How to address seed insecurity in fragile contexts

Introduction

The previous section has discussed the dynamics and functions of seed sectors which operate in more or less stable and secure countries and food systems. There is minimum urgent threat to the basic functioning of the sector and the provision of seed; it is rather about developing or transforming the current system.

Yet in food systems which are affected by fragility, human-made and natural disasters, or protracted crises including conflicts and severe climate stresses, seed sectors regularly struggle to sustain performance to a level that meets the needs of stakeholders. In such cases, critical challenges can cause multiple sector functions to be disrupted or to collapse entirely, seriously constraining seed availability and access. In these contexts, the main focus area is ensuring seed security.

A different playing field on seed security

Seed security responses see different types of actors with separate priorities engaging in different forms of responses. Humanitarian organisations strive to meet immediate needs, often following an emergency; development practitioners focus on strengthening resilience and food security; and in times of conflict, peace-building actors focus on the causes of conflict and improving social cohesion amongst divergent groups.

Commonly however, external interventions by development and humanitarian agencies are not complementary and are sometimes designed with contradictory objectives. Consequently, they do not always sustainably respond to farmer and community needs or interests. Humanitarian interventions often weaken seed sectors in the long-term through the displacement of private sector actors, market flooding of inexpensive or free seeds, or bulk purchases of crops or seeds not suitable for the climate or environment. Seed sector development programmes for their part, are rarely designed to continue operations during emergencies and are comparatively inflexible to adapt to pressing urgent realities and needs.

What is seed (in)security

Seed security exists when men and women within the household have sufficient access to adequate quantities of good quality seed and planting materials of preferred crop varieties at all times, in both good and bad cropping seasons (FAO, 2016). There are four components that constitute seed security:

• Seed availability: There is a supply of seed that can be acquired;
• Seed access: There are ways for seed to be sold, traded, loaned, distributed, or gifted;
• Varietal suitability: The seed is of varieties that the farmer prefers, is suited to local agro-ecology, and that the farmer knows how to cultivate;
• Seed quality: The health and attributes of the actual seed are good

The inverse of seed security is seed insecurity. Seed insecurity exists when any of these four components are not present, whereas resilience in seed security terms is demonstrated when post-shock seed security remains steady, according to the four components (FAO, 2016). It is important to note that attaining seed security does not mean farmers themselves have to produce all the seed they need. Rather, it means diverse groups of farmers should be able to access seed of suitable varieties on a regular, predictable basis (Sperling et al., 2022b).

Acute seed insecurity
Acute seed insecurity is caused by short-term events that impact a wide population, such as a failed planting season, lost harvest, or seed infestation. It can affect any household, even those normally seed secure, during events like floods or civil disturbances. Farmers who recover quickly, with or without seed aid, usually face only acute stress. Note that food stress doesn't always lead to seed stress, and seed systems, especially for crops like sorghum, can be resilient enough to meet farmers' needs (Sperling et al., 2006)

Chronic seed insecurity
Chronic seed insecurity occurs independently of acute events but can be worsened by them. It affects marginalised populations, such as the poor, those in drought-prone or degraded areas, or those in politically unstable regions. These populations face continual seed shortages, struggle to buy seed, and often use poor-quality or unwanted varieties, leading to long-term vulnerability to seed system crises (Sperling et al., 2006).

How does conflict affect seed sectors

Conflict disrupts both the demand for and supply of seeds, potentially leading to chronic seed insecurity. Conflict can significantly disrupt seed sector functions, with effects varying based on the conflict's nature, intensity, and duration.

In conflict-affected regions, the formal seed system—often reliant on government services or commercial supply chains—tends to collapse or become severely weakened. This has a direct impact on the availability of high-quality seeds, which are usually produced by commercial seed companies. Conversely, informal seed systems, which are more localised and farmer-driven, can sometimes continue operating to a certain degree, ensuring the availability of certain seeds such as beans and small grain cereals like millet and sorghum.

Conflict also forces changes in agricultural practices. For example, farmers may alter the types of crops they plant based on factors such as security, labour availability, and access to markets. This could involve switching to crops that are more resistant to theft or those that take longer to harvest, providing farmers more time to move them to safer areas. Furthermore, displacement due to violence can change farming locations, leading to shifts in crop choices or the necessity of new farming techniques.

How to respond to seed insecurity

Whether or not a household or community is considered seed secure or insecure is the central question that underpins humanitarian seed responses, framed as seed security programmes. Seed security programmes may have diverse goals including focusing on staple crop food production, focusing more on nutrition provision than just calories, focusing more on climate-resilient crops and varieties, or focusing on higher-value crops for local markets. Each goal will need a different strategy for humanitarian actors and other stakeholders.

Base decisions on good quality assessments
The specific strategy for seed security programmes is best underpinned by some form of assessment, commonly being a Seed Security Assessment (SSA, also known as Seed System Security Assessment, SSSA). An SSA has two fundamental objectives: (i) to get a clear understanding of the challenges that are impacting seed security; and (ii) to inform decision-making on the most suitable type of response, given the context.

SSAs are designed not just to be used directly after shocks and acute emergencies, but also to understand chronic seed insecurity and help donors and organisations frame longer term strategies. The SSA process sees triangulated data from a number of different sources including household surveys, local market surveys, focus group discussions, key informant interviews and tailored questionnaires for different types of seed sector actors. Good quality SSAs prioritise active participation of and feedback to stakeholders, are conducted and analysed rigorously, deliver actionable, practical recommendations and are supported with additional resources and tools (FAO, 2016).

