Sales of food aid and other coping mechanisms to meet dietary needs among refugees in Uvira, Zaire, in 1996.

摘要

In 1996, the sale and export of food aid from refugee camps near Uvira, Zaire, prompted the World Food Programme to reduce food rations. This research investigated who in this population sold rations, why, and the consequences of the sales on the quantity and quality of refugee diets. Refugees' coping mechanisms were also examined. A mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods, including extensive cross-checks to validate inferences, was used.; Findings revealed that most sales were made to acquire foods refugees regarded as essential. An aversion to the donated maize grain and high fuel demands for ration preparation resulted in sales to enable the purchase of different foods. Sales to purchase critical non-food items were also significant, although less frequent.; Overall, at most 23% of refugee households were eating sufficient and adequate diets. Among the poorest households, only 13% ate sufficiently and adequately, yet they were twice as likely as other households to sell food. All sales resulted in loss of energy from an already energy-deficient diet. However, except for the richest and poorest households, sales were associated with higher quality diets. Also, exchanges of ration oil for palm oil improved the vitamin A content of diets at no cost.; Predominant refugee coping mechanisms included gardening and petty commerce. Participation in these activities was limited by poor access to land and lack of capital for investment.; Conclusions drawn were that sales of rations cannot be used as an indicator of refugee food security, but knowledge of who is selling, why they sell, and the dietary consequences of sales can show which kinds of food and non-food assistance would improve refugee nutrition. Improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of food aid in supporting refugee nutrition requires (1) better application of existing policies that acknowledge refugees' cultural needs and preferences, (2) new policy to define any appropriate use of food aid as an income transfer, and (3) monitoring and evaluation that enables timely corrective measures and accountability.