This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS ROME 00315 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM THE U.S. MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS AGENCIES IN 
ROME 
 
STATE FOR IO/EDA SKOTOK 
USAID FOR DCHA, OFDA GOTTLIEB, MLUTZ, MBBRENNAN, MMARX 
AND LPOWERS; FFP JDWORKEN 
USDA FOR FAS HUGHES 
USUN NEW YORK FOR TMALY 
GENEVA FOR NKYLOH/USAID 
BRUSSELS FOR PLERNER 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: EAID EAGR ECON SENV UN FAO
SUBJECT:  FAO EMERGENCY PROGRAMS: INFORMAL DONORS' 
BRIEFING 
 
REF: (A) 04 ROME 1370; (B) 04 ROME 2298; (C) 05 ROME 
0764; (D) 05 ROME 0877; (E) 05 ROME 1142; (F) 05 ROME 
2979; (G) 05 ROME 3320; (H) 05 ROME 3976; (I) 05 ROME 
3949; (J) 06 ROME 0087; AND (K) 06 ROME 0000 
 
¶1. Summary and Background.  On January 25, 2006, the Food 
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Emergency Operations 
and Rehabilitation Division (TCE) held an informal 
donors' meeting to provide an overview of 2005 activities 
and special requirements for 2006.  Recently appointed 
TCE Assistant Director General Tecle Tesfai chaired the 
session while TCE Director Anne Bauer and her staff 
provided overviews on TCE operations in 2005, including 
in Tsunami-affected areas, Africa and special programs in 
Somalia, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Iraq.  In 
addition, Animal Production and Health Division (AGA) 
Director Samuel Jutzi provided an update on FAO's 
response to the Avian Influenza emergency.  Lastly, a 
member of FAO's Food Security and Agricultural Projects 
Analysis Services (ESAF) briefed on FAO projects to 
improve food security analysis and action in emergencies. 
End Summary. 
 
¶2. FAO entered the emergency operations arena in 1973 
when it responded to the drought in the Sahel.  Over the 
next 20 years, FAO's expertise in humanitarian assistance 
coordination spread out to crises around the world.  In 
2002 the emergency coordination unit evolved into a 
division: the Emergency Operations and Rehabilitation 
Division (TCE).  In 2004, funding for emergencies reached 
the highest level ever when TCE delivered $128 million in 
assistance and raised some $230 million to carry out 
multi-year programs in over 70 countries worldwide.  In 
2005, TCE delivered $163 million in assistance by year's 
end and received $170 million in contributions. 
Currently in 2006, TCE's operational portfolio values 
over $350 million, covering 300 projects in over 70 
countries and regions.  End Summary and Background 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
Donor Confidence and Increasing Contributions 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶3. In his introductory overview, recently appointed TCE 
Assistant Director General (ADG) Tesfai Tecle stated that 
TCE activities increased both in scope and depth in 2005, 
and FAO played a key role among UN agencies and field 
partners in emergencies.  Although many African countries 
still remain affected by complex emergencies, Tecle 
stated there are signs of emerging progress in Sudan and 
the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).  FAO's relief 
and rehabilitation assistance, which is no longer limited 
to providing seeds and tools, not only rebuilds 
livelihoods but helps to bolster peace and stability in 
these countries.  The outcome of last year's activities 
led to the provision of more recovery assistance, 
improved response mechanisms and management, including 
improved financial tracking and accountability, and a 
better understanding of the root causes of vulnerability. 
The growing level of donor contributions to TCE in 2005 
is a sign of growing confidence in FAO's abilities. 
 
¶4. Tecle emphasized that FAO is recognized as a key 
source of information on food security and nutrition 
issues, and the organization is closely collaborating 
with partners such as WFP on vulnerability and assessment 
mapping and UNHCR on reintegration programs for refugees 
and internally displaced persons (IDPs).  Discussions are 
underway for expanded collaboration with ILO, UNDP and 
other NGOs. 
 
