failed to achieve sufficient demand and scale and was subsequently 
terminated; and (ii) UAIS, which is a public-private arrangement launched in July 2016, with major financial support 
from the Government of Uganda in the form of premium subsidies and also subsidies for farmer awareness and 
training.
Under UAIS, a wide range of indemnity-based and index-based crop insurance products are currently offered, 
but in the case of livestock (dairy and beef cattle and pigs), poultry and aquaculture (fish farming), all policies are 
traditional indemnity-based covers. Currently, UAIS does not offer any micro-level IBLI or macro-level IBLI policies to 
protect Ugandan herders/pastoralists against drought. To date, the most important programs purchased by farmers 
include multiple peril crop insurance and a satellite drought weather index insurance policy. Conversely, very few 
indemnity-based livestock insurance policies have been sold.
Table 61: Availability of agricultural insurance (indemnity-based and index-based) in Uganda.
Crop insurance products available
Indemnity-based Index-based Weather index insurance Area yield index insurance Greenhouse Forestry
Low uptake Low uptake Low uptake Low uptake Low uptake n.a.
Livestock Insurance Products Available
Indemnity-based Index-based Micro-level IBLI Meso- & macro-level IBLI Aquaculture Poultry
Low uptake R & D* n.a. n.a. Low uptake Low uptake
Source: Authors.
UAIS is underwritten by an agricultural insurance consortium under a coinsurance agreement among 11 leading 
non-life insurance companies, led by Sanlam. The agricultural insurance consortium co-insurers fund an agro-consortium 
secretariat to underwrite and manage UAIS on their collective behalf. 
The Government of Uganda is very committed to promoting adoption of agricultural insurance by farmers and 
livestock producers and is financing premium subsidies of UGX 5 billion (USD 1.33 million) in 2016/17 and in 2017/18 
and in principle up to UGX 10 billion per year for the four subsequent years up to 2020/21 to make cover more affordable 
to farmers and to assist uptake and penetration of crop and livestock insurance in Uganda. The government’s priority is 
to help small-scale farmers and livestock producers access insurance, and it has agreed to the following premium subsidy 
levels for each category of farmer.
• Large farmers: 30% premium subsidy 
• Small farmers: 50% premium subsidy 
• Farmers in high-risk regions: up to 80% premium subsidy (high-risk and disaster-prone areas include Kasese, Arua, 
Isingiro, Ngora, and Mount Elgon region) 
UAIS has now completed four years of operations (2016/17 to 2019/20) and has achieved some significant 
milestones over this period, including sensitization of more than 1.5 million farmers and cumulative sales in its first four 
years of operations of 174,806 policies by 31 December 2019. 
108 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Figure 77: Number of farmers insured by Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme (2019).
90,000
80,000 77,370
70,000 59,318
60,000
50,000
40,000 33,118
30,000
20,000
10,000 5,000
0
2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Source: Agricultural Insurance Consortium 2020.
Over the four-year period, UAIS has achieved very favourable underwriting results. The total cumulative sum 
insured at 31 December 2019 was UGX 922 billion (USD 245 million), total written premium was UGX 26.7 billion (USD 
7.1 million) and total cumulative claims were UGX 5.5 billion (UGX 1.5 million). According to the Agricultural Insurance 
Consortium’s figures the underwriting performance has been extremely favourable to underwriters over the first three 
and a half years of the program, with a loss ratio at 31 December 2019 of only 21%, which is exceptionally low for an 
agricultural insurance scheme of this nature that insures catastrophic perils of drought and flood.
Table 62: Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme cumulative underwriting results (1 July 2016 to 31 December 2019).
Number Insured Farmers / Total Sum Insured Total Premium Total claims Average  Loss 
Year
Livestock Producers (UGX Million) (UGX Million) (UGX Million) premium rate (%) Ratio (%)
2016-18 64,318 365,300 8,573 4,009 2.3% 46.8%
30-Jun-19 97,436 515,113 15,832 4,755 3.1% 30.0%
31-Dec-19 174,806 921,959 26,678 5,482 2.9% 20.5%
Source: Agricultural Insurance Consortium 2020.
Issues relating to low sales of livestock policies
Over the past four years the standard indemnity-based aquaculture, livestock and poultry policies marketed 
by UAIS have only achieved 109 policy sales to medium and very large commercial enterprises. This suggests a 
need for UAIS stakeholders to completely redraw their livestock insurance strategy and the products that are offered to 
small-scale livestock and poultry producers in Uganda. In addition, the Agricultural Insurance Consortium secretariat may 
wish to study opportunities to introduce micro-level IBLI in drought-prone pastoral regions of Uganda, which ILRI has 
pioneered in Kenya and Ethiopia for the past decade (World Bank 2019a).
Interest from public and private stakeholders
In Uganda, the government has for a number of years actively been exploring options for introducing satellite 
pasture drought IBLI both as a modified macro-level livelihoods protection cover and possibly in the future as 
a micro-level retail IBLI product. At the request of the Government of Uganda, between 2018 and 2019 the World 
Bank conducted a pre-feasibility assessment of developing a large-scale satellite pasture drought index insurance cover 
for pastoralists in the livestock corridor and Karamoja region and presented indicative budgets for the initial five years’ 
implementation. The program is designed to reach 100,000 small-scale pastoralists by year 5, costing USD 27.6 million 
(World Bank 2019a). 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 109
The Government of Uganda has subsequently signalled its strong interest in developing such a modified macro-
IBLI cover and in 2020 the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries presented costed proposals 
to parliament for approval. The COVID-19 lockdown means that decisions are currently on hold. If, however, the 
IBLI proposals are approved, the Agricultural Insurance Consortium-UAIS will need technical assistance to design and 
implement this new program. 
V. Operational elements for potential IBLI 
implementation
Financial inclusion
Table 63: Financial inclusion data for whole population in Uganda (2017).
Financial inclusion data for Uganda’s population (% of population; age 15+)
Total Rural
Financial institution account 59.2 58.2
Borrowed any money in the past year 66.1 66.2
Borrowed from a financial institution or used a credit card 14.7 14.3
Borrowed from a savings club 22.2 22.7
Coming up with emergency funds: not possible 55.1 55.4
Credit card ownership 2.3 2.4
Financial institution account 32.8 31.7
Made or received digital payments in the past year 54.7 54.1
Main source of emergency funds: sale of assets (% able to raise funds) 14.8 15.4
Mobile money account 50.6 50.1
No deposit and no withdrawal from an account in the past year 3.8 3.3
Received government transfers in the past year 9.7 9.8
Source: World Bank 2020f.
Financial inclusion is progressing in Uganda, with mobile banking playing a major role. As per a 2017 survey, 63% 
of Ugandans accessed financial services in 2016/17, up from only 55% in 2015/16. Forty-three per cent of Ugandans had 
a registered mobile banking account. This is the major driver for financial inclusion in Uganda – 94% of those financially 
included owned a mobile banking account. However, there are still strong limitations with regards to mobile access – only 
54% of adults owned a mobile phone in 2017 (Financial Inclusion Insights 2018).
However, financial inclusion in the Karamoja region, the main pastoral region, is still extremely low. Only 20% 
of adults in Karamoja have bank accounts. Indeed, the number of banked adults in the Karamoja region is so small that 
no banked respondents could be identified during the 2018 Financial Sector Deepening FinScope Survey in the area 
(FSD 2019). A USAID-funded 2017 rapid review of financial services in the Karamoja region found that Centenary Bank, 
the largest financial inclusion bank in Uganda, had had branches in Moroto and Kotido since 2013 and serviced 17,000 
customers in Karamoja, all equipped with mobile money accounts; PostBank was then expected to open a branch in 
the area and was expected to take a financial inclusion approach; the microfinance institution BRAC was operating nine 
branches in Karamoja. The review also showed that there were more than 50 SACCOs in Karamoja, many of which were, 
however, dormant or closed, and that there were more than 5,000 village savings and loan associations in Karamoja 
(Seibel 2017). 
110 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Beneficiary registries
Table 64: Key government and donor programs with pastoralist beneficiary registries in Uganda.
Government programs No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
Third Northern Ugandan Social Action Fund 84,000 households
Donor programs No. of pastoralist beneficiaries
WFP SCOPE n.a. (no information)
VI. Summary: Preliminary operational 
feasibility assessment of IBLI in Uganda 
through a regional IGAD IBLI initiative
Table 65: Preliminary assessment of country readiness for IBLI across key operational elements in Uganda.
Status Comments
Importance of pastoral While the livestock sector contributes only 5.2% of GDP, up to 23% of the 
livestock for economy population is constituted by pastoralists. Pastoralism is very important in the 
Karamoja region in northeastern Uganda, which produces approximately 20% 
of Uganda’s livestock.
Impact of drought on livestock Drought impacts on livestock and pastoralists are well documented, particularly 
in the Karamoja region in the far north east of the country. There, droughts 
are recurring frequently and have devastating impacts on the livelihoods of 
pastoralists. They are the poorest segment of the population and are often 
thrown into food security by severe droughts. 
Pastoralist demand for Baseline demand studies prior to the launch of UAIS suggest there is 
livestock insurance considerable demand for crop and livestock insurance by Uganda’s small-scale 
farmers and herders. While no IBLI program has been piloted in Uganda so far, 
traditional indemnity-based livestock insurance is being offered through UAIS. 
This is not offered to pastoralists and to date UAIS has targeted large commercial 
livestock and poultry and aquaculture enterprises as the UAIS insurers lack rural 
distribution networks linked to small-scale livestock herders. 
Effective distribution channels As livestock insurance is already being rolled out in different parts of Uganda, 
for micro-level IBLI insurers have started investing in distribution networks. Mobile money is 
gaining traction rapidly across the country, spearheaded by MTN and Airtel, 
although coverage is still low in the Karamoja region. 
Existing pastoralist beneficiary The Third Northern Ugandan Social Action Fund program is providing social 
registries protection services targeting a total of 599,100 households over five years. 
The scalability component to the program is targeting 84,000 vulnerable 
households in the Karamoja region, many of whom pastoralists. In addition, the 
WFP SCOPE database is in place in Uganda. 
Pastoralist financial literacy Financial literacy among pastoralists is expected to be very low. In pastoral 
areas, there is little experience with financial services and no experience with 
insurance. Significant investments would have to made in capacity building and 
awareness creation of any IBLI products.
Legal and regulatory insurance While no specific IBLI programs exist at this stage, the Government of Uganda, 
environment through UAIS, enables and promotes the sale of index-based insurance 
products. There seem to be no concerns at this stage for IBLI from a legal/
regulatory perspective.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 111
Status Comments
Insurance market The Ugandan insurance market is moderately developed, with a total market 
development premium of more than USD 200 million in 2018 and 11 insurers involved in 
agricultural insurance through UAIS. Overall insurance penetration is still low, 
however, at less than 1%.
Interest from insurers in IBLI With 11 insurers working on agricultural insurance, there is a lively interest in the 
field. Livestock insurance has been rolled out, albeit not yet through an index-
based approach. 
Finance available for premiums The Government of Uganda currently supports premium subsidies on UAIS. 
In 2020 government had officially requested World Bank technical assistance 
to support the roll-out of a national IBLI scheme. It is understood that in 2020 
the Ministry of Livestock prepared a bill and financial budget to support 
the introduction of subsidized macro-level IBLI in the livestock corridor and 
including Karamoja, but that passage of this bill through parliament is currently 
being held up because of the COVID-19 outbreak.68 
Interest from government Government stakeholders have shown a keen interest in IBLI in Uganda, both 
stakeholders in IBLI through participation in regional IGAD conferences on IBLI and communication 
with the World Bank. The Government of Uganda, more generally, has also 
shown interest in the drought risk financing agenda, experimenting with 
different instruments and approaches. 
68.Personal communication with the World Bank Nairobi.
112 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
References
AfDB, AUC and UNECA (African Development Bank, African Union Commission and the United Nations Economic 
Commission for Africa). 2019. The African Statistical Yearbook 2019. https://www.afdb.org/en/documents/
document/the-african-statistical-yearbook-2019-109564.
Agricultural Insurance Consortium. 2020. Uganda Agricultural Insurance Scheme (UAIS): Progress Report on the UAIS as 
at 31st December 2019. Unpublished.
