By Emebet A. Jigssa with contribution from Climate Change Technical Working Group

In the Greater Horn of Africa, climate change is no longer a distant threat; it is a daily reality. However, as the region faces increasingly frequent droughts and unpredictable floods, a critical shift is occurring in how we handle weather data. We are moving from traditional forecasting, which tells us what the weather will be, to Impact-Based Forecasting (IBF), which tells us what the weather will do.

The Paradigm Shift: Why “Impact” Matters

For decades, a forecast of “50mm of rainfall” was considered a success. But for a pastoralist in the Karamoja cluster or a smallholder farmer in southern Ethiopia, that number is abstract. Impact-Based Forecasting bridges this gap by integrating meteorological data with information on human vulnerability information and infrastructure exposure.

IBF answers the questions that actually save lives: Will this rain wash away the bridge? Will this dry spell lead to a total loss of crops in the highlands? Is it time to move my livestock before the wells run dry? By focusing on the predicted specific weather impacts, we empower communities to take Anticipatory Action rather than waiting for a humanitarian crisis to unfold.

ICPAC: The Engine of Regional Resilience

At the heart of this transformation is the IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC). As a WMO-designated Regional Climate Centre, ICPAC has moved beyond simple data collection to become a critical decision-support hub.

Tools for Action: Through platforms like the East Africa Hazards Watch and Drought Watch, ICPAC provides real-time, interactive maps that overlay climate risks with population density and land use.

The Evolution of GHACOF: Recent forums, including GHACOF 72 and 71, have revolutionized how seasonal outlooks are produced. By co-producing these forecasts with sectors such as agriculture, health, and water, ICPAC ensures that a “wet season” forecast is immediately accompanied by sector-specific advisories.

Setting the Triggers: Foundational to IBF is the development of thresholds and triggers. This approach facilitates the localization of impacts, acknowledging that each region affected differently. Thus, member states are trained to identify the exact point at which a dry spell becomes a catastrophic drought; ICPAC enables the release of “trigger-based” financing — allowing aid to reach people before the worst impacts are felt.

Protecting Food Systems: The IGAD Food Systems Resilience Index serves as a vital metric, showing how IBF can directly stabilize food security by preventing the “triple threat” climate extremes, conflict, and economic shocks from reversing development gains.

Media: The Essential Bridge to the “last mile”

A perfect forecast that sits on a scientist’s desk is a failed forecast. This is where the media plays its most critical role. In the IBF ecosystem, journalists are the essential translators who turn scientific probability into community action.

The Power of Translation: Media professionals strip away the technical jargon, turning “above-normal tercile probabilities” into clear instructions: “Prepare for flash floods in low-lying areas by Tuesday.”

The King of Communication: In remote regions, radio remains the most trusted source of information. Local language broadcasts ensure that even the most isolated communities are not left behind in the digital divide.

A Two-Way Street: Modern climate journalism creates a feedback loop. When the media reports on the actual ground-level impacts of a pest invasion or a flood, they provide ICPAC with the “impact data” needed to verify and refine future models.

Incentivizing Excellence: Initiatives like the Reporting Competitions have shown that when journalists are trained in anticipatory action, they become advocates for resilience, holding policymakers accountable and mobilizing communities toward preparedness.

Gaps and the Road Ahead

Despite significant progress, hurdles remain. Data silos continue to persist; while weather data is abundant, “impact data” — such as historical crop yields or livestock mortality rates — is often fragmented, missing, stored in varying formats, sometimes available in national level (missing information at the sub-national or ward level) across different government ministries. This poses a significant challenge in validating the IBF product outputs for further improvement. Additionally, the “Last Mile” challenge remains a physical and digital barrier to reaching every household in the region.

However, opportunities are immense. By leveraging AI and Machine Learning to analyze satellite imagery, we can predict crop failure with unprecedented accuracy.

A Shared Responsibility

Impact-Based Forecasting is more than a technical upgrade; it is a “whole-of-society” approach to survival. It requires a seamless chain of action: from the scientists at ICPAC who detect the hazard, to the media who communicate the risk, to the policymakers who trigger the funds, and finally to the communities who take action.

In the race against a changing climate, the goal is no longer just to predict the storm — it is to ensure that when the storm arrives, the region understands the extent of impacts expected and how best they can respond to minimize or buffer the impacts.

Since early 2026, climate scientists and forecasting centres have been closely monitoring the tropical Pacific Ocean for signs of a major shift. Global seasonal forecasting systems, including the North American Multi-Model Ensemble (NMME) and the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S), are increasingly pointing toward the development of an El Niño event later in the year. More notably, there is a growing discussion around the possibility that this could evolve into a “Super El Niño”, a rare and powerful climate phenomenon with far-reaching global impacts.

To understand what is at stake, it is important to unpack what a Super El Niño is, how it compares with past events such as 1997, 2015, and 2023, and what it could mean for rainfall patterns specifically during the June — September (JJAS) and October — December (OND) 2026 seasons.

For starters, El Niño is one of the three phases of El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), a naturally occurring cycle driven by interactions between the ocean and atmosphere in the tropical Pacific Ocean. Under El Niño conditions, sea surface temperatures in the central and eastern Pacific Ocean (Niño 3.4 region) become significantly warmer than average (anomalies >+0.5°C for consecutive rolling months). This warming weakens the trade winds and allows warm water to spread eastward, disrupting atmospheric circulation and shifting rainfall patterns across the globe. A Super El Niño, therefore, represents the end of this spectrum, typically defined when temperature anomalies in the Niño 3.4 region exceed +2°C (Severe Weather Europe, 2026). These events are rare but are associated with more intense and widespread climate disruptions (NOAA, 2026; Weather.com, 2026).

Current forecasts provide a compelling narrative of a system in transition. Both the NMME and C3S plume forecasts indicate that ENSO-neutral conditions are likely to dominate the early part of 2026. However, by early summer (May–July), there is a clear signal of warming in the Niño 3.4 region, suggesting the onset of El Niño conditions. The probability of El Niño formation during this period is estimated to be around 60% (NOAA CPC, 2026). As the year progresses, models consistently show strengthening of the event through summer, with the potential to reach moderate to strong intensity by late 2026. The peak is expected during the October — December season or into early 2027, aligning with the typical lifecycle of El Niño events. Although there is uncertainty due to the well-known “spring predictability barrier”, some projections suggest a significant probability of a very strong or even super event developing (Stockdale, 2026).

To put this into perspective, it is useful to compare the evolving 2026 event with past major El Niño episodes. The 1997–1998 El Niño remains one of the strongest on record and is often used as a benchmark for Super El Niño events. It caused devastating floods in East Africa, while regions such as southern Africa experienced severe drought. The event also triggered widespread global climate anomalies, including elevated temperatures and extreme weather events. Similarly, the 2015–2016 El Niño, sometimes referred to as the “Godzilla El Niño,” was equally intense, with Niño 3.4 anomalies exceeding +2°C. It contributed to a significant drought in Ethiopia and record-breaking global temperatures. More recently, the 2023–2024 El Niño ranked among the strongest in the historical record, contributing to unprecedented global temperatures in 2024, although its impacts were somewhat less extreme than those observed in 1997 and 2015 (WMO, 2024; The Guardian, 2026).

The potential 2026 event is happening at a time when global temperatures are already warmer than during previous El Niño episodes. The already high sea surface temperatures may amplify the impacts of El Niño, increasing the likelihood of more intense rainfall events, stronger heat extremes, and broader global disruptions. This interaction between natural variability and long-term climate change is a key factor that could make the 2026 event very significant (ECMWF, 2026).