¶5. TCE Director Anne Bauer informed donors that FAO's 
expertise in farming, livestock, fisheries and forestry 
is its comparative advantage and crucial to emergency 
response and rehabilitation efforts.  Although FAO does 
not provide food aid, its assistance complements food 
aid, promoting an early exit from it.  FAO's ability to 
harness know-how and coordinate other UN and NGO partners 
in the agriculture and food security sectors is key, as 
FAO often works as an intermediary between recipient 
governments and these partners to avoid overlaps and gaps 
in agricultural relief. 
 
¶6.  Bauer reported that TCE's delivery of assistance 
services increased over the past few years.  TCE 
delivered $128 million in assistance in 2004 and $163 
million in 2005.  Donor contributions have also been 
trending upwards.  In 2004, TCE received $210 million 
from donors and $20 million from FAO's Technical 
Cooperation Program (TCP) for a total of $230 million. 
In 2005, TCE received $170 million in contributions, 
including over $6 million from FAO's TCP.  (Note: The 
U.S. has been a contributor to FAO's emergency programs 
since 1998.  From 2002-2004, the U.S. contributed between 
$4 million and $8 million annually.  In 2005, U.S. 
donations surpassed $20 million. End Note)  New donors 
contributing less than $1 million include Portugal, 
Luxembourg, Greece, China, and Australia.  Worldwide, TCE 
is currently operating a budget of approximately $350 
million, covering over 300 projects in over 70 countries 
and regions, representing 40 percent of the total of FAO 
field programs' portfolio. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
The 2004-2005 Desert Locust Campaign 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶7.  Bauer reported that FAO mobilized $80 million from 27 
donors to counter an upsurge of desert locusts in North 
and West Africa in 2004.  Of the total mobilized, $56 
million has been spent, with most control inputs being 
delivered in 2004.  In 2005 the emphasis shifted toward 
locust monitoring, control and environmental-related 
activities, and a marked decline in desert locust 
populations at the end of 2005 has led to the phasing out 
of operations in 2006.  Many donors agreed to reallocate 
much of their unspent funds to environmental programs, 
including pesticides drum disposal and the establishment 
of a proper pesticide management program.  Lastly, Bauer 
indicated that a donor-led independent evaluation of the 
2004-2005 desert locust campaign began in November 2005, 
the results of which will be reported at the Desert 
Locust Control Committee (DLCC) meeting being held May 
16-19, 2006, in Rome. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
Increase in Overhead 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶8.  Bauer stated that the increasing scope and complexity 
of TCE interventions led to some financial changes.  In 
responding to an emergency, TCE relies on the services of 
FAO's administrative, finance and legal offices, but the 
reduction in FAO's regular program budget impacted all 
divisions, and TCE's increasing demand for services can 
no longer be met without reimbursement.  Thus, during the 
110th Session in September 2005, the FAO Finance 
Committee, one of its governing bodies, reviewed TCE 
support cost policy and endorsed an increase from 6.5 to 
10 percent of the rate for TCE projects to cover the 
costs incurred by FAO central support services (e.g., 
procurement, finance, personnel, legal, etc.).  The 3.5 
percent increase was based on a 2004 FAO cost study, 
which indicated that a 10 percent ceiling is required to 
recover variable indirect support costs from TCE 
activities.  Bauer assured PermReps present that this 
rate will be reviewed regularly, and asked them to help 
explain this increase to capitals. 
 