Ali, A.E.S. 2020. Enhancing financial inclusion through Islamic finance, Volume II. Springer Nature.
Altai Consulting and the World Bank. 2017. Mobile money in Somalia: Household survey and market analysis. https://
www.mfw4a.org/sites/default/files/resources/Mobile_Money_in_Somalia_-_WBank.pdf.
AMISOM (African Union Mission in Somalia). 2015. Somalia’s first insurance company thrives as economy reinvigorates. 
AMISOM, 3 September 2015. AMISOM News. https://amisom-au.org/2015/09/somalias-first-insurance-
company-thrives-as-economy-reinvigorates/.
Ammar, A. Ahmed, E.M. and McMillan, D. 2016. Factors influencing Sudanese microfinance intention to adopt mobile 
banking. Cogent Business & Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2016.1154257.
AXCO. 2020a. Ethiopia: Non-life (Property & Casualty). Insurance market report.
———. 2020b. Kenya: Non-life (Property & Casualty). Insurance market report.
———. 2020c. Sudan: Non-life (Property & Casualty). Insurance market report.
———. 2020d. Uganda: Non-life (Property & Casualty). Insurance market report
Babikir, O., Muchina, S., Sebsibe, A., Bika, A., Kwai, A., Agosa, C., Obhai, G. and Wakhusama, S. 2015. Agricultural 
systems in IGAD region – A socio-economic review. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/864e/63e2c13cb717ca6d6c
652038b12be09c4118.pdf?_ga=2.177197667.779070619.1601027662-1546373348.1601027662.
Bankable Frontier Associates. 2013. Review of FSD’s Index-Based Weather Insurance Initiatives. June 2013. Nairobi: FSD 
Kenya. https://www.fsdkenya.org/publications/review-of-fsds-index-based-weather-insurance-initiatives-full-
report/
BEH (Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft) and IFHV (Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict). 2020. 
WorldRiskReport. BEH and IFHV. https://weltrisikobericht.de/english/.
C4ED (Center for Evaluation and Development). 2018. Kenya Livestock Insurance Programme Evaluation report. https://
c4ed.org/portfolio/kenya-livestock-insurance-programme/
CAADP (Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme). 2013. East and Central Africa regional CAADP 
nutrition program development workshop: Nutrition country report Eritrea. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_
upload/wa_workshop/ECAfrica-caadp/Eritrea_NCP_190213.pdf.
Cabot Venton, C., Fitzgibbon, C., Shitarek, T., Coulter, L. and Dooley, O. 2012. The economics of early response and 
disaster resilience: lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia. London: UK Department for International Development. https://
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/67330/Econ-
Ear-Rec-Res-Full-Report_20.pdf
Calhoun, N., Cabot Venton, C. Clarey, T. and Dalmar, A. 2020. Mapping of financial services for SHGs and barriers 
for women to access microfinance services in Somalia. Concern Worldwide. https://www.concernusa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/08/Concern-Worldwide-Somalia-Mapping-Financial-Services-Report-May-2020.pdf.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 113
Catley, A., Leland, T. and Bishop, S. 2005. Policies, practices and participation in complex emergencies: the case of 
livestock interventions in South Sudan. A case study for the Agriculture and Development Economics Division of the Food 
and Agriculture Organization. Tufts University, Feinstein International Center.https://fic.tufts.edu/publication-item/
policies-practice-and-participation-in-complex-emergencies-the-case-of-livestock-interventions-in-south-sudan/
Cecchi, G., Wint, W., Shaw, A., Marletta, A., Mattioli, R. and Robinson, T. 2010. Geographic distribution and 
environmental characterization of livestock production systems in eastern Africa. FAO. http://www.fao.org/3/a-
ak791e.pdf.
Crane, T., Marshall, K., Ahmed, M.A., Awaleh, I.A., Wane, A. et al. 2018. Understanding climate change adaptation 
dynamics in central Somaliland. International Livestock Research Institute. https://www.ilri.org/publications/
understanding-climate-change-adaptation-dynamics-central-somaliland.
Debelo, A.R. 2019. Living with conflict: Borana’s resilience in southern Ethiopia. African Conflict and Peacebuilding Review 
9(2): 75–97.
Deloitte. 2020. Economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on east African economies: Summary of government 
intervention measures and Deloitte insights. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/tz/Documents/
finance/Economic_Impact_Covid-19_Pandemic_on_EastAfrican_Economies.pdf.
DFID (United Kingdom Department for International Development). 2018. Livestock and livelihoods in South 
Sudan. UK Department for International Development. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/
media/5c6ebda7ed915d4a33065327/Livestock.pdf.
Drechsler, M., Coll-Black, S., Tatin-Jaleran, C. and Clarke, D. 2017. Quantifying costs of drought risk in Ethiopia. World 
Bank: Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/34192.
EM-DAT. 2020. The international disasters database, 2020. EM-DAT. https://www.emdat.be/.
FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations). 2018. Resilience analysis in Karamoja. FAO. http://
www.fao.org/3/i8365en/I8365EN.pdf.
———. 2020. Earth observation: Country indicators Somalia. 2020. FAO. http://www.fao.org/giews/
earthobservation/country/index.jsp?code=SOM.
FAO and WBG. 2018. Rebuilding resilient and sustainable agriculture in Somalia. FAO and WBG. http://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/781281522164647812/pdf/124651-REVISED-Somalia-CEM-Agriculture-Report-
Main-Report-Revised-July-2018.pdf.
FAOSTAT. 2020a. FAOSTAT country profile: Ethiopia. http://faostat.fao.org/static/syb/syb_238.pdf.
———. 2020b. FAOSTAT country profile: Uganda. http://faostat.fao.org/static/syb/syb_226.pdf.
———. 2020c. FAOSTAT data, 2020. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home.
FEWS NET (Famine Early Warning Systems Network). 2020a. Ethiopia Food Security Outlook: Tue, 2020-10-06 to Thu, 
2021-05-06. Famine Early Warning Systems Network. 2020. https://fews.net/east-africa/ethiopia/food-security-
outlook/october-2020.
———. 2020b. FEWS NET website. Famine Early Warning Systems Network. 2020. https://fews.net/. 
———. 2020c. Kenya.  Famine Early Warning Systems Network. 2020. https://fews.net/east-africa/kenya.
———. 2020d. South Sudan. Famine Early Warning Systems Network. 2020. https://fews.net/east-africa/south-sudan.
———. 2020e. Sudan Food Security Outlook: Wed, 2020-06-17 to Sun, 2021-01-17. Famine Early Warning Systems 
Network. 2020. https://fews.net/east-africa/sudan/food-security-outlook/june-2020.
———. 2020f. Somalia Food Security Outlook: Tue, 2020-06-30 to Sun, 2021-01-31. Famine Early Warning Systems 
Network. September 2020. https://fews.net/east-africa/somalia/food-security-outlook/june-2020.
Financial Inclusion Insights. 2018. Uganda: Wave 5 report. Fifth Annual FII Tracker Survey, Conducted July-August 2017. 
http://finclusion.org/uploads/file/uganda-wave-5-report_final.pdf.
FISO Takaful Insurance. 2020. First Somali takaful & re-takaful, 2020. https://www.fisoinsurance.com/.
FSD (Financial Sector Deepening). 2019. Report on banking and the status of financial inclusion in Uganda: Insights from 
FinScope 2018 survey. https://fsduganda.or.ug/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/FSDU-Thematic-Report-on-
Banking.pdf.
114 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
FSIN (Food Security Information Network). 2019. 2019 global report on food crises:  Regional focus on the 
Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) member states. Food Security Information Network. http://
www.fao.org/resilience/resources/resources-detail/en/c/1206841/.
FSNAU (Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit). 2020. Climate overview: Somalia. Food Security and Nutrition 
Analysis Unit Somalia. https://www.fsnau.org/analytical-approach/methodology/climate.
FSNAU and FAO. 2013. Study suggests 258,000 Somalis died due to severe food insecurity and famine. https://fews.net/
sites/default/files/documents/reports/FSNAU_FEWSNET_PR_050113_FINAL.pdf.
Geleta, K. 2017. Inclusive financial services in pastoral areas of southern Oromia, Afar and Ethiopian Somali regions: 
Opportunities, implementation challenges and prospects. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322112959_
inclusive_financial_services_in_pastoral_areas_of_southern_oromia_afar_and_ethiopian_somali_regions_
opportunities_implementation_challenges_and_prospects.
Gesare, A., Sheahan, M., Mude, A. and Banerjee, R. 2015. Determinants of pastoral women’s demand for credit; evidence 
from Marsabit in northern Kenya. Working Paper. Nairobi: ILRI. https://adrasibli.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/2-
anne-ibli_adras-gender-11_6_2015.pptx.
GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2015. Country profile: Djibouti. file:///C:/Users/Simeon/
AppData/Local/Temp/country-profile-2016-djibouti.pdf.
Goobjoog News. 2019. Somalia opens first insurance company in over 20 years. http://goobjoog.com/english/
somalia-opens-first-insurance-company-in-over-20-years/.
Government of Eritrea. 2017. Saving and micro credit program in NRS Region. Eritrea Ministry of Information. https://
shabait.com/2017/12/02/saving-and-micro-credit-program-in-nrs-region/.
Government of Kenya. 2018. Disaster risk financing strategy 2018–2022. Nairobi: National Treasury and Ministry of 
Planning.
———. 2019. Stakeholder engagement workshop on disaster risk financing and official dissemination of Kenya’s disaster 
risk financing strategy. Speech by Julius Muia, PhD, EBS, Principal Secretary, the National Treasury. Nairobi.
———. 2020. Background rangeland model; presentation at ARC IGAD multi-stakeholder sensitization meeting for the 
IGAD regional economic community, 16 September 2020. National Drought Management Authority. 
Guthiga, P.M., Karugia, J.T., Massawe, S.C., Ogada, M., Mugweru, L., Ongudi, S., Mbo’o-Tchouawou, M. and Mulei. 
M. 2017. Mapping livestock value chains in the IGAD region. Report. The Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural 
Cooperation. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/89789.
Haji, H. and Shirdon, M.F. 2020. Somalia’s agriculture and livestock sectors: A baseline study and a human capital 
development strategy. Heritage Institute for Policy Studies and City University of Mogadishu. https://reliefweb.int/
report/somalia/somalia-s-agriculture-and-livestock-sectors-baseline-study-and-human-capital.
Hillier, D. 2017. From early warning to early action in Somalia: What can we learn to support early action to mitigate 
humanitarian crises? Oxfam. https://doi.org/10.21201/2017.0834.
Hussein, M.O. 2020. An assessment of the impact of the drought during the period 2011–2018 on livestock sector/economy 
and the effects of IDDRSI investments in abating drought impacts in selected IGAD member states (Ethiopia, Kenya, 
Sudan). https://www.fcg.fi/en/projects/assessment-impact-drought-during-period-2011-2018-livestock-
sectoreconomy-and-effects-1.
ICPAC (IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development) and WFP. 2018. Greater Horn of Africa climate and 
food security atlas. Intergovernmental Authority on Development. https://www.icpac.net/publications/greater-
horn-africa-climate-and-food-security-atlas/.
ICPALD (IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development) 2016. Stock-taking and Gap Analysis Study of 
Financial Products for Pastoral Areas and Linking Pastoralists to Financial Service Providers.
IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development) 2013. Regional integration support programme (RISP II) continuation. 
Inter-Governmental Authority for Development. https://icpald.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Cross-border-
livestock-routes-and-markets-TADs-and-zoonoses-study-7.pdf.
———. 2016. IGAD regional animal health certification guidelines. https://icpald.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/
Animal-Health-Certification-Guidelines1.pdf.
———. 2020a. IGAD Resilience. Cross-border knowledge sharing. https://resilience.igad.int/
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 115
———. 2020b. South Sudan country programming paper 2019–2024: Consolidating the path to resilience and 
sustainability. IGAD Resilience. https://resilience.igad.int/resource/south-sudan-country-programming-
paper-2019-2024/.
———. 2020c. Sudan country programming paper 2019–2024: Consolidating the path to resilience and sustainability. 