Within the domain of humanitarian seed responses, there is increasing pressure from donor agencies for SSAs to be conducted before seed aid is approved. Yet there remain many examples where responses are decided upon without the completion of a thorough SSA beforehand.

Prioritise market-based responses to seed insecurity
Good quality assessments will yield valuable information on which response type is necessary and preferable. Market-based approaches are increasingly prioritised in seed insecurity responses, focusing on strengthening local markets rather than relying on free seed distribution. While Direct Seed Distribution (DSD), or ‘seed aid,’ has been the traditional response, it often undermines local seed markets by introducing non-local varieties and disrupting market dynamics. DSD can be logistically complex, and although it can quickly reach large numbers, it is not always timely or suitable for local conditions.

In contrast, market-based approaches support the resilience of local seed markets by promoting access to diverse planting materials and injecting funds into the local economy. These approaches help maintain functioning markets during crises, as local markets tend to be more resilient and adaptable. They also ensure that seed systems, both formal and informal, continue to function over the long term, preserving market integrity and preventing the dependency on external aid. This shift reflects the growing recognition that local actors are often the quickest to adapt and respond to challenges.

There are many examples of market-based approaches to seed security. Each shares the goal to stimulate connection between local purchasers and suppliers of seed. Three of the more common examples of market-based approaches are:

• Cash transfers: Direct cash transfers to farmers, enabling them to purchase seed and other necessary supplies from local markets. This approach boosts the local economy and provides farmers with the flexibility to make decisions based on their specific needs. In recent years, cash transfers have also been facilitated digitally, reducing the risks associated with larger amounts of cash.
• Vouchers: Seed vouchers (either physical or digital) allow farmers to purchase seed from both formal and informal suppliers. This system gives farmers greater choice while supporting local businesses and ensuring that seed markets remain functional. Digital innovations are also used in voucher provision as they can help to prevent fraud, theft and associated risks.
• Seed fairs: These fairs provide an opportunity for farmers to buy seeds from a variety of suppliers, often combined with vouchers. Seed fairs promote diversity in seed options and stimulate local economies by injecting funds into the community.

Seek alignment between humanitarian, development and peacebuilding partners towards a HDP-Nexus
There is now increased focus and attention from humanitarian and development organisations to better align their work in support of seed security and seed sector resilience, under a Humanitarian, Development and Peacebuilding Nexus (HDP-Nexus). The aim is to share on and better understand the rationale and benefit of specific responses, to enable joint strategy development and to ensure efficient coordination and alignment across activities and outcomes.

Key tenants of this work are around the complementary support and promotion of market-based approaches for sector resilience, deepening the support to and integration of community seed producers and organisations into emergency response strategies, and developing a repertoire of methodological support tools and guidance to support structured and informed responses. Achieving an effective HDP-Nexus calls on food system initiatives and partners to be proactive and transparent in their outreach and willingness to engage, inform and align on activities.

Good Practices

Multiple partners engaged in seed security interventions have jointly reflected on their collective experiences and put forward the 10 Guiding Principles of Good Seed Aid. The ‘10Ps’ aim to guide effective seed security responses in emergencies, ensuring sustainable and targeted assistance.

The 10 Principles are supported by specific Technical Notes to guide the adoption and implementation of the principle (SeedSystem and Mercy Corps, 2024). For short reference, the 10 Principles are:

• Seed System Security Assessment (SSSA)
  Conduct assessments to identify seed security problems among diverse groups, focusing on availability, access, seed health, and variety suitability.
• Response type
  Choose the appropriate response (e.g., direct distribution, cash, or voucher-based interventions) based on the specific seed security problem identified.
• Goal of the intervention
  Design the intervention with clear, farmer-driven goals, ensuring that the assistance addresses both immediate needs and long-term resilience.
• Context
  Match the response to the local context, considering social, environmental, and gender factors while ensuring that the intervention adheres to the “do no harm” principle.
• Timeliness
  Ensure seed is delivered in time for farmers to plant according to their normal sowing cycles, avoiding delays that compromise productivity.
• Market-based assistance
  Prioritise market-based approaches to support seed security, facilitating both demand-side (farmer purchasing power) and supply-side (seed vendors) interventions.
• Crop and variety choice
  Select crops and varieties that suit the local context, farmer preferences, and agricultural conditions, considering gendered needs and stress tolerance.
• Seed quality
  Maintain seed quality to meet minimum standards, ensuring reliable production and avoiding the spread of diseases or pests through proper seed handling.
• Farmers’ choice
  Provide farmers with a choice of seeds, offering a variety of crops and varieties to cater to different household needs and farming strategies.
• Feedback at multiple key stages
  Integrate monitoring and evaluation processes throughout the intervention, collecting feedback from farmers and suppliers to guide improvements and adjustments.

References and additional resources

• FAO, 2016. Seed security assessment: A practitioner’s guide. (Link)
• Sperling et al., 2006. Seed aid for seed security: Advice for practitioners. Practice Briefs 6-10. (Link)
• Sperling et al., 2022a. Seed systems in conflict-affected areas: Context analysis tool. Version 1. (Link)
• Sperling et al., 2022b. Seed emergency response tool: Guidance for practitioners. (Link)
• SeedSystem and Mercy Corps, 2024. Ten principles of good seed aid. (Link, Video link)