¶9.  Bauer also stated that FAO's capacity to deal rapidly 
with an emergency has been enhanced by the Special Fund 
for Emergency and Rehabilitation Activities (SFERA). 
SFERA was established in April 2004 and provides FAO with 
the flexibility and financial means to react promptly to 
crises before donor funds are actually received by FAO. 
She thanked the increasing number of donors who 
contributed to the SFERA, including Norway, Finland, 
Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, France, 
and the U.S.  (Note: The U.S. earmarked funds for Avian 
Influenza activities. End Note) 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
Avian Influenza Activities 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶10. Samuel Jutzi, Director, Animal Production and Health 
Division (AGA), provided a brief update on developments 
in the response to Avian Influenza since FAO's last 
informal briefing to donors on September 1, 2005, (reftel 
Rome 2979): 
 
A) With geographical expansion outside of Asia, the 
Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus is now 
firmly entrenched in Ukraine, Romania and Turkey.  FAO 
initiated five TCPs outside of Asia, with Budapest being 
the site for Eastern Europe, Bamako for West Africa, 
Nairobi for East Africa, and Cairo the site for both 
North Africa and the Near East.  Jutzi noted that if HPAI 
is detected in Africa, donors and governments must act 
quickly to bolster already weak veterinary networks. 
 
B) David Nabarro, UN Coordinator for Avian Influenza 
activities, has been instrumental in coordinating 
activities between the UN agencies and other partners. 
In November 2005, FAO co-sponsored a meeting in Geneva 
with OIE, WHO and the World Bank to review progress made 
and identify financial needs and coordination mechanisms. 
Most recently, a donor pledging conference was held in 
Beijing, where donors pledged $1.9 billion in assistance. 
In preparation for Beijing, FAO developed a Global 
Program for Avian Influenza Control and Eradication, 
which encompasses global and regional action; support to 
infected countries' control activities; assistance to 
countries at risk; and immediate support for a newly 
infected country. 
 
¶11. To date, FAO has received a total of $29 million in 
contributions from Australia, France, Germany, Japan, 
Norway, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the U.S. and its 
own TCP funds.  FAO reports it will require an additional 
$100 million, noting shortfalls of $35 million for global 
and regional programs and $65 million for country 
specific activities. 
 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
2005 TCE Outputs 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶12. Tsunami: Accomplishments include the deployment of 
over 70 FAO experts to provide fishery and fish 
processing assistance to over 2,000 households and 
support on income-generating activities to over 30,000 
households in Indonesia.   FAO provided both technical 
assistance and direct assistance through training on 
cash-for-work initiatives, boat building, saltwater 
damage and coastal planning, all under the "build back 
better" theme.  A joint report by the UN, the UK's 
Department for International Development (DfID) and the 
World Bank appreciated FAO's role, and the American Red 
Cross recently approached FAO to begin collaborating in 
ongoing relief activities.  TCE staff indicated FAO will 
need an additional $47.5 million over the next two years 
for ongoing rehabilitation work in many countries, 
including Yemen, which has been largely forgotten by 
donors. 
¶13. Africa: Overall, TCE activities supported 200,000 
beneficiaries, 500 training workshops, and the 
distribution of 200 000 tools and 253.5 tons of seeds. 
In Sudan, FAO assisted 160,000 households in the south 
and Darfur to rebuild livelihoods, and worked with the 
European Commission to formulate a $100 million food 
security project.  In Niger, FAO established an emergency 
coordination unit (ECU); however, with the backing of 
only one donor, FAO had to use TCP funds to supplement 
the ECU.  Lastly, in Southern Africa, FAO strengthened 
its information activities, developed a monitoring and 
evaluation framework for emergencies and, under the new 
UN humanitarian reform clusters framework, began 
implementing many programs jointly with UN partners such 
as UNICEF.  In 2006, it plans to bolster its Nairobi 
office with food security specialists to monitor and 
identify issues relating to the drought. 
¶14. Special Programs: The current portfolio of the 
Special Emergency Programs Service (TCES) includes Iraq, 
Somalia, West Bank and Gaza Strip and North Korea. 
Beginning in February, Sudan will be added to the 
portfolio.  For Somalia, FAO appointed a Nairobi-based 
joint FAO Officer-in-Charge/Emergency Coordinator in May 
¶2005. For the West Bank and Gaza Strip, FAO provided 
agricultural inputs and equipment; training on pest 
management, cultivation techniques, dairy farming and 
horticulture production; and is contributing to the 
establishment of a multi-sectoral Food Insecurity and 
Vulnerability Information and Mapping System (FIVIMS). 
For Iraq, TCES provides assistance through the UN 
"Clusters" framework to restore community irrigation 
schemes and water supply, support veterinary and 
livestock services (pleading for $6 million for the 
control of the animal disease brucellosis), and to 
promote cottage industries.  TCES staff noted their unit 
has made progress in mobilizing non-traditional sources 
of donor funding for its programs, for example, from 
church groups in Kenya and from a well-known Italian 
supermarket chain. 
 