IGAD Resilience. https://resilience.igad.int/resource/sudan-country-programming-paper-2019-2024/.
———. 2020d. Uganda country programming paper 2019–2024: Consolidating the path to resilience and sustainability. 
IGAD Resilience. https://resilience.igad.int/resource/uganda-country-programming-paper-2019-2024/.
IGAD and WHO. 2020. IGAD COVID-19 tracker. https://igad.int/coronavirus/igad-covid-19-tracker.
International Finance Corporation 2012. South Sudan: Key findings from the scoping report. 2012. https://www.ifc.org/
wps/wcm/connect/REGION__EXT_Content/Regions/Sub-Saharan+Africa/Advisory+Services/AccessFinance/
Partnership_FinancialInclusion/ScopingReport_SouthSudan.
ILRI. 2013. Index-based livestock insurance (IBLI) in northern Kenya. Project document. January 2013 revision. Unpublished.
IPC (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification). 2020. IPC global platform: country overview, 2020. http://www.
ipcinfo.org/.
JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency). 2015. Livestock. 2015. https://openjicareport.jica.go.jp/
pdf/12233656_02.pdf.
Kenya News Agency. 2020. Farmers receive over Sh117 million from the agriculture insurance cover. https://www.
kenyanews.go.ke/farmers-receive-over-sh117-million-from-the-agriculture-insurance-cover/.
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. 2016. Kenya: FinAccess household survey. 2016. https://www.centralbank.go.ke/
uploads/financial_inclusion/736331048_FinAccess%20%20Household%202016%20Key%20Results%20
Report.pdf.
Kyuma, R. 2019. Lessons learnt from implementing index-based livestock insurance – implementers’ views. Presentation 
for the index-insurance for livestock in the IGAD region ministerial policy roundtable and technical workshop. ILRI 
Campus, Addis Ababa, 24-26 June. 
LaGuardia, D. and Poole, L. 2016. DFID’s internal risk facility: Changing the humanitarian financing landscape for 
protracted crises? Humanitarian Outcomes. The Department for International Development. https://www.
humanitarianoutcomes.org/publications/dfid%e2%80%99s-internal-risk-facility-changing-humanitarian-
financing-landscape-protracted.
Library of Congress. 2005. Country profile: Eritrea. https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/cs/profiles/Eritrea.pdf.
Mahul, O., and C.J. Stutley. 2010a. Government support to agricultural insurance: Challenges and options for developing 
countries. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2432
Mahul, O., and C.J. Stutley. 2010b. Government support to agricultural insurance: Challenges and options for developing 
countries. Annex E. International experiences with agricultural insurance: Findings from a World Bank survey of 65 
countries. The World Bank. 
Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. 2020. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. 
https://www.agriculture.go.ug/.
Maher, B. and Poulter, R. 2018. Better data, better resilience: Lessons in disaster risk finance from Uganda. Washington, 
DC: World Bank Group. https://www.gfdrr.org/en/publication/better-data-better-resilience-lessons-disaster-
risk-finance-uganda.
Mercy Corps. 2020a. COVID-19 and livestock market systems: The impact of COVID-19 on livestock-based economies in the 
Horn of Africa. http://www.celep.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-MC-HoA-COVID-Impact-Livestock-
Mrkts-Aug-2020.pdf.
———. 2020b. Economic impact of COVID-19 in Somali Region. https://www.mercycorps.org/research-resources/
economic-impact-covid-19-somali-region.
Microcapital. 2019. NilePay, Zain to Launch Mobile Money Service in South Sudan. Microcapital: Brief, 26 August 2019. 
https://www.microcapital.org/microcapital-brief-nilepay-zain-to-launch-mobile-money-service-in-south-sudan/.
Ministry of Livestock, Forestry and Range. 2016. Federal Republic of Somalia: Veterinary Law Code 2016. Ministry of 
Livestock, Forestry and Range. http://www.fao.org/faolex/results/details/en/c/LEX-FAOC171698/.
116 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Ministry of Agriculture. 2020. Ministry of Agriculture. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Cooperatives. 2020. 
https://www.kilimo.go.ke/.
Moehler, D.C. 2008. The political economy of pro-poor livestock policy in Eritrea. IGAD Livestock Policy Initiative. https://
cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/24971/IGAD_LPI_WP_03-08.pdf?sequence=1.
MoPIED (Ministry of Planning, Investment and Economic Development). 2019. Somalia National Development Plan 
2020 to 2024. Ministry of Planning, Investment and Economic Development. https://mop.gov.so/wp-content/
uploads/2019/12/NDP-9-2020-2024.pdf.
Mugunieri, L.G., Baker, D., Elmi, I.I., Costagli, R., Gulaid, I. and Wanyoike, F.N. 2014. Enhancing the provision of livestock 
marketing information in Somaliland. Report. ILRI. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/56737.
Musa, A.M., Wasonga, O.V. and Mtimet, N. 2020. Factors influencing livestock export in Somaliland’s terminal markets. 
Pastoralism 10(1): 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13570-019-0155-7.
ND-GAIN (Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative). 2020. ND-GAIN index score country ranking. Notre Dame Global 
Adaptation Initiative. 2020. https://gain.nd.edu/.
Nextv Africa. 2019. Zain and Trinity Technologies introduced mobile money service ‘M-Gurush’ in South Sudan. NexTV 
News Africa. July 26, 2019. https://nextvafrica.com/zain-and-trinity-technologies-introduced-mobile-money-
service-m-gurush-in-south-sudan/.
OPHI (Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative). 2017. Somalia country briefing. Oxford Poverty and Human 
Development Initiative. www.ophi.org.uk/multidimensional-poverty-index/mpi-country-briefings/.
———. 2020a. Global MPI country briefing 2020: Ethiopia. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. https://
ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/CB_ETH_2020.pdf.
———. 2020b. Global MPI country briefing 2020: South Sudan. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI). 
https://ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/CB_SSD_2020.pdf.
———. 2020c. Global MPI country briefing 2020: Sudan. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. https://
ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/CB_SDN_2020.pdf.
———. 2020d. Global MPI country briefing 2020: Uganda. https://ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/CB_UGA_2020.
pdf.
Ouma, C. 2017. Analysis on pastoralists financial products and models in Kenya. International Journal of Innovative 
Research and Development 6(8). https://doi.org/10.24940/ijird/2017/v6/i8/AUG17100.
Rena, Ravinder. 2007. Insurance industry in Eritrea: Achievements and challenges. Osmania Journal of International 
Business Studies 2(1): 140–146. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/10762/1/Ravi_Problems_and_Prospects_of_
Eritrean_Insurance_Industry_April2007.pdf
Rijal, A., and Hanafi A. 2017. Climate risk finance for sustainable and climate resilient rain-fed farming and pastoral 
systems. United Nations Development Program. November 2017. 
Seibel, H. 2017. Financial Services in Karamoja: A Rapid Review. Karamoja Resilience Support Unit. USAID: Uganda, 
Kampala. https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00D5QB.pdf
Shahidur, R. and Lemma, S. 2011. Strategic grain reserves in Ethiopia. International Food Policy Research Institute. 
https://www.ifpri.org/publication/strategic-grain-reserves-ethiopia.
Somali Resilience Program. 2018. SomReP Strategy Phase II 2018–2023. https://careclimatechange.org/wp-content/
uploads/2019/03/SomReP-Strategy-Phase-II.pdf.
Somaliland Law. 2020. Somaliland insurance law. http://www.somalilandlaw.com/insurance_companies_bill.htm.
Stark, J. 2011. Climate change and conflict in Uganda: The cattle corridor and Karamoja.  https://www.climatelinks.org/
resources/climate-change-and-conflict-uganda-cattle-corridor-and-karamoja.
Stoppa, A. 2020. Feasibility of index insurance for livestock in Djibouti. World Bank Group.
Stutley, C., Kerer, J., Jacobi, P., Osumba J. and Sina, J. 2013. Kenya: Situation analysis for a national agricultural insurance 
policy. Prepared by the German Agency for International Cooperation. Unpublished.
Sudan Democracy First Group. 2019. Insurance sector in Sudan – Islamization and corruption. https://
democracyfirstgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Insurance-Sector-Report-English.pdf
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 117
Syngenta 2010. Kilimo Salama (safe agriculture): Micro insurance for farmers in Kenya. Fact sheet. http://www.
syngentafoundation.org/__temp/Kilimo_Salama_Fact_sheet_FINAL.pdf
Thornton, P., Herrero, M., Freeman, A., Mwai, O., Rege, E., Jones, P. and McDermott, J. 2007. Vulnerability, climate 
change and livestock – research opportunities and challenges for poverty alleviation. International Livestock Research 
Institute (ILRI). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26520771_Vulnerability_climate_change_and_
livestock_-_research_opportunities_and_challenges_for_poverty_alleviation.
UN OCHA. 2018. Eritrea: country snapshot. OCHA. February 15, 2018. https://www.unocha.org/southern-and-
eastern-africa-rosea/eritrea.
———. 2020. Financial Tracking Service, 2020. https://fts.unocha.org/.
———. 2020. Somalia country preparedness and response plan (CPRP) COVID-19. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.
int/files/resources/CPRP%20Final%20Subow%2C%2026%20April%20%281%29.pdf.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2012. Environmental impacts risks and opportunities assessment 
– natural resources management and climate change in South Sudan. http://webcache.googleusercontent.
com/search?q=cache:AEBjEtkAHCYJ:www.undp.org/content/dam/southsudan/library/Reports/
southsudanotherdocuments/EIRO%2520Report-fr-website.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-
b-d.
———. 2019a. Human Development Indicators: Country Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries.
———. 2019b. Human Development Report 2019 – Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human 
development in the 21st century. United National Development Programme. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/
files/hdr2019.pdf.
UNECA (United Nations Economic Commission for Africa). 2017. New fringe pastoralism: Conflict and insecurity and 
development in the Horn of Africa and the Sahel. https://repository.uneca.org/bitstream/handle/10855/23727/
b11836179.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y.
United Nations Population Fund. 2014. Population estimation survey 2014 for the 18 pre-war regionals of Somalia. United 
Nations Population Fund. https://somalia.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/Population-Estimation-Survey-
of-Somalia-PESS-2013-2014.pdf.
WBG (World Bank Group). 2019a. Somali poverty and vulnerability assessment: Findings from wave 2 of the Somali 
high frequency survey. AUS0000407. World Bank Group. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/464241565765065128/pdf/Findings-from-Wave-2-of-the-Somali-High-Frequency-Survey.pdf.
———. 2019b. Toward scaled-up and sustainable agriculture finance and insurance in Uganda. Washington, DC: World 
Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/32331?show=full.
———. 2020. Republique de Djibouti: Options pour renforcer la ér silience financèi re face aux catastrophes naturelles. 
World Bank Group.
WBG and ILRI. 2019. Feasibility of Drought Index-Insurance for Livestock in Somalia. Unpublished.
WFP (World Food Programme). 2019. IOM, WFP conduct first beneficiary data exchange in South Sudan. World Food 
Programme. https://www.wfp.org/news/iom-wfp-conduct-first-beneficiary-data-exchange-south-sudan.
World Bank 2015a. Kenya. Towards a national crop and livestock insurance program: Summary of policy suggestions. 
World Bank Group, October 2015.
World Bank 2015b. Kenya. Towards a national crop and livestock insurance program: Background report. World Bank 
Group, October 2015.
World Bank. 2018a. Kenya’s pastoralists protect assets from drought risk with financial protection, 2018. https://www.
worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2018/11/05/kenyas-pastoralists-protect-assets-from-drought-risk-with-
financial-protection.
World Bank. 2018b. Somalia: country partnership framework for the period FY19-FY22. https://documents.worldbank.
org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail.
———. 2019. World Bank Open Data. 2019. https://data.worldbank.org/.
———. 2020a. Country overview – Eritrea. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/eritrea/overview.
———. 2020b. Country overview – Ethiopia. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ethiopia/overview.
———. 2020c. Country overview – South Sudan. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/southsudan/overview.
118 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
———. 2020d. Country overview – Sudan. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/sudan/overview.
———. 2020e. Country overview – Uganda. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/uganda/overview.
———. 2020f. Global financial inclusion: DataBank. 2020. https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.
aspx?source=1228.
