FAO published its Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT) of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security in 2012. The purpose of these guidelines is to serve as reference and to provide guidance to improve the governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forest with the overarching goal of achieving food security for all and to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security.

Summary Report of the TA Baseline Survey - Key Findings 

Wild foods are an integral component of the household food basket, yet their quantified contribution to food security relative to other sources in the context of HIV/AIDS, climate change and variability remains underexplored. This study was carried out in Willowvale and Lesseyton which are rural communities in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa.

Climate change and the HIV/AIDS epidemic are two of the most critical long-term global challenges, especially for Africa and even more so Southern Africa.

The ongoing and rapid change (from global to local level) in climate, populations, governments, cultures, environment, land use and economies are critical issues, especially for poor rural communities found in the dryland parts of southern Africa.

This paper seeks to understand the drivers and pathways of local livelihood change and the prospects for transformation towards a more sustainable future. Data are used from several studies, and a participatory social learning process, which formed part of a larger project in two sites in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Secondary information from a wealth of related work is used to place our results within the historic context and more general trends in the country. Findings indicate that livelihoods in the rural Eastern Cape are on new trajectories.

How do social, environmental and economic stressors interact to constrain people's ability to improve their livelihoods and respond to change and what does this mean for policies?

Whilst most interpret food insecurity to mean an insufficient quantity of food (as measured by the number of calories consumed), the widely accepted FAO definition considers four dimensions of food security, namely quantity, quality or diversity, access and use. Provision of enough calories on a daily basis is not sufficient if the diet lacks diversity and appropriate balance to provide the full range of minerals and vitamins necessary for proper health,or if the food available is culturally unacceptable.

This policy brief draws on three sources of data from a study undertaken in Lesseyton in Lukanji Local Municipality and Willowvale in Mbashe Local Municipality, in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa.The aim was to understand the vulnerability context of households in the two sites and how they coped with multiple shocks and stresses, with an emphasis on various types of safety nets. Methods included a survey that specifically targeted vulnerable households, data from several community workshops and in-depth life history interviews.

Livelihood stressors in southern Africa, such as HIV/Aids and climate change, do not act in isolation but rather interact concurrently in complex socio-ecological systems with diverse, interrelated and compounded affects. Households experience differential vulnerability to such stressors based on contextual factors such as geographical location, income level and the gender and age of its members.

This Issue Paper No.2 is part of the series Making Rangelands Secure, a learning initiative supported by ILC, IFAD, RECONCILE, IUCN-WISP and Procasur. The Making Rangelands Secure Initiative has been established by a group of organisations seeking to improve security of rights to rangelands. The initiative seeks to identify, communicate and build good practice on making rangelands secure for local rangeland users.

Ill advised, uncoordinated, and badly planned interventions have been blamed for continuing poverty and food insecurity in rangelands. Water interventions in particular have had negative impacts. Not only have these interventions failed to improve the livelihoods of people living there, but in many cases they have served to undermine them and the environment on which they depend. Rangeland development interventions have been sectoral in their approach.