¶15. A member of FAO's Agricultural and Development 
Economic Division gave a brief overview of Food Security 
Information for Action program and how it is applied to 
emergencies.  FAO has been asked to be more involved in 
food security interventions and information and analysis 
systems.  This is mainly being driven by a) the Good 
Humanitarian Donorship Initiative (GHDI); b) current FAO 
collaboration with donors on food security, for example 
the European Commission, which is funding projects to 
obtain country-level information in 20 countries, and the 
Netherlands, whose partnership with FAO is leading to UN- 
based programming; and c) the need to improve FAO 
response frameworks to emergencies, as mandated by the 
FAO Strategic Framework, 2000-2015.  In 2005, food 
security information gathering activities were conducted 
in partnership with TCE in Angola, Afghanistan, Eritrea, 
Mozambique, Somalia; in 2006, these activities will 
expand to Ethiopia, Sudan (North and South), West Bank 
and Gaza Strip.  FAO and WFP are working together on food 
security analysis/assessment methodologies and plan to 
hold a joint workshop in April 2006 in Nairobi.  FAO 
hopes to host an international workshop on same in June 
¶2006. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
2006 FAO Appeals 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶16. FAO is requesting over $96 million in funding through 
the United Nations Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) to 
support food security activities in 14 countries and 
regions.  In Africa, FAO's appeals total $86.8 million 
including $33.2 million for Zimbabwe, $10.4 million for 
Burundi and $7.8 million for Liberia.  (Note: in 2005, 
FAO launched 12 CAPs for Africa totaling $157 million; 
donors responded with $66 million in contributions or 42 
percent. End Note)  Outside of Africa, FAO's CAP 
components include $6.4 million to improve the 
livelihoods of fisherman in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, 
and $2.9 million to strengthen disrupted livelihoods in 
Nepal. 
 
¶17. Under the UN Flash Appeal for Pakistan, FAO is 
requesting $25 million to restore livelihoods by 
providing seeds, fertilizer, tools, and fodder as well as 
spot repair of small-scale irrigation canals and roads. 
FAO has already provided emergency assistance through its 
own funds, delivering 200 tons of seed and 200 tons of 
fertilizer for the winter season.  Currently, only Canada 
has confirmed a substantial contribution to FAO's work in 
Pakistan, although negotiations are ongoing with others. 
 
¶18. FAO's component of the UN Flash Appeal for Ethiopia 
is $18 million for a broad range of agricultural relief 
and rehabilitation projects.  Meanwhile, FAO and other UN 
and partners are currently finalizing a plan of action 
for the DRC.  The plan should be released on February 13, 
with FAO seeking $50 million.  Lastly, FAO joined the UN 
and other partners to develop the 2006 Work Plan for 
Sudan, for which FAO is seeking $40 million.  More 
information on FAO's component of the 2006 Work Plan for 
Sudan can be found at: 
http://www.fao.org/reliefoperations/app_sudan _intro_en.as 
p. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
Donor Response 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶19. The United Kingdom Ambassador reiterated DfID's 
appreciation for FAO's work in the Tsunami, noting it was 
a job well done thus far.  He then questioned whether a) 
FAO can reprogram its own funds for Avian Influenza in 
order to reach the $100 million appeal; b) FAO would be 
willing to accept other technical assistance if donor 
governments are unable to provide funds, since the number 
FAO staff working on Avian Influenza activities is 
limited; and c) FAO can really manage such a large 
program.  ADG Tecle responded that the FAO TCP monies 
have a $400,000 limit per project, according to 
regulations, and there is no possibility to reprogram 
more without a new ruling by the governing body and 
donors.  AGA Director Jutzi welcomed technical expertise 
and assistance from donors in addition to cash.  And TCE 
Director Bauer stated that FAO managed successfully the 
$700 million Iraq Oil-for-Food program over five years. 
 