———. 2020g. Systematic country diagnostic – Kenya. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/531731600090213005/pdf/Kenya-Systematic-Country-Diagnostic.pdf.
———. 2020h. The World Bank in Djibouti – Overview. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/djibouti/overview.
———. 2020i. Somalia – Data. World Bank Open Data. 2020. https://data.worldbank.org/country/somalia.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 119
Annex A: Livestock organizations in Djibouti
Table 1: Livestock associations.
Location 
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
(app)
Association DALAL- Obock, 2004 Individuals Improvement of livelihoods Government of Forage management through Export market Goats, sheep, Mr. Abdalla
AFITO D’Obock Djibouti (20) through education support; Japan, WFP, Action WFP; enhancing members’ (Yemen); local camel, cattle
support pastoral communities Against Hunger, livelihoods through provision market
through provision of NEALCO of health facilities and 
waterpoints, bring individual education support.
members together.
Djibouti Ambouli, 2005 Cooperative Provide support to members FAO, SDC, French Capacity building through Local market Goats (number Email: ado.
Agro-pastoral Arta route (37); in agro-pastoral areas in cooperation, training, information sharing cannot be okieh@
Association individuals livestock production, resource Ministry of and experience-sharing ascertained) gmail.com, 
(327) mobilization from donors, Agriculture, WFP, within the eastern Africa eaff.org
improvement of livelihoods E.A. Farmers’ region.
(provision of water). Federation, China, 
Japan, IGAD
Association des Nagad, 2015 Individuals Development and Directorate of Assist farmers in marketing Local market Chickens (200), Mr. Yonis 
femmes jardinieres Djibouti (8) improvement of chicken and Livestock, Fisheries and selling poultry products goats Adar, 
(Planters goat production. and Agriculture, and goats. yonisadar@
association of FAO, AfDB, yahoo.
women) Drought Resilience fr, 253 
and Sustainable 77812037
Livelihood Program 
for the Horn of Africa 
I and III
120 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Location 
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
(app)
No. 23 Commune 2003 Individuals European Union, Database creation of N/A N/A (they are paixlait@
Balbala, cite (40) FAO, UNICEF, livestock producers, not livestock intnet.dj
55 Action against consumers and market for producers)
Hunger, CEWARN, dairy farming; capacity 
NEALCO, Ministry of building through training on 
Agriculture disease surveillance in small 
ruminants.
La Caravne du Cite Arhiba 2012 It aims to improve the FAO, UNDP, Action Capacity development Local market Sheep, goats dadalarho@
Development de livelihood quality of the against Hunger, SOS through training in agriculture (100) gmail.com
Gobaad population of the Gobaad SAHEL, European and livestock management; 
region by acting on the levers Union providing market access 
of development such as to its members, policy and 
education, agro-pastoralism advocacy.
and livestock.
Source: ICPALD website 2020 (IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development).
AfDB = African Development Bank.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 121
Annex B: Pastoralist and livestock organizations Ethiopia
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations.
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Afar Pastoralist National/ https://apda-ethiopia.org/ afarpda@gmail.com http://www.fao.org/
Development local pastoralist-knowledge-
Association hub/pastoralist-networks/
database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979825/ 
Aged and Children National/ http://www. ali.sh@ +251 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralists local agedandchildren.org agedandchildren.org 118602432 pastoralist-knowledge-
Association hub/pastoralist-networks/
database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979826/ 
Community Initiative National/ 1991 To support in the communities of http://www.cifakenya. ibrasora@yahoo.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Facilitation and local Marsabit County of northern Kenya co.ke/ 692102115 pastoralist-knowledge-
Assistance and southern Ethiopia through hub/pastoralist-networks/
support for the initiatives in livestock, database-of-organization/
environment, peacebuilding and details/en/c/979845/ 
economic diversification.
Ethiopia Muslim’s National/ 1994 EMRDA’s overall objective is to be https://www.emrda.org/ emrda@ethionet.et +251 http://www.fao.org/
Relief and local a strong integrated development 113482463 pastoralist-knowledge-
Development organization in the fight against hub/pastoralist-networks/
Association poverty for better livelihoods, database-of-organization/
particularly in rural and pastoral details/en/c/979828/ 
areas.
122 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Ethiopian Pastoralist National/ eparda@ethionet.et http://www.fao.org/
Research and local pastoralist-knowledge-
Development hub/pastoralist-networks/
Association database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979827/ 
Friends of Lake National/ 2010 Friends of Lake Turkana is a http:// afd@ethionet.et http://www.fao.org/
Turkana local grassroots organization that friendsoflaketurkana.org/ pastoralist-knowledge-
works with and on behalf of the hub/pastoralist-networks/
communities within the greater database-of-organization/
Lake Turkana basin to demand their details/en/c/979829/ 
collective social, environmental, 
economic, cultural and territorial 
rights.
Gayo Pastoral National/ 2003 GPDI works with pastoral https://gpdi-ethio.org/ gpdi@gpdi-ethio.org +251 http://www.fao.org/
Development local communities in Oromia Regional 114664375 pastoralist-knowledge-
Initiative Sates (Ethiopia). The overall goal of hub/pastoralist-networks/
GPDI is to improve socio-economic database-of-organization/
conditions and promote sustainable details/en/c/979830/ 
livelihoods of pastoral communities.
Horn of Africa International HAVOYOCO’s vision is to alleviate http://www.havoyoco.org yohannes2001@ +251 http://www.fao.org/
Voluntary Youth poverty through sustainable yahoo.com 911505428 pastoralist-knowledge-
Communities development. hub/pastoralist-networks/
database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979831/ 
Labata Fantalle National/ labatafantalle@gmail. +251 http://www.fao.org/
Organization local com 911093985 pastoralist-knowledge-
hub/pastoralist-networks/
database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979832/ 
Ogaden Welfare National/ 1999 OWDA focuses on capacity building https://www.owda.org.et/ olmarei.lang@gmail. +254 http://www.fao.org/
and Development local to empower communities, especially com 20202543 pastoralist-knowledge-
Association women, to protect their rights and hub/pastoralist-networks/
participate in power, decision- database-of-organization/
making activities. details/en/c/979858/ 
Oromia Pastoralist National/ 2006 To contribute to enhancing well- https://www. info@pdnkenya.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Association local being, rising voices and protecting oromiapastoralist.org/ 722810161 pastoralist-knowledge-
right for the pastoralists through hub/pastoralist-networks/
engaging policy advocacy, database-of-organization/
peaceful coexistence and resource details/en/c/979860/ 
management & climate adaptation
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 123
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Pastoralist Forum National/ 1998 To represent and capacitate its pfe@pfe-ethiopia.org +251 http://www.fao.org/
Ethiopia local member organization and contribute 115524582 pastoralist-knowledge-
to sustainable pastoral development hub/pastoralist-networks/
in Ethiopia. database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979835/ 
SOS Sahel Ethiopia International 1989 SOS Sahel Ethiopia is dedicated http://www. SOS.Sahel@ethionet. +251 http://www.fao.org/
to improving the living standards sossahelethiopia.org/ et 911934917 pastoralist-knowledge-
of marginalized pastoralists and hub/pastoralist-networks/
smallholder farmers through better database-of-organization/
management of their environment details/en/c/979837/ 
and improved access to fair and 
sustainable markets.
Source: FAO website 2020.
Table 2: Livestock associations.
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
Ethiopian 2003 EMPEA has 15 • To represent Ministry of • Provide linkages UAE, Jeddah and Meat 251912249130, Mr.Abebaw 
Meat members that the interests of Industry, Ministry from producers Riyadh, Egypt, Kuwait, export-19038 Mekonen, www.empea.com.et, 
Producer- are engaged in the sector in the of Livestock and to the export Qatar and Congo, tons, Live animal Abebaw.m1@gmail.com/empea@
Exporters meat processing international market Fisheries, Ministry market. Bahrain, Kuwait, export-535,620 ethionet.et
Association and export and at government of Trade, Ministry Qatar, Oman, Angola, 
level to ensure of Foreign Affairs, • Identification of Comoros, Vietnam, 
meat products Ethiopian Chamber possible strategic Hong Kong
meet international of Commerce partners and 
standards. and Sectoral supporters. 
Association, USAID
• Lobbying and 
advocacy.
Ethiopian 2011 55 • To enhance policy Agriterra, ENTAG, • Represent and Locally (hotels, Improved and 251911491049, Mr.Fanta Terere, 
Poultry entrepreneurs environment for HAPP, Ministry protect member’s supermarkets, higher commercial www.ethiopoultryassociation.
Producers and (poultry efficient service of Livestock and interests, enhance learning institutions) poultry (which is org , Mesegiz2112@gmail.com, 
Processors production and delivery. Fisheries, Chamber public-private about 10 million) temesgen_alemu@yahoo.com 
Association processing) of Commerce, partnerships. fanta_elere@yahoo.com
• To engage with Ethiopian Dairy and 
other actors within Meat Technology • Awareness 
the value chain. Development creation and 
Industry sensitization.
• To build farmers 
capacity in 
production.
124 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
CSO 
Name Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Type
Ethiopian 2006 Voluntary • To strengthen SNV Ethiopia, • Organize & Locally, export 251 911606492, Mr.Elias Zewdie, 
Honey & membership the apisector by Ministry of present the (European Union, eliaszewdie1@gmail.com
Beeswax base for working with various Livestock and sectors’ problems UAE, Korea, Japan & 
Producers interested stakeholders. Fisheries, Ministry to the concerned USA)
& Exporters parties in the of Trade, Ministry of government 
Association apisector • To assist the Industry, Ethiopian body. 
private sector for Meat & Dairy 
more effective & Development • Identify the 
efficient business Institute problems faced 
operations. by the private 
sector investors 
& work to find 
solutions
Ethiopian 2008 10 unions, 36 • To enhance USDA, ACDI/ • Lobbying and Locally poultry and dairy 251 911346749, Mr. Telaye, www.
Animal Feed feed processors cooperation VOCA, FEED II advocacy. partners EAFIA.com, telate_gt@yahoo.com
Industry and ingredient between the 
Association suppliers members and the • Provide market 
public sector. connection for its 
members. 
• To provide 
technical assistance • Improvement 
and training to its in forage 
members, enhance production.
availability of credit 
facility.
Ethiopian 2004 > 120 members, • To promote USAID-LMD, • Provide linkages Domestic market, Shoats 251 912719161, Meseret 
Livestock 25% domestic domestic and export NEALCO, Mercy from producers export market (279,639), cattle Adugnaw, www.elta.com.et, 
Traders livestock, livestock trade. Corps, Ministry to the export (129, 032), adugnawmeseret@yahoo.com
Association 75% feedlot of Trade, Ministry market, camels (43,299)
operations • To improve public of Foreign Affairs, 
awareness and Ministry of Customs • Condition 
visibility of Ethiopian Authorities, animals in feedlot 
livestock trade. Ministry of areas for export 
Transport market. 
• To develop 
capacity of livestock • lobbying and 
trading. advocacy for 
livestock traders
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 125
CSO 
Name Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Type
Ethiopian 2003 11 (meat • To ensure 11 Export abattoirs • Provide linkages Export: Dubai and 251 912249130/251 116628292, 
Meat processing and Ethiopian meat and slaughter to its members Saudi Arabia Mr.Abebaw Mekonen, www.
Producer- export), five products meet houses to the export empea.com.et , empea@ethionet.
Exporters meat export international market. et/Abebaw.m1@gmail.com
Association abattoirs (under standards. 
development) • Ensure food 
• To promote safety and quality 
Ethiopian meat assurance,
products in the 
international market.
Ethiopian Milk 1914 Milk processors • To facilitate and raw milk suppliers • Lobbying and Domestic African zebus and 2519011228775, Mr Belechew 
Processors as members and serve as bridge distributors advocacy. crosses Elemtu, belachew.elemtu@gmail.
Industry input providers between the government com
Association as associate producer members agencies financial • Capacity 
members and market. institutions building. 
research ad higher 
• To build the learning institutions • Market linkage 
capacities of the and promotion. 
members.
• Research. 
• Resource 
mobilization.