From a rainfall perspective, El Niño does not simply enhance or suppress rainfall uniformly; it changes rainfall patterns across regions. During the JJAS season, El Niño is often associated with a weakening of major monsoon systems, which often lead to depressed or delayed rainfall in the northern parts of Eastern Africa. The OND season, however, tells a very different story. This is the period when El Niño signals are the strongest and most consistent, especially for Eastern Africa. Historically, El Niño events have been associated with enhanced rainfall during the short rains. The science behind this involves a shift in tropical convection toward the central and eastern Pacific, which in turn changes atmospheric circulation patterns and enhances moisture transport from the Indian Ocean into East Africa. The result is an increased likelihood of above-normal rainfall, often accompanied by flooding. This pattern was clearly observed during the 1997–1998 El Niño, when widespread flooding affected Kenya, Somalia, and neighbouring countries.

If the 2026 El Niño strengthens as projected, there is a high probability that OND rainfall in Eastern Africa will be above normal, with an elevated risk of extreme rainfall events and flooding. What makes the potential 2026 event particularly noteworthy is not only its possible strength, but also the context in which it is occurring. With global temperatures already elevated due to climate change, the impacts of El Niño may be amplified. Warmer oceans can enhance evaporation and increase atmospheric moisture, leading to more intense rainfall events. At the same time, higher temperatures can worsen drought conditions in regions that experience depressed rainfall. This dual risk emphasises the importance of effective early warning systems and anticipatory action.

In conclusion, there is a growing scientific consensus that 2026 could see the development of a strong, possibly Super El Niño. Forecast models such as NMME and C3S provide early indications of this potential, highlighting a transition from neutral conditions to a warming phase that could peak toward the end of the year. Comparisons with past events such as 1997, 2015, and 2023 suggest that the impacts could be significant, especially in rainfall patterns. For Eastern Africa, the two most critical seasons are JJAS and OND, where the likelihood of below and above-normal rainfall, respectively, is high. As always, continued monitoring and interpretation of seasonal forecasts will be essential for informing preparedness and response strategies.

References

• Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S), 2026: Seasonal Forecast Plume for Niño 3.4 Region. Retrieved from: https://climate.copernicus.eu/charts/packages/c3s_seasonal/products/c3s_seasonal_plume_mm?area=nino34&base_time=202604010000&type=plumepercentiles
• Stockdale, T. (2026). How confident should we be in a prediction of El Niño?. Retrieved from: https://www.ecmwf.int/en/about/media-centre/science-blog/2026/el-nino-2026
• NOAA Climate Prediction Centre (CPC), 2026: ENSO Diagnostic Discussion. Retrieved from https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/ensodisc.shtml?
• Severe Weather Europe, 2026: Super El Niño Forecast and Implications for Global Climate. Retrieved from: https://www.severe-weather.eu/long-range-2/super-el-nino-2026-forecast-global-weather-shift-expected-united-states-canada-europe-fa/
• World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), 2024: State of the Global Climate 2023. Retrieved from: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://wmo.int/publication-series/state-of-global-climate/state-of-global-climate-2023&ved=2ahUKEwjmgryvju2TAxXqRaQEHS0zAgQQFnoECBwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2vU_To1w3BnFYOd8E84qpb
• The Guardian, 2026: Are we heading for ‘super El Niño’ — and what could we expect? Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/apr/13/el-nino-explainer

By Linda Ogallo, Paula Machio, Geoffrey Sabiiti, Hussein Mohamed, in collaboration with the ICPAC Climate Change Technical Working Group

Somewhere between the borders of Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, and Ethiopia lies a stretch of land where the word “drought” has lost its sense of urgency. Not because things have improved, but because drought has been here so long, it has stopped feeling like an emergency and started feeling like the weather. In this part of the Horn of Africa, drought is no longer experienced as a temporary shock. It has become a recurring condition that shapes livelihoods, mobility, local economies, and the everyday decisions of households and communities.

This is the Karamoja Cross-Border Area, a vast semi-arid landscape of savannah grasslands, scattered acacia woodlands, and dry riverbeds that briefly come alive each year before retreating into dust. It is home to millions of people, at least 19 distinct pastoral and agro-pastoral communities, and one of the most persistent slow-burning humanitarian crises on the African continent. Yet Karamoja is more than a geography of hardship; it is also a landscape of resilience, cross-border interdependence, and indigenous knowledge systems that have enabled communities to endure in one of the region’s most climatically fragile environments.

The Turkana, the Pokot, the Karamojong, and the Daasanach. Communities whose ways of life are built around livestock, seasonal mobility, and a deep, practised knowledge of an unforgiving landscape. They have always lived with drought. But the drought they are living with now is different: more frequent, more prolonged, more severe, and arriving in a world far less prepared to respond than it should be.

When the rains don’t come

Karamoja receives less than 500 mm of rainfall annually across much of its territory. When the rains do arrive, they fall mainly between March and November, with a brief peak in April and May before the long dry season sets in. December, January, and February are typically the harshest months; parched, windswept, and unforgiving.

But what makes Karamoja so vulnerable is not simply the scarcity of rain. It is its unreliability. Rainfall across the region is highly erratic, arriving late, falling unevenly, abandoning one valley entirely while drenching a neighbouring hillside. For communities whose food security and economic survival depend on when and where rain falls, this variability is not a minor inconvenience. It is an existential threat.

Three drought years remain deeply etched in living memory across the region: 1984, 2000, and 2022. Each unfolded differently, but all followed the same brutal pattern. Pastures withered and shrank. Water points dried up. Livestock began to die. Hunger spread through communities. Then conflict emerged over the last green pasture, the last functioning borehole, and the final stretches of land still worth grazing on.

During the 2010–2011 drought, livestock mortality in parts of Karamoja hit 20 per cent. In 2017, a single drought season wiped out 70 per cent of the region’s maize and sorghum harvest. In 2020, nearly 30 per cent of children under five in Karamoja were acutely malnourished. These are not statistics from a faraway crisis. They are records of what happens when rain fails a population that has nowhere else to turn to.

The livestock economy and its fragility

To understand what drought means in Karamoja, you first have to understand what livestock means here. Cattle, goats, camels, and sheep are not simply sources of food; they are savings accounts, bride wealth, social currency, and the primary engine of economic life. A family’s herd is its insurance against a bad season, its collateral for trade, and its marker of status and security. In many ways, it is everything.

When drought comes, and animals die, families do not just lose protein; they lose their financial foundation. They lose the very assets that would enable them to recover. What follows is often a descent into destitution that can take years, sometimes generations, to reverse; if recovery comes at all.

For centuries, communities have developed ways to manage this risk. Seasonal mobility, moving herds to where water and pasture remain, is among the oldest and most effective strategies. Others include splitting herds, diversifying livestock species, and supplementing livelihoods through small-scale farming, fishing, or trade. These are not coping mechanisms of desperation but sophisticated adaptations refined over generations in response to a harsh environment.

Yet these systems were built for a climate that, however unforgiving, still followed a rhythm. Drought came, drought passed, herds recovered, and communities rebuilt. That rhythm is now breaking. Droughts are arriving more frequently, lasting longer, and leaving less time for recovery in between. The traditional playbook that sustained communities for generations is increasingly being outpaced by the pace of change.

More than a climate story

Drought in Karamoja is not a simple climate story. It is a security story. A public health story. A story about increased animal diseases. A conflict story. It is a story about what happens when climate stress collides with poverty, political marginalisation, and inadequate infrastructure.

When water and pasture run short, communities that have coexisted for generations find themselves in competition for the same scarce resources. Tensions escalate. Livestock raids, already a feature of pastoral life, intensify. People are killed. Families are displaced. Children are pulled from school to help salvage whatever the family has left.

The health consequences compound everything. Reduced water availability forces communities to share water sources with their animals and drink from contaminated supplies, raising the incidence of cholera and diarrhoeal disease. Malnutrition weakens the immune system. Mental health deteriorates under the sustained stress of not knowing whether there will be enough; enough water, enough food, enough to keep children alive.