¶20. The European Commission Ambassador requested a 
clarification on SFERA and whether there was duplication 
of effort on Avian Influenza funding and activities 
within the UN system.  Bauer responded that SFERA is used 
as a vehicle to jumpstart Avian Influenza projects for 
donors to earmark funds thereby avoiding the lengthy 
approval process of a formal project document.  Jutzi 
stated his division supports the use of SFERA because it 
allows flexibility in programming.  Lastly, Tecle stated 
there is no duplication of effort on Avian Influenza 
activities globally as FAO and its partner agencies have 
set up a global strategy to ensure no overlap (for 
example, FAO concentrates on early warning systems, 
wildlife research, vaccinations, etc). 
 
¶21. Norway reacted negatively to the TCE support cost 
increase from 6.5 to 10 percent, noting it was an overall 
increase of 47 percent.  For an emergency the size of the 
Tsunami it is understandable, but not for small emergency 
 
SIPDIS 
projects, the PermRep noted.  Bauer replied that the 
comparison of emergencies is not fair as there are 
economies of scale, and the increase was warranted 
because member states were not willing to pay for 
services rendered at headquarters via assessed 
contributions.  She explained that, until now, these 
services had been rendered free of charge to TCE, but 
this can no longer continue due to staff cuts.  Tecle 
stated that the original 6.5 percent fee was an 
underestimation. 
 
¶22. The Netherlands Ambassador encouraged FAO to engage 
in more frequent donor consultations, especially as they 
relate to improving humanitarian assistance and reform. 
On Avian Influenza, the Ambassador was pleased to hear 
FAO would accept technical expertise, as he was having 
difficulty in leveraging funds from The Hague on a 
largely animal health emergency.  Lastly, the Netherlands 
questioned whether FAO saw some of the humanitarian 
reform processes alluded to in the presentations as 
threats or opportunities.  Bauer responded that TCE 
welcomed continuous dialogue on humanitarian reform 
processes, especially the clusters approach, noting it 
was not an easy issue to pinpoint as it is applied 
differently in each country.  Bauer is FAO's 
representative at all IASC and OCHA reform meetings, and 
all FAO offices, including regional offices, are 
solicited for contributions to the discussions on reform. 
 
¶23. Canada asked when FAO would move to a consolidating 
reporting system under SFERA (the Netherlands 
subsequently echoed, suggesting FAO employ WFP's 
reporting system), and expressed concern over the 
inflation of the Avian Influenza emergency, questioning 
whether it is really a humanitarian emergency.  Bauer 
explained that TCE already issues project reports to 
donors individually, however, a consolidated system can 
be deployed at an increased cost.  Jutzi replied that 
work on Avian Influenza goes beyond emergency and into 
capacity building as veterinary services are being 
strengthened, therefore, using the emergency gateway is 
justified to reduce future emergency preparations. 
Lastly, humanitarians are dialoguing to ensure it does 
not become a human pandemic.  A TCE staff member stated 
that the American Red Cross indicated to FAO Avian 
Influenza is one of their top priorities for 2006. 
 
¶24. USMISSION UN Rome will continue to disseminate widely 
information on FAO's emergency operations. 
 
CLEVERLEY