Ethiopian 1928 1500 reg. • Promote and foster 31 tanneries, • Advocacy with China, Italy, within 127,700 pieces of 251911657287/+251 115 15 61 
Leather private traders, the interests of the 16 leather regard to the Africa, UK, Western skins and 7,200 44, Berhanu Abate/Mr. Abdissa 
Industries 26 tanneries,1 leather industry. manufacturers, industry’s views Europe, Middle pieces of hides Adugna, http://www.elia.org.et / 
Association 6 leather 18 shoe in administrative East and Far East, per day for each berhanuabate3@gmail.com/elia@
producer • Promote manufacturers, matters. Southeast Asia tannery elia.org.et,     aalf@elia.org.et
manufacturers, cooperation LIDI, UNDP, 
18 shoe among its members UNIDO, • Coordinate 
manufacturers and establish USAID, Italian capacity-building 
good working Cooperation, ECBP, activities 
relations with other ECF-World Bank, through training 
stakeholders in the COMESA-LLPI programs, panel 
value chain. discussions.
Source: ICPALD website 2020.
126 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Annex C: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in Kenya
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations.
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Action for National/local msheikh@afosc.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Sustainable 720534151 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Change pastoralist-networks/database-
of-organization/details/
en/c/979839/ 
Adakar National/local To work towards the achievement of Apedi.project@gmail. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Peace and the people supported, owned and com 729422160 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development sustainable peace that will enhance pastoralist-networks/database-
Initiatives security and development between of-organization/details/
the Turkana of Kenya and their Topesa en/c/979840/
cousin of S. Sudan.
Agency for National/local APAD contributes towards resolution https:// sam.kimeli@apadkenya. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist of the inherent problems that affect apadkenya. org 722240445 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development nomadic pastoralist communities of wordpress.com/ pastoralist-networks/database-
Loima and cross-border districts of of-organization/details/
Karamoja cluster. en/c/979841/ 
Agency for National/local aspire.organization10 +254 http://www.fao.org/
Strengthening @gmail.com 721256810 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Pastoralist pastoralist-networks/database-
Innovation & of-organization/details/
Resilience en/c/979842/ 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 127
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Alumen National/local apeicbn@yahoo.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist 724725650; pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Empowerment pastoralist-networks/database-
Initiative of-organization/details/
en/c/979844/ 
Arid Lands National/local http://www. Sharun.iman@yahoo. +245 http://www.fao.org/
Development aldef.org com 46421016 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Focus Kenya pastoralist-networks/database-
of-organization/details/
en/c/979843/ 
Centre for National/local 2001 Enhancing economic empowerment http://www. nyangori.ohenjo +254 http://www.fao.org/
Minority Rights of minority and indigenous cemiride.org @cemiride.org 701705620 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development communities; strengthening pastoralist-networks/database-
CEMIRIDE’s institutional capacity. of-organization/details/
en/c/1085582/ 
Community National/local 1991 To contribute towards the http://www. ibrasora@yahoo.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Initiative improvement in the quality of life in cifakenya.co.ke/ 692102115 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Facilitation and the communities of Marsabit County pastoralist-networks/database-
Assistance of northern Kenya and southern of-organization/details/
Ethiopia through support for the en/c/979845/ 
initiatives in livestock, environment, 
peacebuilding and economic 
diversification.
Drylands National/local 2008 A knowledge management and http://www.dlci- info@dlci-hoa.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Learning and advocacy resource organization hoa.org 736851076 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Capacity with the aim of improving policy pastoralist-networks/database-
Building and practice in the Horn of Africa. of-organization/details/
Initiative for Previously known as REGLAP (the en/c/1071517/ 
Improved Policy Regional Learning and Advocacy 
and Practice program), it supports collaborative 
in the Horn of learning and documentation on 
Africa drylands development and advocacy.
128 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Dupoto E-maa National/local 1993 To empower Maa pastoralists dupoto-e-maa@ +2547 http://www.fao.org/
through inclusive quality education africaonline.co.ke 26056855 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
and sustainable land resource use pastoralist-networks/database-
intervention for economic growth, of-organization/details/
high livelihoods and social standards. en/c/979847/ 
Food for the International 1971 FH Kenya’s goal is eradication of uk@fh.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Hungry poverty among the most vulnerable 720239621 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
communities by connecting marginal pastoralist-networks/database-
communities and regions with of-organization/details/
opportunity through economic en/c/979848/ 
empowerment, livelihoods 
development and education. 
Strengthening the resiliency of the 
most vulnerable through program 
implementation.
Horn of Africa National/local 2003 The organization’s mission is to https://www. info@hodiafrica.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Development champion justice and development hodiafrica.org/ 719192313 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Initiative in northern Kenya through advocacy pastoralist-networks/database-
and facilitation of education, of-organization/details/
community cohesion and livelihood en/c/979849/ 
support programs
International National/local Together with our development https://iirr.org/ admin@iirr.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Institute of Rural partners, we build on the unique 202370039 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Reconstruction assets and strengths of the rural pastoralist-networks/database-
people. We focus on learning what of-organization/details/
works for them through research, en/c/979850/ 
action, sharing, and enriching their 
knowledge. We then implement 
field programs that empower rural 
communities.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 129
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Kapitur National/local 2002 KARMA is a grassroot community- info@karmaturkana.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Resources based organization formed in 2002 711636297 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Management by herders, farmers, women and pastoralist-networks/database-
Association youth to fight hunger, poverty and of-organization/details/
unemployment in order to uplift en/c/979851/ 
the living standards of the Turkana 
community which has fallen out of 
pastoralist lifeline.
Kenya Livestock National/local 2000 To improve the livelihoods and http:// klmc@livestockcouncil. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Marketing resilience of pastoral communities livestockcouncil. or.ke 203746549 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Council and other livestock keepers/ or.ke pastoralist-networks/database-
producers by providing services that of-organization/details/
effectively respond to their needs. en/c/979846/ 
League of National/local 2007 Our mission is to build pastoralist contact@lpwk.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist women’s leadership capacity and 202513360 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Women of Kenya foster participation in a broad sense, pastoralist-networks/database-
with a focus on economic and social of-organization/details/
empowerment as well as political en/c/979852/ 
engagement.
Lotus Kenya National/local 2003 LOKADO is a community-driven local https://lokadoke. lomeds@gmail.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Action for organization formed by members wordpress.com/ 722652268 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development from Lokichoggio, Oropoi and about/ pastoralist-networks/database-
organization Kakuma divisions in 2003. The major of-organization/details/
driving factor was to assist address en/c/979853/ 
the cross-border violent conflict 
experienced among the Turkana 
pastoralist and their neighbours from 
Uganda and South Sudan.
130 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Mainyoito National/local 2000 MPIDO curves its niche into pursuing mpido@mpido.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist food security, climate change 722303233 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development mitigation, governance and conflict pastoralist-networks/database-
Organization transformation, natural resource of-organization/details/
management, gender equity, and en/c/979854/ 
HIV & AIDS responses targeting Maa 
pastoralists.
Merti Integrated National/local 2003 Envision an empowered, just, https://www. info@midpkenya.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Development equitable and resilient society in midpkenya.org/ 721109171 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Program northern Kenya cross-cutting- pastoralist-networks/database-
themes/ of-organization/details/
en/c/1074451/ 
Northern Kenya National/local NORKENYA is set to be the region’s http://nkcaucus. nbi.nkc@gmail.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Caucus leading organization to help the blogspot.it/ 726722226 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
communities attain self-sufficiency, pastoralist-networks/database-
survival, peace, protection, of-organization/details/
development and participation. en/c/979855/ 
Northern National/local 2004 The Northern Rangelands Trust was https://www.nrt- info@nrt-kenya.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Rangelands Trust set up in 2004 in northern Kenya kenya.org/ 701555000 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
by a coalition of local leaders, pastoralist-networks/database-
politicians and conservation of-organization/details/
interests. Its mission is to develop en/c/979856/ 
resilient community conservancies, 
which transform people’s lives, 
secure peace and conserve natural 
resources.
Oloip Lenkerai National/local 2010 To promote and ensure sustainable +254 http://www.fao.org/
Organization livelihoods in a safe and secure 724591564 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
environment. pastoralist-networks/database-
of-organization/details/
en/c/979859/ 
Pastoral Girls National/local 2001 To enhance socioeconomic status of info@pastoralistgirls.org +254 202165 http://www.fao.org/
Initiative pastoralist community in the targeted 376 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
counties by developing alternative pastoralist-networks/database-
sources of livelihood. of-organization/details/
en/c/979861/ 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 131
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Pastoralist National/local 1996 PISP exists to reduce poverty and https://www. admin@pisp.org +254 http://www.fao.org/
Integrated vulnerability amongst pastoralist pisp.org 2102201 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Support Program communities in Marsabit County /index.php/en/ pastoralist-networks/database-
through provision of appropriate of-organization/details/
community empowerment strategies en/c/979862/ 
for enhanced and sustainable 
development.
Pastoralist National/local 1998 To be a critical parliamentary https://dlci- pworg@ethionet.et +251 http://www.fao.org/
Parliamentary force that ensures security, unity hoa.org/ppg/ 116626407 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Group and prosperity for pastoralists overview pastoralist-networks/database-
communities in Kenya. To of-organization/details/
provide political leadership in the en/c/979836/ 
development and implementation of 
policies and legislation that achieve 
pastoralism full potential.
Pastoralist National/local 2006 PWHE objectives are enhanced local https://www. Pastoralistwomenhealth +254 http://www.fao.org/
Women for and inclusive governance, strong pastrolists education@yahoo.com 726844850 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Health and community groups/champion for women.org/ pastoralist-networks/database-
Education peace and good leader, access to about-us/ of-organization/details/
quality health and education services en/c/979864/ 
for pastoralist children, to diversify 
income for women and youth, to 
advocate for change for vulnerable 
groups especially the pastoralist 
communities, women and youth, 
diversify and growth of funding base 
for PWHE.
Pastoralists National/local 2008 PACIDA empowers pastoralist http://pacida. pacida@pacida.org +254 20265 http://www.fao.org/
Community communities through sustainable org/ 6947 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Initiative for community-driven development pastoralist-networks/database-
Development interventions. For instance, the of-organization/details/
livelihoods program seeks to en/c/979865/ 
increase the incomes of households 
within the ASAL regions of northern 
Kenya and southern Ethiopia by 
facilitating better access, control and 
management of available community 
resources. 
132 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Resilience and National/local To alleviate poverty, mitigate and adhiambotracyl@yahoo. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Development manage disasters, minimize impact com 703662311 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Action in Kenya of HIV/AIDs, and improve agricultural pastoralist-networks/database-
production for the poor, vulnerable of-organization/details/
and marginalized people, groups and en/c/979866/ 
communities in Kenya.
Rural Agency National/local RACIDA’s mission is to enhance self- https://racida. racidamandera@yahoo. +254 http://www.fao.org/
for Community reliance and prosperity amongst org/ com 4652368 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development vulnerable pastoralist communities pastoralist-networks/database-
and Assistance living in northern Kenya through of-organization/details/
promotion of better livelihood en/c/979867/ 
systems, sustainable use of 
natural resources and community 
empowerment.
Samburu National/local 2009 We exist to empower human rights http://www. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Women Trust of women and girls in pastoralists samburu 622031822 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
communities; strengthening their womentrust.org/ pastoralist-networks/database-
capacity to influence local and of-organization/details/
national policies; and address silent en/c/979868/ 
harmful traditional cultural practices 
through integrating the role of 
women as decision makers in the 
community.
Turkana National/local 2002 TuDOF is dedicated to improving https://namati. tudof2008@yahoo.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Development enjoyment of human rights and root org/network/ 717414370 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Organization for democratic governance among organization/ pastoralist-networks/database-
Forum the people of Turkana County in tudof/ of-organization/details/
northwest Kenya. en/c/979869/ 
Turkana National/local 1998 To advocate for the conservation/ Philip_ekolong@ yahoo. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Environmental reservation and useful utilization of com 710245998 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Resources environmental natural resources, pastoralist-networks/database-
Association and promote and facilitate inter- of-organization/details/
and intra-community cooperation en/c/979870/ 
and collaboration amongst the co-
existing diversified communities.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 133
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Turkana National/local 2000 TUPADO work towards the realization tupadongo@gmail.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist of an empowered gender-sensitive 202352296 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development pastoralist community capable pastoralist-networks/database-
Organization of initiating and sustaining its of-organization/details/
development activities by utilizing en/c/979871/ 
the available local resources to 
improve livelihoods using the Asset 
Based Community Development 
approach.