Deforestation and overgrazing, themselves partly driven by desperation during dry seasons, accelerate land degradation, stripping away vegetation that would otherwise help soils retain moisture when rain does arrive. The land becomes progressively less able to absorb the shocks that are becoming increasingly frequent.

Approximately 46 per cent of the Karamoja region is classified as remote, and communities there face long travel times to the nearest town. When food prices spike during drought or when emergency assistance must reach isolated villages, those hours translate directly into lives lost.

The gaps that keep widening

What is most striking about the situation in Karamoja is not the scale of the climate challenge, significant as that is. It is the scale of the institutional gap.

When communities across the region are asked whether drought monitoring systems exist where they live, close to half say no. Where early warning systems do function, they are often disconnected from one another, with national meteorological services operating separately from traditional knowledge holders, who remain excluded from formal systems. Information that reaches capital cities often fails to reach the villages that need it most. For cross-border pastoralists, reaching them becomes even more challenging.

There is also a technical problem that rarely gets discussed. The global thresholds used to classify drought, the standardised metrics used by international agencies to trigger alerts and response, do not always capture what communities in Karamoja actually experience. Seasons that register as merely dry in international databases can be catastrophic on the ground. When the tools do not match reality, neither does the response.

The region’s extreme remoteness reinforces the problem. Roads are poor. Markets are distant. Access to credit and insurance, the financial buffers that might allow a household to absorb a bad season without losing everything, is almost nonexistent. The central and eastern zones, which face the highest drought risk, are also the areas where poverty is deepest, market access is most limited, and communities are most exposed.

What a different future could look like

None of this is inevitable. The solutions are not mysterious.

A cross-border early warning system, one that actually functions across Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, and Ethiopia simultaneously, integrating scientific data with local knowledge and making information available to communities in real time, could transform how drought is managed in the region. Drought does not stop at a border post. The systems designed to respond to it should not either.

Nature-based solutions offer enormous potential. Restoring degraded rangelands, rehabilitating water catchments, and promoting water harvesting during seasons of heavy rainfall can dramatically improve the land’s capacity to buffer drought when it comes. In areas like West Pokot, where land degradation has reached severe levels, restoration is not a luxury; it is the foundation upon which every other intervention depends.

Livelihood diversification is equally critical. Beekeeping, poultry farming, small-scale trade, and value addition to milk, meat, and crops are not exotic alternatives but practical, proven options that reduce families’ dependence on a single climate-vulnerable income source. Vocational training that opens doors to non-agricultural employment matters too, especially for younger generations growing up in a rapidly changing landscape.

And communities themselves must be central to all of it — not as beneficiaries of programmes designed elsewhere, but as the primary managers of their own natural resources, empowered through local institutions, supported with resources and capacity, and recognised as holders of knowledge that no remote sensing system can replicate.

A long overdue reckoning

The communities of Karamoja have been adapting to a difficult climate for longer than any current government has existed. Their knowledge, resilience, and determination deserve more than emergency food drops in a bad year. They deserve systems that see the crisis coming, institutions that respond before the animals start dying, and investments that build the kind of buffer that means one dry year does not erase a decade of progress.

The climate is not going to become more forgiving in Karamoja. The rains will remain erratic. The droughts will likely intensify. The question is whether the world pays attention now or waits for the next catastrophe to remind it that this place exists.

The people who live here cannot afford to wait.

Source: Drought Risk Profile For Karamoja Cross-Border Area: Strengthening Capacity of IGAD to Increase Drought Resilience in the Horn of Africa

In November 2023, floods affected more than 2 million people across Somalia in a single season — killing over 100, displacing 750,000, and inundating an estimated 1.5 million hectares of farmland. Six months earlier, the same country had been on the brink of famine from the worst drought in 40 years. In April 2024, floods swept through Nairobi, Kampala, and Dar es Salaam simultaneously, affecting nearly one million people across East Africa. In 2021, South Sudan recorded its worst flood season in living memory — more than 800,000 people displaced across a country still recovering from decades of conflict.

On the night of 6–7 March 2026, the Nairobi River burst its banks after a single night of intense rainfall. Floodwaters swept through Kibra, Mathare, Mukuru, and Westlands — the same informal settlements that have flooded repeatedly for over a decade. At least 66 people died nationally, 33 of them in Nairobi alone. Seventy-one vehicles were swept away. Flights were diverted to Mombasa.

By the end of March, the death toll had risen to 110 across 30 counties, with more than 34,000 people displaced. What made this event particularly telling was not the rainfall. The Kenya Meteorological Department had issued a clear warning on 25 February 2026 — more than a week before the flood struck. The drainage systems were not cleared. The at-risk neighbourhoods were not properly warned. No pre-emptive action was taken. The forecast for heavy rain was accurate but not flood-location specific, leading to inadequate preparedness in affected areas.

For too long, conversations around climate risk in the IGAD region have focused mainly on drought, food insecurity, and rural livelihoods. These issues remain critical and deserve continued attention. But the urban dimension of risk is becoming equally urgent.

Across the IGAD region, cities are experiencing rapid growth, but their resilience is not keeping pace. Roads are expanding, buildings are rising, and urban populations are increasing, yet many of our towns and cities remain dangerously unprepared for the climate extremes and associated risks. Floods, storms and heat stress — combined with poor drainage, informal settlement expansion, and weak urban planning are creating a new layer of vulnerability that can no longer be ignored. If the region is serious about disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation, then urban resilience must move from the margins of policy discussion to the centre stage for immediate action.

More people live in cities and secondary towns than ever before. More investment is being concentrated in urban areas. More livelihoods depend on transport systems, markets, drainage networks, water systems, housing conditions, and local governance. When these systems fail under climate stress, the consequences are immediate and far-reaching. What begins as heavy rainfall quickly turns into displacement, loss of income, transport disruption, school closures, disease outbreaks, damaged infrastructure, and human suffering. This is why early warnings must go beyond forecasts to timely action.

An accurate weather forecast does not protect a household on its own. An advisory does not unblock a drainage channel. A bulletin does not prevent settlement in a flood-prone area. Information becomes meaningful only when it is linked to proper risk assessment, preparedness, pre-arranged finance, pre-defined actions, risk-informed planning, and public awareness and protection of vulnerable groups and assets. That is the real test of urban resilience. Not whether rain was predicted, but whether institutions, systems, and communities issued specific and actionable warning information to be acted upon before the disasters hit and impacts escalated.

Why Cities Must Prepare Before Disaster

The recent flooding in Nairobi offers an important lesson for the wider IGAD region. It should not be seen only as a local incident or an urban problem. It should be understood as a warning sign for the region’s rapidly growing cities — a sign that they urgently need climate risk-informed plans and risk-proof infrastructure. The recent floods in Nairobi showed, once again, that flooding is never just about rainfall. It is also about drainage, land use, infrastructure maintenance, settlement patterns, governance, inequality, and the level of preparedness in advance.

When these systems are weak, even a forecast issued on time may not be enough to prevent disaster. That is the deeper issue many cities across the IGAD region must now reckon with.

From Addis Ababa to Juba, from Mogadishu to Kampala and Nairobi, and across many secondary cities and border towns, the pattern is increasingly familiar. Urban growth is outpacing planning. Informal settlements are expanding into high-risk zones. Waste management systems are overburdened. Drainage infrastructure is inadequate or poorly maintained. Natural waterways are being encroached upon. Public institutions are often overstretched, reactive, or fragmented.

In such a setting, climate shocks do not arrive in a vacuum. They strike cities that have already accumulated risks over many years. The hazard may be natural, but the scale of disaster is often dictated by human decisions.

That is why urban resilience must be treated not only as a climate issue, but also as a governance issue. Cities become vulnerable when land-use controls are weak, when planning regulations are not enforced, when drainage is neglected, when poor communities are left to settle in unsafe places, and when infrastructure is developed without regard for future risk. Urban resilience, therefore, is not simply about emergency response after a disaster. It is about the quality of decisions made before a disaster. It is about whether climate risk is taken seriously in urban planning, budgeting, service delivery, and development control.

The IGAD region has made important progress in strengthening climate information services, early warning systems, and disaster risk management. Seasonal forecasts, regional climate outlooks, drought monitoring systems, and multi-hazard risk platforms have all become more visible and more useful over time. But the next frontier is clear.

These systems must speak more directly to urban realities. They must support cities, municipalities, and local governments to move from awareness to action based on a clear standard operating procedure. They must help decision-makers understand not only what hazard is imminent, but which neighbourhoods are most exposed, which infrastructure is most at risk, which communities need targeted support, and which anticipatory measures should be activated immediately.

This is where the idea of the last mile becomes especially important. In urban settings, the last mile is not just a remote rural location — it is also the informal settlement along a riverbank, the low-lying neighbourhood with blocked drains, the crowded market vulnerable to flash flooding, the school with inadequate protective infrastructure, the road section that becomes impassable after heavy rains, and the health centre serving the most exposed communities.

Urban early warning must become more localised, more practical, and more people-centred. It must tell people what is likely to happen, where it is likely to happen, and what actions must be taken when.

At the same time, city authorities must be prepared to act on warnings in a structured way. A credible flood forecast should trigger drainage clearance, inspection of hotspots, communication to at-risk neighbourhoods, emergency coordination, traffic management, readiness of health and rescue teams, and protective measures around critical infrastructure. This is where anticipatory action matters. It is the bridge between knowing and acting. It is the point at which climate information becomes public protection. Without anticipatory action, forecasts remain technically sound but operationally incomplete to save lives, protect livelihoods, and assets.

Governance, Inequality, and the Risk Ahead

There is a social justice dimension that cannot be ignored. Climate shocks in cities do not affect everyone equally. The most exposed are often the poorest. They are the households living in informal settlements, flood-prone zones, fragile housing, and service-deprived neighbourhoods. They are people with the fewest resources to relocate, recover, or absorb repeated losses. Any serious conversation on urban resilience in the IGAD region must therefore place these communities at the centre. Resilience cannot mean protecting only central business districts, major roads, or high-value infrastructure while low-income neighbourhoods remain trapped in recurring disaster. A people-centred approach demands that the priority be those with the highest exposure and the least protection.

The region must also stop treating drainage, waste management, land-use planning, and settlement regulation as secondary urban issues. These are climate resilience issues. They are disaster risk reduction issues. They are governance issues.

A city that neglects its drainage systems is not simply facing an engineering gap — it is courting flood risk. A city that allows construction in waterways and unsafe zones is not simply managing urban growth poorly — it is creating the conditions for disaster. A city that waits until people are displaced before acting is not resilient. It is reactive.

Urban resilience in the IGAD region requires a stronger compact between climate science, governance, infrastructure, and communities. Meteorological services, disaster management institutions, city planners, engineers, water departments, public health teams, transport agencies, and local leaders must work together in a far more coordinated way.

Climate information must shape planning decisions. Risk maps must shape investment choices. Preparedness plans must shape operational response. Community voices must shape local priorities. Resilience is built when these pieces work together, not when each sector operates in isolation.

The challenge is real, but so is the opportunity. The IGAD region does not need to start from zero. It already has strong experience in climate services, early warning, cross-border coordination, anticipatory action and risk monitoring. What is needed now is to extend this strength more deliberately into urban systems and urban governance. The region’s cities need not remain symbols of recurring crisis. They can become examples of preparedness, inclusion, and adaptive planning. But this will only happen if urban resilience is treated as a serious public investment priority rather than as an afterthought that returns to the agenda only after disaster strikes.

To move from concept to impact, we must focus on four non-negotiable priorities: first, integrate flood risk maps into municipal planning and permitting systems — with strict enforcement; second, develop city-level Anticipatory Action plans backed by pre-arranged financing; third, institutionalize mandatory drainage clearance and maintenance before every rainy season; and finally — the elephant in the room — take decisive action on informal settlements and unchecked land encroachment in urban floodplains.

The central message is simple. Cities in the IGAD region cannot afford to prepare after the flood. They must prepare before it. They cannot continue to treat forecasts as the final output of resilience. Forecasts are only the beginning. The real measure of success is whether warning leads to action, whether action reduces risk, and whether the most exposed communities are protected before the next hazard arrives.

Nairobi’s recent flooding has offered the region a timely and uncomfortable lesson. The question now is whether we are willing to learn from it. If we are, then urban resilience must become one of the defining priorities of climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction across the IGAD region. Not tomorrow. Now!

In the Horn of Africa, communities living in remote and crisis-prone areas often remain beyond the reach of conventional information systems. For the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and its Member States, ensuring that these populations are informed, involved, connected, and resilient is essential to achieving regional stability, development, and peace.

Husika, an innovative regional information and communication platform, has emerged as a key tool in bridging this critical “last mile” gap.

What is Husika?

Husika, meaning “to be involved” in Swahili, is a digital ecosystem developed to strengthen the flow of timely, reliable, and actionable information across IGAD Member States. The platform integrates early warning data, disaster risk information, and humanitarian updates to enhance decision-making at local, national, and regional levels.

Through the Husika App, SMS alerts, and web feeds, the platform is designed to improve how early warning messages, such as alerts about extreme weather or natural disasters, reach communities in remote or underserved areas across the region.

It brings together with National Disaster Operation Centes (NDOCs), and community actors to ensure that information moves both ways: from the ground to policymakers, and from regional systems back to the communities who need it most.

Addressing the ‘last mile’ challenge

The “last mile” refers to the hardest-to-reach populations, pastoralists, cross-border communities, displaced people, and rural households, often underserved by traditional communication networks. HUSIKA addresses this challenge by:

• Leveraging multiple communication channels such as mobile platforms, community radio, and social media to reach diverse audiences.
• Localizing information into local languages and culturally relevant formats.
• Connecting early warning and early action by ensuring local actors receive alerts fast enough to respond before crises escalate.
• Facilitating two-way communication, allowing communities to share feedback and local data to improve accuracy and responsiveness.

Strengthening Regional Resilience

Through Husika, IGAD Member States can coordinate better responses to transboundary challenges , such as drought, conflict, and disease outbreaks, by sharing real-time data and harmonized messages. This fosters collective resilience and regional solidarity, empowering local communities while supporting national and regional systems.

Partnerships and Innovation

Husika operates through strong partnerships between IGAD’s specialized institutions, national disaster management agencies, development partners, and technology innovators. Capacity-building initiatives and knowledge exchanges ensure that countries have the tools and expertise to sustain and expand the system.

Looking Ahead

As IGAD continues to invest in digital transformation and community resilience, Husika represents a model for inclusive, people-centered information systems. By enabling Member States to reach the last mile, Husika not only enhances preparedness and response but also reinforces trust, transparency, and shared accountability in the region’s humanitarian and development efforts.

HUSIKA is more than a platform — it is a commitment to ensuring that no one is left behind. Through it, IGAD and its partners are transforming the way information empowers communities, helping them anticipate risks, take action, and shape their own futures.

A comparative Analysis of Desert Locus Managemenet in the IGAD region

The 2019–2021 desert Locust upsurge and 2023 outbreak served as both a wake-up call and a catalyst for rethinking transboundary pest management in the IGAD region. The 2019–2021 outbreak exposed severe systemic weaknesses, including limited early warning capabilities, delayed responses, inadequate logistical capacity, and weak environmental safeguards. These shortcomings led to devastating impacts on agriculture, livelihoods, and ecosystems across the Horn of Africa. By contrast, the 2023–2024 outbreak, while a serious threat, illustrated a meaningful progress.

Key Interventions and Achievements

The Emergency Locust Response Project (ELRP), a large-scale, multi-country initiative launched by the World Bank, was a pivotal effort to combat the 2019–2021 upsurge. With a total commitment of approximately $375.7 million in financing, the project was rolled out in six countries, including Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and South Sudan, as well as the regional body IGAD. The program was designed to be a flexible, phased intervention that not only supported emergency response but also built long-term resilience.