Wajir Paralegal National/local 2008 To empower pastoralist communities wajirparalegaln@yahoo. +254 http://www.fao.org/
Network to understand their basic com 729844964 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
(WAPNET) constitutional rights and enable them pastoralist-networks/database-
hold service providers/duty bearers of-organization/details/
accountable for better service en/c/1071535/ 
delivery. 
Wajir Peace and National/local 2002 To promote self-reliance of the Wajir wajirpeace@gmail.com +254 http://www.fao.org/
Development people by partnering with others 724873621 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Agency to develop sustainable peace and pastoralist-networks/database-
livelihoods. of-organization/details/
en/c/1074453/ 
Source: FAO website 2020.
134 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Table 2: Livestock associations.
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
Kenya 2000 22,000 To organize livestock OXFARM, Cordaid, Supporting its members in Local market Cattle, goats, klmc@livestockcouncil.
Livestock marketing and provide a SNV, ILRI, Land on facilitating market access, & UAE camels, or.ke, livestockcouncil@
Marketing conducive environment to Lakes donkeys gmail.com,
Council promote livestock trade. capacity building and resource 
mobilization. www.livestockcouncil.
or.ke
Kenya Camel 1997 1,230 Contribution to research Natural Research Promotion and facilitation of Under Camels kenya.camel@gmail.
Association through provision of training Institute, GIZ-Marsabit, production and marketing of development com
on livestock production the Government of camel trade  
and veterinary services in Kenya, World Bank, 
University of Nairobi. National Drought policy and advocacy 
Management 
Authority training and research.
Kenya 2004 100,000 To provide a network platform Ministry of Agriculture, • Advocacy and lobbying, policy Local market- All klpakenya@gmail.com, 
Livestock for all livestock producers & Council of Governors intervention, provision of training through trade domesticated www.klpakenya.org
Producers provide market linkages and & private sector. of farmers and conducting trade fairs. livestock and 
Association opportunities to its members. fairs. emerging 
(quails, 
crocodile)
Eastern and 2004 To promote initiatives in the COMESA, RNDP, • Participation in the African East and Dairy animals secretariat@dairyafrica.
Southern dairy industry & contribute MPO, TAMPA, UDPA, Dairy Conference and Exhibition, South Africa and their com, 
Africa Dairy towards shaping the policy EMPPA, ZDIT ESADA trade & exchange products www.dairyafrica.com
Association environment for trade in dairy missions. Capacity building in 
products in the region. provision of relevant training to 
its members.
Kenya Fish 2000 Fish To enhance sustainable Fishermen, Fish • Increase capacity of fish export. Mainly Nile perch, admin@afipek.org, 
Processors Exporters fisheries supply, enhance and agents, MoALF, KAM, Europe (70%) octopus, 
& Exporters promote marketing of fish and KPSA • Provide linkage with regional lobsters, www.afipek.org
Association enhance effective fish safety, fisheries operators in Uganda and live crabs, 
quality assurance and cleaner Tanzania through the regional squids, marine 
production. association. ornamentals
Kenya Poultry 2005 7,653 • To advance poultry farmers MoALF, KPBA, AKFM, • Advocacy and lobbying. Linking our All types of info@
Farmers interests, facilitate dialogue Kenya National farmers poultry kenyapoultryfarmers.
Association between stakeholders and Farmers Federation, • Training. to market org/www.
engage with other actors Poultry Association of outlets kenyapoultryfarmers.
within the value chain. East Africa • Market linkages. org, 0722 406390
• Information dissemination.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 135
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
Dairy Goat 1993 12,000 • Raising the income of Government • Buck rotation Locally and Approximately dgak@jambo.co.ke, 
Association of its members and enhance of Kenya of countrywide 50,000 www.dgakenya.org
Kenya their food security through Kenya,KLBO,KAGRIC • Artificial Insemination 
increasing their capabilities 
and skills in dairy goat • Marketing of breeding stock 
breeding. • Identification and registration 
of dairy goats • Training
Association of Contact: Dr Humphrey 
Kenya Feeds Mbugua, hcwmbugua@
Manufacturers yahoo.com, 
0725159104
Kenya Contact: DrJohn 
National Mutunga, 0723903957, 
Farmers producers@kenfap.org 
Federation http://www.kenaff.org/
Kenya Dairy 1958 Active To organize, regulate and National government, • Licensing of milk handling Local and Name: Racheal 
Board develop efficient production, county government, premises. Export Gatei, 0722573432/ 
market distribution and supply donor agencies, dairy market 0733521438, info@kdb.
of dairy produce, To improve development partners • Inspection of milk handling co.ke, http://www.kdb.
the quality of dairy produce. premises. co.ke
• Surveillance on the quality and 
safety of milk and milk products.
Kenya 1994 16,000 • To improve livestock MoALF, LRC, ILRI, KDB, • Setting up livestock registration  East Africa All livestock Name: Leonard 
Livestock breeding through effective farmer cooperatives, rules  in  liaison with  the  breed  species (cattle, Mukhebi0722907686, 
Breeders and efficient livestock farmers/livestock societies sheep, pigs, lmukhebi@gmail.com/ 
Organization registration and recording. breeders, K AGRC goats, poultry) info@klbo.co.ke, www.
• Registration and issuance of klbo.co.ke
certificates for both grade and 
pedigree stock.
Kenya Pig 2009 834 • Advocacy and capacity Government of • Advocacy and capacity building Locally There are info@kenpig.org  
Farmers building of members. Kenya, Pig Policy and of members. several types akireria@gmail.com  
Association Strategy, National of pig genetics silvester.muigah@gmail.
• Support members Livestock Associations • Support members for e.g. large com
for improvement of pig improvement of pig value chain white, landress, 
value chain (production (production management, duroc).
management, processing and processing and products).
products).
Source: ICPALD website 2020.
136 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Annex D: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in 
Somalia
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations.
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Agricultural National/local Focusing on securing livelihoods of http://adosom.org dosomalia@yahoo.com +252 http://www.fao.org/
Development communities through intervention 24429664 pastoralist-knowledge-
Organization aimed at food sovereignty including hub/pastoralist-networks/
access to clean water and sanitation database-of-organization/
for communities we work with. details/en/c/979875/ 
Candlelight National/local 1995 Candlelight strives to bring about http://www. candasli@yahoo.com +252 http://www.fao.org/
positive changes in communities candlelightsomal.org 523146 pastoralist-knowledge-
through environmental hub/pastoralist-networks/
conservation, provision of database-of-organization/
quality education and creation of details/en/c/979876/ 
awareness rising on health issues.
Gargaar Relief National/local 1992 GREDO focuses so much on aspects http://www.gredosom. info@gredosom.org http://www.fao.org/
Development of emergency, humanitarian org pastoralist-knowledge-
Organization responses and development/ hub/pastoralist-networks/
resilience programs. database-of-organization/
details/en/c/979877/ 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 137
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Humanitarian International 1992 Our mission today is to save lives info@hardo-ea.org http://www.fao.org/
Action for Relief and create sustainable socio- pastoralist-knowledge-
and Development economic development for hub/pastoralist-networks/
Organization vulnerable groups and needy database-of-organization/
communities in the Horn of Africa. details/en/c/979879/ 
Somaliland Pastoral National/local 2006 To empower pastoralists and abdikarim.daud@ +252 http://www.fao.org/
Forum agro-pastoralists to secure their solpaf.org 634448747 pastoralist-knowledge-
livelihoods, influence institutions to hub/pastoralist-networks/
be responsive to pastoralists’ and database-of-organization/
agro-pastoralists’ needs. details/en/c/979880/ 
Source: FAO.
Table 2: Livestock associations.
Name Location (app.) Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
Nafaqo Meat Hargeisa, Half 2001 3500 FAO, Ministry Selling meat, Local Cattle, goats, NAFAQOHargeisa@
Association London of Livestock slaughtering sheep, yahoo.com
livestock. camels
Somaliland Hargeisa, Half 2012 21 To improve veterinary FAO, TERA Community Cows, goats, Hornspca@gmail.
Veterinary London services to ensure food NOUVA, ICITE animal health camels, com
Association security. worker training. sheep
Maandeq Hargeisa 2005 85 To ensure quality meat Ministry of Slaughtering of Local market Cattle, mdeek@hotmail.com
Slaughterhouse produce in Hargeisa; to Livestock, local livestock. camels, 
provide hygienic meat government, goats, sheep, 
standards in Hargeisa. FAO poultry
Somaliland Meat FAO Training of the Cows, goats, 
Development livestock farmers. camels
Association
Assal Youth 2001 25 To improve peoples’ living Ministry of Trainings and Goats, 
Development standards in rural areas. Livestock DRRA. camels, cows
African House 2008 15 To improve livestock FAO, Ministry Conducting Goats, cows, idaan54@gmail.com
production in Somaliland. of Livestock trainings for camels
livestock farmers.
Somaliland 2001 83 To provide training to the FAO, UN Training, Local Goats, cows, sowdaze@gmail.com
Livestock Network livestock communities OCHA, enterprising camels
to ensure livestock Ministry of people in rural 
development. Livestock areas.
138 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Ubale Poultry Farm 2000 13 To ensure quality poultry DAI, World Training of Local Poultry UbalePF@gmail.com
Association production. Bank farmers, 
providing 
livestock farmers 
with information 
on drugs.
Somaliland Youth 2016 12 Lobbying and advocacy in Ministry of Rearing of Local Goats, cows, 
Public Health livestock farming. Livestock, FAO livestock. camels
Association
Source: ICPALD website 2020.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 139
Annex E: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in South 
Sudan
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations.
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Assistance Mission for National/ 2002 Focusing on securing livelihoods of http://www. jubaama@gmail. +211 http://www.fao.org/
Africa local communities through intervention amasouthsudan.org com 955224368 pastoralist-knowledge-
aimed at food sovereignty including hub/pastoralist-
access to clean water and secured networks/database-of-
sanitation for communities we work organization/details/
with. en/c/1070585/ 
Source: FAO website 2020.
Table 2: Livestock associations.
Name Location Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Market base Livestock Contacts
NICODO Dairy Jubek 1983 82 Train pastoralists, provide OXFAM, WFP, Milk processing Local/domestic Cattle, goats Nicodoorg@gmail.
Associations veterinary services to pastoralists, UNICEF and promotion. com
collect milk and process.
Butchers Union Ladjor 1986 20 Improvement of meat Traders, GOSS Buy, slaughter, Local Cows, 
Ladjor State State environment, produce quality sell. goats, 
meat. sheep
Central Equatorial Jubek state 2009 To promote poultry techniques, MCF, MARF, Broiler Juba town and Broiler Jami_jele@yahoo.
Poultry Association train farmers. USAD and layers some states (2,000) com.au
production, 
training farmers.
140 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Lainya Poultry Yei River, 2013 17 Improve community livelihood and Local and Local feed Local/domestic Poultry Lainya@yahoo.com
Association state increase production. international formulation (300)
NGOs and poultry 
production.
Hides and Skin Latjor state 2009 18 to make people speak with one Butchers, Collect hides, Export to Cattle, 
Group voice so that they have access to traders, GOSS treat them by Khartoum goats, 
market and determine price. salting then sell. sheep
Jebel Group Poultry Jubek state 2008 10 Improve chicken quality meat. N/A Import chicken Local Chicken for 
Farm from Uganda meat
and sell in South 
Sudan.
Bari Anigo 2006 21 To change livelihoods of members, GOSS, Rearing chicks, Local markets 900 Jami_jele@yahoo.
Intergrated Farm have good technical poultry ideas traders, cultivate greens within Juba chickens com.au
and to have more products for training from and vegetables.
export. NGOs
Butchers Union Western 2008 26 To avoid cattle rustling and under N/A Buy and sell Local Cattle, goats
Rumbek Lakes payment during selling. cows.