Surveillance and Control Measures

At the height of the crisis, ELRP’s most critical interventions were the rapid deployment of locust surveillance and control measures. Over 10 million hectares of land were monitored across affected countries, with over 530,000 hectares subjected to locust control treatments. The project facilitated the leasing of six aircraft, drones, helicopters, and one specialized spray plane for aerial spraying of pesticides in infested areas. In addition, ultra-low volume (ULV) sprayers were distributed to ground teams, and over 24,000 pieces of personal protective equipment (PPE) were procured. These interventions, coordinated with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and national authorities, significantly curbed the spread of locust swarms. By 2022, these collective efforts had contributed to the official declaration by FAO that the upsurge had ended in the region.

Capacity building was a critical pillar of ELRP’s sustainability strategy. The project trained more than 700 front-line staff, including plant protection officers, surveillance agents, and pesticide applicators. Community awareness programs reached over 40,000 individuals, helping to improve the reporting of locust sightings and local response actions. Moreover, the project helped countries connect with FAO’s Desert Locust Information System (DLIS), enabling near-real-time data sharing and improved forecasting.

Livelihoods Protection and Rehabilitation

Recognizing the impact on vulnerable communities, ELRP invested heavily in safeguarding livelihoods. Across all countries, approximately 1.6 million households received direct livelihood support. This included cash transfers to pastoral and farming households, emergency agricultural inputs such as seeds and farming tools, and the restoration of crop and rangelands. In South Sudan, for instance, the project reached over 184,000 beneficiaries, with 30,786 households receiving cash transfers.

ELRP also supported medium-term environmental recovery, rehabilitating over 35,000 hectares of cropland and 305 hectares of pasture in South Sudan. The project emphasized the integration of ecosystem-based approaches with livelihoods support, including the promotion of climate-smart farming techniques and investments in resilient livestock systems.

The Role of Regional Coordination Platforms

The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) played a transformative role in enhancing regional coordination during the locust crisis. While the 2019–2021 response was initially fragmented, IGAD, with support from the World Bank’s ELRP, established a dedicated Inter-Regional Platform for the Sustainable Management of Desert Locust and other Trans-Boundary Pests. This platform served as a crucial mechanism to foster collaboration and prevent the previous operational silos.

How the Platform Helped:

• Harmonized Policy and Strategic Alignment: The platform brought together ministers of agriculture, technical experts, and regional partners to develop strategic documents and contingency plans. A key outcome was the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed between Ethiopia, Somalia, and Djibouti. This agreement formalized joint surveillance, resource pooling, and synchronized control operations across borders. This collaborative approach was crucial in the 2023 outbreak, where joint planning enabled a more rapid and effective response.
• Enhanced Early Warning Systems: The platform facilitated the sharing of critical pest data and forecasts between countries. It strengthened the IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC), which developed tools like the East Africa Pest Watch to disseminate early warning information. By integrating satellite imagery and climate data, these systems provided more accurate, actionable forecasts on locust movements, allowing countries to prepare proactively.
• Facilitated Resource Mobilization and Knowledge Sharing: The platform provided a central forum for donors, member states, and technical agencies like FAO and DLCO-EA to discuss priorities and mobilize resources. It helped ensure that funding was targeted and reduced duplication of efforts. The platform also served as a hub for knowledge management, promoting the exchange of best practices, especially on the use of biopesticides and sustainable control strategies.
• Strengthened National Capacities: By coordinating training and providing resources, the platform helped member states improve their national surveillance and control operations. This included support for developing and finalizing national preparedness plans, as well as the strategic stockpiling of pesticides and equipment.

This structured approach to coordination, a marked improvement from the initial reactive response, significantly reduced the scale and severity of the 2023 outbreak and demonstrated the value of proactive, institutionalized collaboration.

Comparative Analysis of the 2019–2020 and 2023–2024 Outbreaks

The 2019–2021 upsurge was the worst in 70 years in some IGAD countries, affecting millions of hectares. The event exposed critical gaps in early warning systems, preparedness, and coordination. The 2023–2024 period, in contrast, offered an opportunity to test the robustness of new response mechanisms.

Key Drivers Behind the Outbreaks

Both outbreaks were primarily driven by favorable climatic and ecological conditions, namely abnormal cyclonic activity in the Arabian Peninsula. Climate change was identified as a longer-term driver, increasing the frequency and severity of such events.

Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Stakeholder engagement revealed critical lessons from both outbreaks, highlighting the need for a fundamental shift in pest management.

• Early Warning: The 2019 crisis demonstrated that warnings were ineffective without a structured framework for action. This led to the establishment of community-based scout networks and better integration with meteorological services.
• Logistical Readiness: The lack of pre-positioned resources in 2019 greatly hampered the response. In response, Ethiopia procured five aircraft and established three regional control bases, while Somalia established a fully equipped locust response center in Hargeisa.
• Biopesticides: Adoption was limited due to weak regulatory systems and inconsistent field performance. Stakeholders stressed the importance of early application and policy support to overcome skepticism.
• Cross-Border Coordination: Coordination was fragmented in 2019 but saw significant improvement in 2023 through IGAD-led platforms and formal MoUs between neighboring countries.

Based on these lessons, a comprehensive set of recommendations was developed, including:

• Strengthen Early Warning: Institutionalize national units and integrate interoperable digital platforms like eLocust3 and EarthRanger.
• Enhance Sustainable Control: Promote integrated pest management (IPM) and scale up the regulated use of biopesticides.
• Institutionalize Preparedness: Develop national contingency plans with predefined triggers and secure dedicated budget lines to avoid reliance on emergency appeals.
• Improve Cross-Border Coordination: Strengthen IGAD’s role in harmonizing protocols and facilitating formal agreements for shared surveillance and resource pooling.
• Invest in Infrastructure: Expand training programs for technical staff and ensure a sustainable supply of standardized equipment.
• Promote Innovation: Support research on climate-locust interactions and the effectiveness of new control technologies.
• Foster Inclusive Community Engagement: Expand local surveillance networks and build trust through transparent communication and community outreach.

The desert locust upsurges of 2019–2020 and 2023–2024 underscore that reactive emergency spraying alone is no longer sufficient. The region must adopt a proactive, integrated, and climate-smart approach rooted in long-term preparedness, institutional resilience, regional collaboration, and community engagement to effectively manage transboundary pest threats in a changing climate.

References

• Adams, E.C., Parache, H.B., Cherrington, E., Ellenburg, W.L., Mishra, V., Lucey, R. et al. (2021). ‘Limitations of Remote Sensing in Assessing Vegetation Damage Due to the 2019–2021 Desert Locust Upsurge’, Frontiers in Climate, 3, pp. 1–13. doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.00013.
• Alemu, G. and Neigh, R. (2022). ‘Desert Locust Cropland Damage Differentiated from Drought, with Multi-Source Remote Sensing in Ethiopia’, Remote Sensing, 14(7), p. 1723. doi:10.3390/rs14071723.
• Baraka, E., Sirera, M. and Ong’amo, O. (2023). “The dilemma of balancing between benefits and risks: Desert locust management best practices.” Path of Science, 9(9), pp. 1–11. ISSN 2413–9009.
• Bekele, M. (2024) ‘Effects of desert locust plague on disaster management in the subsistence agriculture of Ethiopia: Do ex-ante or ex-post policy measures are more appropriate in agricultural risk management? An analytical review’, IDRiM Journal, 14(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.5595/001c.117270.
• Bennett, M. (2020, February 13). Desert locust outbreak highlights gaps in risk governance. PreventionWeb. https://www.preventionweb.net/blog/desert-locust-outbreak-highlights-gaps-risk-governance
• Brader, L., Djibo, H., Faye, F. G., Ghaout, S., Lazar, M., Luz, M., & Ould Babah, M. A. (2006). Towards a more effective response to desert locusts and their impacts on food security, livelihoods and poverty. Multilateral Evaluation of the 2003–05 Desert Locust Campaign. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
• Bruce, A., & MacDiarmid, R. (2022). “Towards resilient food systems: Integrating surveillance for plant pests and animal diseases.” Food Security, 14(5), 1295–1308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-022-01301-z
• Burgin, L.E., Gloster, J., Sanders, C., Mellor, P.S., Gubbins, S. & Carpenter, S. (2012) ‘Investigating incursions of Bluetongue Virus using a model of long-distance Culicoides biting midge’.
• Cheke, A. and Tratalos, A. (2007) ‘Migration, patchiness, and population processes illustrated by two migrant pests’, BioScience, 57(2), pp. 145–154.
• Cressman, K. (2001). Monitoring desert locusts in the Middle East: An overview. Environmental Science.
• Cressman, K. (2013). “Role of remote sensing in desert locust early warning.” Journal of Applied Remote Sensing, 7, 075098–1.
• Cressman, K. (December 2016). Biological and Environmental Hazards, Risks, and Disasters, pp.87–105. doi:10.1016/B978–0–12–394847–2.00006–1
• Cressman, K. (1996). “Current methods of desert locust forecasting at FAO.” EPPO Bulletin, 26(3–4), 577–585.
• ELRP Kenya. (2024). Emergency Locust Response Program — Kenya Chapter. Retrieved from https://www.elrp.go.ke/homepage
• Ethiopian News Agency (ENA). (2020, March 4). Ethiopia heaps on locust swarms deterrence efforts. Retrieved from https://www.ena.et/web/eng/w/en_13025
• FAO (2021). Desert Locust Crisis Appeal Progress Report — January 2020 to December 2021. https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/7ab4aa04-158e-4896-a55f-295d432467a2
• Halubanza, B., Phiri, J., Nyirenda, M., & Nkunika, P. O. Y. (2023). “Locust Infestations and Mobile Phones: Exploring the Potential of Digital Tools to Enhance Early Warning Systems and Response Mechanisms.” Zambia ICT Journal, 7(2), 10–16.
• Healey, G., Robertson, G., Magor, T, Pender, J., and Cressman K. (1996). “A GIS for desert locust forecasting and monitoring.” International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 10(1), 117–136.
• FAO. (2009). Emergency Prevention System (EMPRES): Desert Locust component — Enhancing early warning and early reaction capacity(Brochure). https://www.fao.org/ag/locusts/common/ecg/1344/en/EMPRESbrochureE.pdf
• United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. (n.d.). Early warning system. UNDRR. https://www.undrr.org/terminology/early-warning-system
• Hu, G., Stefanescu, C., Oliver, H. & Chapman, W. (2021). ‘Environmental drivers of annual population fluctuations in a trans-Saharan insect migrant’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(26), e2102762118. doi:10.1073/pnas.2102762118.
• Ibrahim, K. M. (2008). “Plague dynamics and population genetics of the desert locust: Can turnover during recession maintain population genetic structure?” Molecular Ecology, 10(3), 581–591.
• Jones, A., Thomson, D., Hort, M. & Devenish, B. (2007) ‘The U.K. Met Office’s Next-Generation Atmospheric Dispersion Model, NAME III’, in Air Pollution Modeling and Its Application XVII. Springer US, pp. 580–589. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68854-1_62.
• Kenyans.co.ke. (2024, June 26). Emergency Locust Response part of Ksh 54 Billion budget for Agricultural Transformation. Retrieved from https://www.kenyans.co.ke/news/102053-emergency-locust-response-part-ksh54-billion-budget-agricultural-transformation
• Li, S., Feng, S.-q., Ullah, H., Tu, X.-b., & Zhang, Z.-h. (2022). “IPM — Biological and integrated management of desert locust.” Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 21(12), 3467–3487.
• Luther, J., Thurston, W., Smith, J.W., Schumacher, A., Millington, S.C. & Hodson, D.P. et al. (2023). ‘Three-Dimensional Visualization of Long-Range Atmospheric Transport of Crop Pathogens and Insect Pests’, Atmosphere, 14(6), p. 910.
• Meynard, C.N., Gay, P.E., Lecoq, M., Foucart, A., Piou, C. and Chapuis, M.P. (2017). ‘Climate-driven geographic distribution of the desert locust during recession periods: Subspecies’ niche differentiation and relative risks under scenarios of climate change’, Global Change Biology, 23(11), pp. 4739–4749. pmid:28464493.
• Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security — South Sudan. (n.d.). Emergency Locust Response Project (ELRP). Retrieved July 9, 2025, from https://mafs.gov.ss/emergency-locust-response-project/
• Mongare, R., Abdel-Rahman, E.M., Mudereri, B.T., Kimathi, E., Onywere, S. & Tonnang, H.E.Z. (2023). “Desert Locust (Schistocerca gregaria) Invasion Risk and Vegetation Damage in a Key Upsurge Area.” Earth, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 187–208. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/earth4020010
• Retkute, R., Thurston, W., Cressman, K. and Gilligan, A. (2024), “A framework for modelling desert locust population dynamics and large-scale dispersal”, PLoS Comput Biol., 20(12), e1012562. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012562 PMID: 39700069 PMCID: PMC11658591
• Roffey, J. and Magor, J.I. (2003) Desert Locust Population Dynamics Parameters. FAO Report No. AGP/DL/TS30. Available at: https://www.fao.org/ag/locusts/oldsite/PDFs/TS30.pdf.
• Salih, A., Baraibar, M., Mwangi, K. and Artan, G. (2020). “Climate change and locust outbreak in East Africa.” Nature Climate Change, 10, pp.584–585. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0835-8.
• Showler, T. (2019). “Desert locust control: The effectiveness of proactive interventions and the goal of outbreak prevention.” American Entomologist, 65(3), pp.180–191. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ae/tmz020
• Showler, T., Ould Babah Ebbe, A., Lecoq, M. and Maeno, O. (2021). “Early intervention against desert locusts: current proactive approach and the prospect of sustainable outbreak prevention.” Agronomy, 11(2), p.312. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11020312.
• Shrestha, S., Thakur, G., Gautam, J., Acharya, N., Pandey, M., and Shrestha, J. (2021) ‘Desert locust and its management in Nepal: a review’, Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 4(1), pp. 1–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3126/janr.v4i1.33197.
• United Nations CERF. CERF funding to FAO for locust crisis. https://cerf.un.org/news/funding-update-desert-locusts-2020
• World Bank. (2024, April). Implementation Status & Results Report — Emergency Locust Response Program (P174546). Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099121924040042265/pdf/P17454618826140691b91e1d1564771a36a.pdf
• World Bank. (2024, September). Implementation Completion and Results Report — Emergency Locust Response Program (P173702). Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099122024092521688/pdf/P17370217d07a906e1843a1224179314815.pdf

Watch our End of Project Interview video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac1uUc3-QSg&t=165s

Read our End of Project Report

Read The full Analysis Report on Desert Locus Managemenet in the IGAD region

For ICPAC, seeing Somalia step forward as an IGAD member state to hold such a dialogue was a moment of profound significance.

By Kennedy Wekesa

In a city too often defined by the headlines of crisis, a different rhythm pulsed through the halls of Mogadishu. It was the strum of a Somali guitar, the soulful cadence of a traditional singer, and the determined hum of over a hundred voices charting a new future. From December 9–11, 2025, Somalia didn’t just host a meeting; it orchestrated a national symphony for resilience at its historic National Dialogue Platform on Anticipatory Action.