(Rumbek)
Jonglei Fisheries 2012 17 To empower members of the N/A Purchasing fish Local Fish
Association association, to establish a market from fishermen 
system, to assist members of the and selling them 
association to make a profit. to the target 
market.
Terekeka Butchers 2010 24 To encourage quality meat N/A Slaughtering, Local market Cows, goats
Association production. selling of meat 
products.
Alesoka Fisheries 2012 100 To freeze fish, to provide efficient N/A Fishing, selling Local Fish
Association and quality storage facilities for of fish produce.
fish.
Butchers Union 2013 14 To represent any program for Government Market access. Local market Cows, coats
WAU butchers’ unions, to organize and of S.S
put things in order.
Pastoralists 2013 25 To keep animals for economic use, Government Gather Local, exports Cattle, 
Association to control livestock diseases, to of S.S livestock, find (hides and skin) goats, 
increase beef production. market for sheep
its livestock 
members, 
negotiate 
pricing.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 141
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Butcher Association 2014 20 Government Provide Cows, goats
Rejat County of S.S market access, 
slaughtering.
Butchers Traders 2014 100 Local market Cattle, goats
Union
Source: ICPALD website 2020.
142 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Annex F: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in Sudan
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations.
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Al Massar Charity National/local 2001 Reduction of resource-based conflict, http://almassar. hq@almassar.org +249 http://www.fao.org/
Organization for Nomads enrolment & retention of nomadic org/ 120796149 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Development and children in basic education, increased pastoralist-networks/database-
Environment Conservation access for nomadic pastoralists to of-organization/details/
primary health care, improved supply en/c/979953/ 
& management of resources, improved 
animal health and animal production.
Arab Organization for Intergovernmental 1970 The overall objective of the AOAD is to http://www.aoad. info@aoad.org +249 http://www.fao.org/
Agricultural Development identify and develop linkages between org/indexeng.htm 18347217683 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
Arab countries, and coordinate all pastoralist-networks/database-
agricultural and agricultural-related of-organization/details/
activities amongst them. en/c/979954/ 
Fellowship for African Relief International 1985 FAR is a Canadian, Christian NGO info@farsudan. +249 http://www.fao.org/
which has been working in Sudan org 183231233 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
for 25 years providing relief and pastoralist-networks/database-
development to the country’s most of-organization/details/
vulnerable people. en/c/979955/ 
Vet Care National/local 2003 VCO aims at empowering rural http://vetcare-sd. info@vetcare-sd. +249 http://www.fao.org/
communities to enable them to org/ org 120344073 pastoralist-knowledge-hub/
improve their livelihood and food pastoralist-networks/database-
security. of-organization/details/
en/c/979956/ 
Source: FAO.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 143
Table 2: Livestock associations
Location Market 
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock Contacts
(app.) base
Sudanese Hide and Industrial 1940 All exporters • To organize member tanneries, • Participate in Italy, Cattle hide 249 912302013, 
Skins Exporters area, from raw to exporters to have port of Sudan international leather Spain, (3 million Eng. Marwan, 
Union of Sudanese Khartoum tanned, leather information on exports. authority, Niala, trade fairs. Turkey, pieces (60%)), marwan@
Chamber of North traders and exporters Brazil, goats (12 sudanmail-net-
Commerce tanneries. • To facilitate export • Network and provide India, million pieces  sd
procedures with linkages with other China, (80%)), sheep 
government. leather associations. Egypt, (15 million 
Syria (80%)), 
camels 
(500,000 
pieces (25%)).
Chamber of Fish Omurdman 1991 Owners of • To promote the Feed • Enhancement of Locally to 50,000 tons 249 912213597, 
Producers boats, traders development of fish companies, production of fishnets. hotels and per year Adam Nasr, 
and fishermen. sector. union of restaurants adamn222@
chamber of • Production of feed from hotmail.com
• To facilitate and agriculture fish remains.
promote interaction and animal 
with other relevant and production
related associations.
Meat Processors Chamber of 2012 21 factories • To promote Government, • Policy development Locally 249 912338891, 
Sub-Chamber Commerce, privatization and NEALCO, and legislation. Mr. Yassir 
Gamhoria innovativeness in meat suppliers Abdukarim, 
Street, in attaining international • Promotion of national info@
Khartoum, quality standards. interest in meat industry. sudanindustry1.
Sudan org
• Facilitate the process of 
obtaining international 
quality assurance 
standards.
Meat Exporters Chamber of 1990 Exporters: • Ensure meat products NEALCO, • Resource mobilization Gulf 8099.612 249 
Sub-Chamber Commerce, individual meet international government operating tons; Cattle 123000709, Dr. 
Gamhoria (18), family standards as well • lobbying and policy council (2168.078), Khalid Magboul, 
Street, companies (3). as the promotion of development. countries Sheep khmragaa@
Khartoum, meat products in the (GCC), (2337.657), yahoo.com
Sudan international market. • Facilitation of trade and MENA, Goats 
promotion of conducive Malasyia, (176.158), 
business environment. locally Camels 
(8.908) (for 
the year 2016)
144 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Location Market 
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock Contacts
(app.) base
Chamber of Africa 2002 Producers, • Promote policy NEALCO, • Facilitate trade and Locally Camels (4.85 249 
Livestock, Meat and street, slaughter house development on government, supply of livestock. million, cattle 123000709, Dr. 
Slaughter House Union of owners, traders. livestock meat and traders, feed (30.926 Khalid Magboul, 
chamber of slaughterhouses. suppliers and • Capacity development million), khmragaa@
agriculture processors, to its members. goats (31.569 yahoo.com
and animal meat and million), 
production livestock • Construction of sheep 
exporters slaughter houses. (40.725 
 • Resource mobilization. million)
Livestock Exporter Chamber of 1990 Exporters: • To promote domestic NEALCO, • Facilitate trade and GCC, Sheep 249 
Sub-chamber Commerce, individuals and export livestock government, supply of livestock. Saudi (4,411,956), 123000709/ 
Gamhoria (600), family trade in meeting Arabia goats 249 
Street, companies (10). international quality • Capacity development (accounts (271,647), 9912225182, 
Khartoum, standards. to its members. to 98% camels Dr. Khalid 
Sudan exports) (220,665), Magboul, 
• Advocacy and cattle Mr Al Nassir, 
development of policies. (100,655) khmragaa@
(total yahoo.com
5,004,923)
Traders of Sheep Omurdman 1990 Individuals • To provide linkages livestock • Promote trade 900,000 per 249 
and Goats SELAM (4,000) to potential investors, exporters, environment to year 912299422, 
(export market) producers and buyers in meat exporters, exporters. Mr. Alsarik, 
the international market. NEALCO, govt, khmragaa@
locality govt. yahoo.com
Mouleh Export Omurdman 1992 Producers and • To provide linkages govt, NEALCO • Facilitate trade and Locally 1.04 million 249 123303731, 
Market (cattle) traders to potential investors, export of cattle. tonnes Mr. Hussein, 
producers and buyers in khmragaa@
the international market. yahoo.com
Dairy Sub-Chamber Nile 2002 Dairy farmers • To represent the dairy Dairy plants, • To create a portfolio to Locally, Hybrid cows 249 912398547, 
Avenue, (primary), input farmers at the different Feed millers, finance the activity of the regional ( 593250), Zubeir Ibrahim 
Kuwait suppliers & forums to advocate Artificial Sector; assist farmers and market local breeds Mohamed, 
Building 3rd dairy processing for their development insemination farmers group to develop in Saudi (13,918,510), nilesun@
tower (associate) needs, capacity building providers, milk collection centres. Arabia hybrid goats hotmail.com
of producers and all Government and Gulf (740,135)
employee in the sector. extension countries, 
services Egypt
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 145
Location Market 
Name Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock Contacts
(app.) base
Poultry Sub- 2002 Companies, • To engage with other NEALCO, • Capacity building Locally 100,000 tons 249 912393184, 
Chamber individual actors and engage with Government, through organization of meat Mr. Ayaad 
farmers stakeholders within the producers of trainings and skill George
value chain; to improve development.
the capacity of producers 
in sustainable poultry • Policy dialogue to 
production. create better business 
environment.
Source: ICPALD website 2020.
146 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Annex G: Pastoralist and livestock organizations in 
Uganda
Table 1: Pastoralist organizations.
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Africa Climate International ACCRA champions development https://www.odi.org/ Tracy_Kajumba@wvi.org http://www.fao.org/
Change planning, which is adaptive to projects/2554-africa- pastoralist-knowledge-
Resilience climate change, grounded in the climate-change hub/pastoralist-
Alliance, Uganda needs and priorities of citizens, -resilience-alliance-phase-2 networks/database-of-
and equitable towards women, organization/details/
girls, boys and men. en/c/979887/ 
Caritas Kotido National/ 1991 Self-reliant, just and peaceful http://www.caritaskotido. kotidocaritas@gmail.com +256 http://www.fao.org/
Diocese local community with sustainable org 772605387 pastoralist-knowledge-
livelihoods and social services. hub/pastoralist-
networks/database-of-
organization/details/
en/c/1095234/ 
Coalition of National/ 2005 To provide a platform for civil info@copacso.org +256 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist local society organizations to engage 414697137 pastoralist-knowledge-
Civil Society with policy formulation and hub/pastoralist-
Organizations advocacy for the recognition networks/database-of-
of pastoralism as a way of life organization/details/
and the right of pastoralists to en/c/979888/ 
benefit from national and local 
resources.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 147
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Dodoth Agro National/ 1996 To empower agro-pastoralists https://www.weadapt. simonpeter.lomoe@dadoug.org +256 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist local in Dodoth to fully take control org/organisation/dado 392176417 pastoralist-knowledge-
Development of own development pursuits, hub/pastoralist-
Organization improve animal health, networks/database-of-
agriculture, livestock production organization/details/
and marketing, livelihood en/c/979889/ 
diversification, human rights 
protection and peace building.
Ecological National/ 2005 To promote transparent, eco@ecouganda.org +256 http://www.fao.org/
Christian local accountable, sustainable and 464660273 pastoralist-knowledge-
Organization equitable management of land hub/pastoralist-
and extractive mineral. networks/database-of-
organization/details/
en/c/1105931/ 
To build community resilience 
through increasing adaptive 
capacity to climate change and 
other natural hazards. 
Biodiversity conservation and 
community resource use.
Gender and National/ 2012 Sustainable production, gloryuganda.org@gmail.com +256 http://www.fao.org/
Livelihoods local improved livelihood and 392126791 pastoralist-knowledge-
Opportunities household socio-economic hub/pastoralist-
for Rural Youth transformation and food security networks/database-of-
in Karamoja attained. organization/details/
en/c/979890/ 
Jie Community National/ 2004 To create and ensure a peaceful, jicahwa@gmail.com http://www.fao.org/
Animal Health local viable, resilient community with pastoralist-knowledge-
Workers improved healthy animals, better hub/pastoralist-
Association livelihoods where community networks/database-of-
livestock assets and other natural organization/details/
resources are not threatened by en/c/979891/ 
natural hazards.
148 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Kaabong National/  KAPDA was formed by a group https://www.peaceinsight. lokwangp1@yahoo.com +256 http://www.fao.org/
Peace and local of peacemakers from the org/conflicts/uganda/ 772959094 pastoralist-knowledge-
Development Karamoja sub-region following peacebuilding- hub/pastoralist-
Agency a period of insecurity including organisations/kapda/ networks/database-of-
cattle raids and theft, cross- organization/details/
border conflicts, land disputes, en/c/979892/ 
domestic violence and many 
other types of dispute. 