This was no ordinary workshop. It was a cultural and strategic convergence, where climate scientists sat with government officials and development partners, where data analysts exchanged notes with pastoralists, and where the ancient wisdom of the land met the cutting-edge science of foresight. At the heart of this symphony was the steady, guiding tempo provided by IGAD’s Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC), helping Somalia compose its score for survival in the face of relentless climate shocks.

The Opening Chord: A Nation Chooses to Anticipate

The dialogue opened not just with speeches, but with a cultural invocation — a reminder that the land they sought to protect was woven with stories and song. Against this backdrop, Somalia Disaster Management Agency (SoDMA) Commissioner Mohamoud Moallim issued a powerful call: “As climate-related shocks intensify… Somalia must chart a path that allows us to anticipate risks early and act decisively.” The roadmap for this path — the Somalia National Anticipatory Action Roadmap — lay before them, a document born from the collaboration between SoDMA, ICPAC, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Food Programme (WFP), International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), Danish Refugee Council (DRC) and the communities on the frontlines.

For ICPAC, seeing Somalia step forward as an IGAD member state to hold such a dialogue was a moment of profound significance. Dr George Otieno, ICPAC’s Anticipatory Action Thematic Lead, captured the gravity of the moment: “We meet at a time when climate extremes are reshaping our environment at an unprecedented pace… The cost of inaction is immense.” His words hung in the air, underscored by the harrowing statistics: 43,000 lives lost in the 2021–23 drought, over $176 million in flood damages just in 2024. This dialogue was Somalia’s answer to that cost — a defiant move from paying the price to investing in prevention.

The Melody of Collaboration: From Forecasts to Action

Over three days, the dialogue moved through movements of intense collaboration. In sessions co-facilitated by ICPAC, the complex mechanics of anticipatory action were broken down. How do you design a financial trigger that releases funds before a flood drowns crops? How do you harmonize satellite data with a pastoralist’s reading of the sky? ICPAC experts guided discussions on digital tools that turn climate predictions into clear, actionable alerts for communities.

The conversation was grounded in a central, human truth voiced by Ezana Kassa, FAO Representative in Somalia: “At the center of this effort are Somalia’s rural communities… They face the first and harshest impacts of shocks.” This principle ensured that technical talks about “triggers” and “thresholds” never lost sight of their ultimate purpose: protecting a pastoralist’s herd, a farmer’s field, a family’s home.

Delivering such a forward-looking platform in a fragile and climate-stressed context would have been immensely challenging without sustained international support. Through the backing of Germany’s Federal Foreign Office (GFFO) and the European Union’s Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), ICPAC was able to provide the technical coordination, regional expertise, and anticipatory frameworks that helped turn ambition into action.

The Bridge: Where Data Meets Culture

Perhaps the most unforgettable feature was the seamless weave of science and Somali culture. Each day, discussions on hydrology models and financing mechanisms were punctuated by the stirring performances of a local guitarist and vocalist. The music served as a cultural bridge, reminding everyone that the data points on their screens told the story of a living, breathing land with a deep cultural heritage to preserve. It was a tangible expression of WFP’s Marco Selva’s observation that anticipatory action is “about people, culture, and the collective vision of a safer future.”

The Finale: A Marketplace of Hope

The dialogue crescendoed on the final day with an Anticipatory Action Marketplace. The venue transformed into a vibrant exhibition of hope, where organizations like ICPAC, FAO, and WFP showcased their tools not in dry reports, but in dynamic, interactive stalls. Attendees touched soil moisture sensors, explored digital flood maps, and debated with innovators. This was the roadmap coming to life — a tangible bazaar of solutions where partnerships were forged over demonstrations, and ideas crossed-pollinated between stalls.

Here, the core philosophy of ICPAC’s support was on full display: empowering Somalia with the knowledge and tools to lead. It was about ensuring that early warnings don’t just end as alerts on a phone, but spark pre-arranged actions, dignified cash transfers, and community-led protection of assets.

The Encore: A Resilient Refrain

As the final notes of the dialogue faded, a powerful new refrain for Somalia had been composed. It is a refrain that chooses, in the words of FAO’s Kassa, “early action over late reaction, preparedness over crisis, and resilience over repeated loss.”

With the technical guidance of ICPAC and the united will of its people and partners, Somalia is no longer just listening to the forecast of the next storm. It is learning to dance to the rhythm of readiness, ensuring that when the rains fail or the rivers swell, the nation moves — not as victims of disaster, but as architects of its own resilience.

The dialogue in Mogadishu proved that the most powerful early warning system is a united community. And in that room, for three days, Somalia tuned into its strongest signal yet.

Shifting from Reactive to proactive approaches

Anticipatory Action (AA) refers to acting ahead of predicted hazardous events to reduce their impact on lives, livelihoods, and humanitarian needs before they fully unfold. It relies on pre-defined thresholds, actions, and financing mechanisms triggered by forecasts and early warnings. Rather than waiting for disasters to strike, AA enables proactive measures to protect vulnerable communities.

In the IGAD region — comprising Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda — AA is emerging as a key strategy to address climate-driven shocks such as droughts, floods, food insecurity, and locust outbreaks. IGAD is actively laying the foundation for effective AA through strategic frameworks, roadmaps, multi-stakeholder platforms, and targeted capacity building.

To fully realize AA’s potential, deeper systemic strengthening is essential. This includes sustained funding commitments, integration into governance systems, improved forecasting capabilities, and inclusive engagement of communities and stakeholders. These investments are vital to safeguarding lives, preserving livelihoods, sustaining ecosystems, and fostering peace across the Horn of Africa.

Momentum is building, with increased financing through initiatives like SCALAA-GHA and ARiPHA, supported by ECHO and GFFO. These programs provide both foundational and operational funding, signaling growing recognition of AA as indispensable to regional resilience.

Core Components of AA:

• Risk Analysis: Assesses hazards, vulnerabilities, and exposure to anticipate potential impacts.
• Trigger Mechanism: Activates timely interventions based on forecast-linked thresholds (e.g., cash transfers, livestock support, supply distribution).
• Anticipatory Actions: Context-specific, pre-impact measures aligned with agency or government plans.
• Financing Mechanisms: Ensures pre-arranged, rapid-release funding tied to forecast data for early response.

The Climate and Risk Context in IGAD

IGAD’s Climate Adaptation Strategy 2023–2030 highlights an alarming rise in climatic hazards. More frequent droughts, floods, desertification, storms, and sea-level rise are all intensifying. These events not only threaten livelihoods but also exacerbate existing issues such as displacement, food shortages, ecosystem degradation, and conflicts over scarce resources like water and pasture.

As IGAD’s Executive Secretary has noted, unless and until we tackle the climate risks proactively, climate variability and change will continue to exacerbate conflict and humanitarian crisis.

Anticipatory Action and Food Security

Food systems across the IGAD region are under severe strain. The IGAD Food Systems Resilience Programme (FSRP) is working to strengthen digital agro-climate advisory services (DCAS), which provide farmers and policymakers with the information they need to make informed decisions. A DCAS Knowledge Network was launched in December 2024 to facilitate the sharing of best practices, build capacity, and guide adaptation planning across member states.

To further bolster food security, climate-smart agriculture and fodder cultivation pilots are being implemented in semi-arid zones, such as Kulaan, Kenya, which has proven effective in improving the resilience of pastoral livelihoods.

Addressing Transboundary Pests

Transboundary pests, especially Desert Locusts, pose a recurrent and cross-border threat to food security. IGAD has developed multi-hazard early warning platforms like the East Africa Hazards Watch and the Climate Risk & Food Security Atlas to monitor and forecast pest movements. This allows for anticipatory interventions to begin before a full-scale outbreak occurs.

While there is growing global interest in applying AA to non-weather hazards like pest outbreaks and livestock diseases, regional coverage is still in its early stages and often limited to pilot projects.