Karamoja National/ http://www.kdfug.org/ ed@kdfug.org +256 http://www.fao.org/
Development local 773044910 pastoralist-knowledge-
Forum hub/pastoralist-
networks/database-of-
organization/details/
en/c/979894/ 
Nakapiripirit National/ Nakapiripiritcivilsocietyforum +256 http://www.fao.org/
Civil Society local @gmail.com 773965611 pastoralist-knowledge-
Forum hub/pastoralist-
networks/database-of-
organization/details/
en/c/979896/ 
Nakasongola National/ samuelkaweesi2014@gmail.com +256 http://www.fao.org/
Pastoralist local 772403335 pastoralist-knowledge-
Association hub/pastoralist-
networks/database-of-
organization/details/
en/c/979897/ 
Riamiriam Civil National/ 2003 To strengthen civil society Riamiriamkaramojanetwork +256 http://www.fao.org/
Society Network local organizations through @gmail.com 759441129 pastoralist-knowledge-
coordination and capacity hub/pastoralist-
building for self-reliant networks/database-of-
communities. organization/details/
en/c/979899/ 
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 149
Name CSO Type Since Details Website E-Mail Telephone Reference
Uganda Land National/ 1995 To promote people-centred land ula@ulaug.org  +256 http://www.fao.org/
Alliance local governance that recognizes 414540048 pastoralist-knowledge-
and protects the rights of the hub/pastoralist-
poor and vulnerable through networks/database-of-
advocacy for fair land laws, organization/details/
policies and empowering en/c/979900/ 
rights holders for sustainable 
Livelihoods.
Uganda National/ . UVA is an umbrella organization info@vetuganda.org +256 http://www.fao.org/
Veterinary local that promotes and protects 414251762 pastoralist-knowledge-
Association the interests of veterinarians in hub/pastoralist-
Uganda and collaborate with networks/database-of-
other stakeholders in the animal organization/details/
industry. en/c/979901/ 
Warrior Squad National/ 2005 WSF aims at fighting for the http://warriorsfdn. lopiriamilton@gmail.com +256 http://www.fao.org/
Foundation local rights of children, youth and blogspot.it/ 782002597 pastoralist-knowledge-
communities who suffer from hub/pastoralist-
poverty, disease, injustice and networks/database-of-
violence through working with organization/details/
them to find lifelong answers to en/c/979902/ 
the problems they face.
FAO website 2020
150 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Table 2: Livestock associations.
Market 
Name Location (app.) Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock
base
Masindi Port Livestock and Masindi District 2011 32 Promoting cattle trade. UMPCU Buying and Cattle and goats
Beef Producers selling animals
Uganda Livestock Products Kampala District 1999 65 Promoting livestock products Uganda Meat Buying and Local Cattle, sheep and 
and Bio Products Traders and beef products trade. Industries selling livestock goats
Association products
Gombe Meat producers Gomba District 2010 136 Improving the quality of UMPEU Buying and Cattle, sheep and 
Cooperative Society cows, selling cows on market. selling animals goats
Uganda Meat Producers Whole of Uganda 2008 2,017 To enhance livestock Norture, Norges Mobilization of Cattle, goats and 
Cooperative Union Limited individual production and productivity, Vel, NORAD, farmers, Markets, sheep
farmers to enhance member access to European Union, Financing
finance. MAAIF
Uganda Leather and Allied USSIA 1996 57 To develop the leather Government Advocacy, Export Cattle, goats, 
Industries Association Building, Uma industry. ministry and technical training, tanners sheep, fish
Showground, agencies, investment 
Lugogo ministries of profiling 
trade, agriculture, standards
gender, NEMA, 
Bearem of 
standards.
Ngoma Beef Producers Ngoma 1999 200 To help farmers produce the Free Cuts and Livestock Uganda Cows and goats
best beef. Uganda meat production meat 
industry industry
Uganda Cattle Traders and Uganda Meat 2000 3,000 Promote cattle trade in Fresh Cuts, Cattle trading, Kampala 10,000 goats
Transporters Association Industries, Plot 5, and outside the country, to Ngoma Beef beef production and its 
Old Portbell Road promote good transportation Producers, Uganda and livestock suburbs
practices. Meat Producers transportation
Cooperative 
Union.
Walimi Fish Cooperative Wandegeya, 2004 312 The overall goal is to make MAAIF, Worldfish Technical training Local and Tilapia, fish and 
Society Buganda Road, aquaculture a competitive. Centre, Aurburn in agriculture export catfish
Kampala, Uganda University. market
The Uganda National Countrywide 2004 89,000 bee- To promote agriculture for Government Value addition 88% Bees. About 
Agriculture Development keepers; 266 employment, income and (MAAIF), **TRIAS in bee products, demotive 1000,000 
Organization (Tumado) coop livelihood improvement and Uganda, OXFAM. Policy advocacy market colonies
do sector coordination.
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 151
Market 
Name Location (app.) Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock
base
Pig Production and Marketing Mateyga -Wakiso 2016 To moderate, promote and ILRI, Breeds, Feeds Sale of pork, Local Pigs
Uganda Limited District develop pig production in and Meats Limited. Sale of 
Uganda through providing breeding stock/
secure and sustainable consultancy 
markets. services
Entebbe Livestock Co- Entebbe 1989 45 Developing and multiplying Ministry of Marketing Local Cows, sheep, 
operative Society cattle population and trade Agriculture. Livestock, beef goats, poultry
economic stability. hide
Kitenga-Kayebe Beef Kiboga 2011 40 Promoting farmers. Buying and Cattle, sheep and 
Producers Co-operative selling cattle goat
Society
Bitemba Meat Producers Co- Kyamkwanzi 2011 51 Promoting farmers. UMPE Producing beef Local Goats, cattle and 
operative Society cattle sheep
Buremba Livestock Co- Kirunura 2010 36 Produce meat and goat for UMPE Meeting Goat, cattle and 
operative Society beef. and sharing sheep
information
Kinyogoya Livestock Co- Makaseka District 2008 546 To get one voice; to improve UPMC Buying and Cattle
operative Society business. selling milk
Zirobwe Co-operative Society Luwero District 2010 40 Promoting cattle trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle, goats and 
selling cattle sheep
Zalira Abalunda Meat Luwero District 2009 36 Promoting cattle trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle, sheep ang 
Producers Co-operative selling livestock goats
Society
Bigasa Kitanda Beef Farmers Bukomansimbi 2009 38 Producing beef for export UMPEU Selling beef Local Cattle, sheep and 
Cooperative Society District and local consumption. goats
Kayunga Poultry Farms Kayunga 2012 40 Promote poultry production Biyimsika farmers Buying and Local Chicken and eggs
Association in the district. selling chicken
Kamira Livestock Co-operative Lhwero District 2008 222 To promote beef and dairy UMPCU Selling milk and Local
Society farming in the area. cattle
Kiganda Tukole Livestock Co- Mubende District 2012 58 Promoting beef and dairy UMPCU Selling milk and Local
operative Society farming. beef
Kigando Meat Producers Co- Mubende District 2008 63 Promote beef in the area. UMPCU Selling and Local Cattle and goats
operative Society buying cattle
Lwengo Meat Producers Co- Lwengo District 2011 37 Promoting beef production. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle
operative Society selling cattle
152 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Market 
Name Location (app.) Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock
base
Maddu Meat Producers Co- Gomba district 2011 58 Buying and selling cattle. Cattle, sheep and 
operative Society goats
Biharwe Meat Producers Co- Biharwe Town 2010 65 Bring farmers together so that UMPCU Buying animals, Cows
operative Society before Mbarara can get market. fatten, then sell
Kyankwanzi Livestock Co- Kiboga District 2005 40 Promote farmers. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle
operative Society selling milk
Endinzi Meat Producers Kingiro 2005 80 Produce meat and promote UMPE Buying and Local Cattle, sheep and 
Cooperative Society farmers. selling cows goat
Wakyato Livestock Co- Nakaseke District 2008 43 Promoting livestock trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle and goat
operative Society selling livestock
Wabinyonyi Meat Producers Nakasongola 2008 60 Marketing and lobbying for UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle and goats
Society District farmers. selling livestock
Lugushuru Meat Producers Co- Sembabule 2009 36 Promoting livestock trade. UMPCU Selling and Local Cattle and goats
operative Society District Buying livestock
Kyazanga Beef Farmers’ Co- Lwengo District 2012 31 Promoting livestock trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle and goats
operative Society selling livestock
Kyarujungu Meat Producers Mbarara District 2009 72 Promoting livestock trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle and goats
Co-operative Society selling livestock
Nabiswera Meat Producers Nakasongola 2009 40 Promoting livestock trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle and goats
Co-operative Society District selling livestock
Ntuutsi Meat Producer Co- Sembabule 2010 156 Promoting cattle trade. UMPCU Buying and Local Cattle and goats
operative Society selling livestock
Ngoma Meat Producers Co- Makaseke District 2009 68 Promoting livestock trade. IMPCU Buying livestock Local Cattle and goats
operative Society
Rushenyi Meat Producers C0- Ntungamo 2008 64 Focus on producing meat. UMPCU Selling and Local Cattle and goat
0perative Society District buying Livestock
Gulu Meat Producers Co- Gulu District 2010 50 Promoting livestock. UMPCU Selling milk and Cattle and goats
operative Society meat
Kabuyanda Nshenyi Meat Isingiro District 2010 64 Promoting livestock UMPCU Selling and Local Cattle and goats
Producers Co-operative production. buying livestock
Society
Kyanamukanka Meat Masaka District 2009 34 Promoting livestock trade. UMPCU Selling and Local Cattle and goats
Producers Co-operative buying livestock
society
A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume2 153
Market 
Name Location (app.) Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock
base
Uganda National Farmers Nakasero Rd, Plot 1992 98 members: Advocate for favourable MAAIF, NARO, Advocacy Local Cattle, goats, 
Federation 27, Kampala 78 districts, agricultural policies and Development pigs, sheep
20 community programs. partners
associations
Heifer International/ EADD Nakaserro 1982 42 farmers Poverty reduction. Plan International, Working Locally Cattle, goats, 
cooperatives DDA with farmers and pigs, dairy and 
related to communities and export animal traction, 
EADD other value chain beef
sectors
Poultry Association of Uganda Chicken House 2004 Executive-10, To lobby the government, to Poultry Public Poultry
old Kampala, total tackle industry challenges. breeders, Feed sensitization, 
near police members-200 manufacturers, lobbying the 
station Ministry of government
Agriculture
Isingiro United Beef Farmers’ Isingiro District 2012 39 members Beef production. UMPCU Livestock trading Local Cattle, goats
Co-operative society (buying and 
selling)
Keshunga Meat Producers Co- Kiruhura District 2011 66 members To produce quality livestock. UMPCU Livestock trading Local Cattle, goats
operative Society (buying and 
selling)
Kashongi Meat Producers Co- Kiruhura District 2008 259 members Quality beef production. UMPCU Livestock trading Local Cattle, goats
operative Society (buying and 
selling)
Kinoni Meat producers Co- Kiruhura District 2010 100 To promote livestock trade. UMPCU Livestock trading Local Cattle, goats
operative Society (buying and 
selling)
Uganda National Farmers Nakasero Rd, Plot 1992 98 members: Advocate for favourable MAAIF, NARO, Advocacy Local Cattle, goats, 
Federation 27, Kampala 78 districts, agricultural policies and Development pigs, sheep
20 community programs. partners
associations
Heifer International/EADD Nakaserro 1982 42 farmers Poverty reduction. Plan International, Working Locally cattle, goats, 
cooperatives DDA with farmers and pigs, dairy and 
related to communities and export animal traction, 
EADD other value chain beef
sectors
154 A regional approach to drought index-insurance in Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) countries: Volume 2
Market 
Name Location (app.) Since Members Objectives Partners Key activities Livestock
base
Poultry Association of Uganda Chicken House 2004 Executive-10, To lobby the government, to Poultry Public Poultry
old Kampala, total tackle industry challenges. breeders, Feed sensitization, 
near police members-200 manufacturers, lobbying the 
station Ministry of government
Agriculture
Source: ICPALD website 2020.
Notes: MAAIF – Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
92–9146–662–5 A regional approach to drought index-
insurance in Intergovernmental Authority 
The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) works to improve food and nutritional security and reduce
poverty in developing co untries through research for efficient, safe and sustainable use of livestock.
Co-hosted by Kenya and Ethiopia, it has regional o r country offices and projects in East, South and on Development (IGAD) countries
Southeast Asia as well as Central, East, Southern and West Africa. ilri.org  
  
Volume II: Intergovernmental Authority on Development 
CGIAR is a global agricultural research partnership for a food-secure future. Its research is carried
out by 15 research centres  in collaboration with hundreds of partner organizations. cgiar.org country annexes
76
I L R I  R E S E A R C H  R E P O RT