Regional Frameworks and Strategy Implementation

The IGAD Regional Roadmap for Anticipatory Action

Adopted in August 2024, this roadmap provides a harmonized strategy to scale up AA across IGAD member states. It connects triggers, financing, governance, and implementation mechanisms into a cohesive framework. IGAD is working with member states to develop national road maps to accelerate a transition from traditional, slow and expensive emergency management to proactive, dignified and sustainable anticipatory action.

The Eastern Africa Dialogue Platform (EADP)

The first EADP was hosted by IGAD in Mombasa in October 2024. The platform focused on aligning triggers across different hazards, integrating national services, combining scientific and traditional forecasts, and mobilizing sustainable financing. The resulting declaration and recommendations aim to integrate AA into national planning systems and budgets across the region.

The Building Blocks of Anticipatory Action

Effective anticipatory action relies on three key components:

• Early Warning Systems & Triggers: Forecast-based triggers are linked to predefined thresholds that activate interventions. These can include cash transfers, livestock protection, the pre-distribution of supplies, or disease surveillance.
• Financing Mechanisms: Pre-arranged financing is crucial. While global models exist (e.g., UN CERF, IFRC’s Disaster Response Emergency Fund), regional financing remains limited.
• Governance & Collaboration: For AA to be effective, coordination is essential among national meteorological agencies, disaster management authorities, humanitarian and development actors, and civil society. Government ownership and clear policy frameworks help institutionalize AA.

The Benefits and Challenges of AA

Benefits

• Cost-Efficiency and Risk Reduction: Acting before an emergency escalates helps to save lives, protect livelihoods, and significantly reduces the costs associated with disaster response.
• Resilience Building: When integrated into broader resilience goals, AA can drive sustained systemic change and policy integration.

Challenges

• Limited Financing: AA often suffers from a lack of dedicated budget allocation and political support. Many governments are unfamiliar with its long-term benefits.
• Data Gaps: Many regions lack the reliable, high-resolution forecast data or the technical capacity needed to translate early warnings into actionable triggers, especially across borders.
• Expanding to New Risks: While interest is growing, formal models for triggering AA for locusts, animal disease outbreaks, or displacement are still in development.

Emerging Practices and Success Stories

• Drought Forecasting in Kenya: In pastoral regions of Kenya, models forecasting vegetation conditions have enabled drought alerts to be activated up to six weeks in advance. This has given decision-makers critical lead time to support vulnerable pastoralist communities with high accuracy.
• DCAS Knowledge Network: This network, established under the FSRP, is democratizing access to agro-climate advisory tools like digital platforms and early warning alerts. This empowers farmers to make more informed decisions, strengthening their resilience across IGAD countries.

Recommendations for Strengthening AA in the IGAD Region

To fully realize the potential of anticipatory action, IGAD must focus on a few key areas:

1. Scale up National AA Frameworks: Move pilot projects into national policy, secure operational funding, and integrate them into disaster risk management plans.
2. Harmonize Triggers: Facilitate cross-border coordination on issues like locust monitoring, drought thresholds, and the sharing of meteorological data.
3. Diversify Financing: Invest in national budget lines, explore insurance mechanisms like index-based insurance (e.g., African Risk Capacity), and foster public-private partnerships.
4. Bridge Data and Capacity Gaps: Strengthen national hydro-meteorological services and invest in platforms that bring forecasts directly to communities.
5. Expand Beyond Climate Shocks: Develop protocols for preemptive action against pest outbreaks, livestock diseases, and displacement triggers.
6. Ensure Inclusion: Provide equitable access to forecasts and action, especially for women-headed households, pastoral communities, and other marginalized groups.

Anticipatory Action represents a transformative shift for the IGAD region, moving from reactive crisis response to proactive resilience building. Through strategic frameworks, roadmaps, multi-stakeholder platforms, and capacity building, IGAD is laying the groundwork for a future where AA can effectively address climate shocks, food insecurity, and transboundary threats.

However, to truly unlock its full potential, systemic strengthening through funding commitments, governance integration, enhanced data, and inclusive engagement is essential. This will help to safeguard vulnerable populations across the Horn of Africa, preserving lives, livelihoods, ecosystems, and peace for years to come.

Anticipatory Action is a novel approach that avert risk before disasters strike and/or significantly advance community asset and resilience building by investing in pre-identified actions.

References

IGAD Climate Adaptation Strategy 2023–2030

IGAD Disaster Risk Management programme, early warning & anticipatory action

IGAD Regional Roadmap for Anticipatory Action (August 2024)

IGAD/ICPAC anticipatory action workshop May 2023

Eastern Africa Dialogue Platform (EADP) Oct 2024 outcomes

Anticipatory Finance

Global overview of anticipatory action and definitions

Case of vegetation forecasting for drought early warning in Kenya

IGAD gender-responsive initiatives in climate resilience

Kennedy Wekesa, Emebet Jigssa and Dr. Ahmed Amdihun with contribution from Climate Change Technical Working Group

Busia County, Kenya — October 2025 — In a powerful convergence of policy and practice, the IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC) was at the forefront of the National Symposium on Disaster Risk Reduction, held from 10th to 13th October. The event, strategically aligned with the International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction (IDDRR) 2025 and its potent theme, “Fund Resilience, Not Disasters,” placed a critical spotlight on Busia County — a transboundary region symbolic of the cross-border climate challenges facing Eastern Africa.

The symposium served as a dynamic platform for governments, donors, and development partners to translate the global ambitions of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the IGAD Disaster Risk Management Strategy into tangible local action. ICPAC’s presence underscored its thought leadership in demonstrating how strategic investment in climate and disaster resilience with the right communication is the most effective way to build resilience and reduce the escalating costs of disaster response.

The choice of Busia County was symbolic and strategic. Situated along the Kenya-Uganda border and repeatedly battered by extreme floods, Busia embodies the complex reality of transboundary disaster risk. Communities here face not only more frequent climate shocks but also the compounded challenges of fragmented access to early warning information and siloed response efforts across borders.

“Let’s invest wisely for a safer Eastern Africa,” emphasized an ICPAC representative during a keynote address.

Showcasing HUSIKA: Investing in the Architecture of Resilience

Central to ICPAC’s contribution was the showcase of the HUSIKA Communication Platform, highlighted as a prime example of a smart, high-impact investment in resilience and reaching the last mile with early warning information. Designed specifically to dismantle the barriers exposed in regions like Busia, HUSIKA is a multi-layered, multi-level, and multi-channel platform that structures information dissemination for maximum impact.

The platform demonstrates its value by:

• Targeting with Precision: Through smart user categorization and geo-targeting, HUSIKA ensures a flood warning reaches specific sub-counties and wards in Busia in the appropriate language, making alerts actionable and reducing warning fatigue.
• Closing the Feedback Loop: Unlike costly, one-way traditional systems, HUSIKA’s integrated two-way communication creates a vital dialogue. Communities can report on-ground impacts, which improves the relevance of advisories and ensures resources are directed to where they are most needed.
• Fostering Collaborative Efficiency: The platform eliminates silos by facilitating collaboration between national meteorological services, county governments, and NGOs, ensuring a unified and cost-effective response.

The platform’s proven results provide donors and partners with the measurable impact and value for money they seek, demostrating that upfront investment in such technology prevents far greater losses in the future.

Aligning with the Sendai Framework and the Future of DRR Financing

The symposium provided a critical moment to reflect on regional progress against the Sendai Framework targets, particularly urging countries to “Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to people by 2030.”

ICPAC’s presentations made a compelling case that IGAD, through its disaster risk management programme and innovations like HUSIKA are key to accelerating this progress. The dialogue around DRR financing highlighted a strategic shift towards investing in integrated, scalable platforms that enhance member states capacity while directly empowering communities. The message was clear: investing in systems like HUSIKA is not an IT cost, but a foundational investment in community resilience that generates significant returns by anticipating and mitigating disaster impacts.

As the world marked IDDRR 2025 under the banner of “Fund Resilience, Not Disasters,” the events in Busia served as a powerful microcosm of a new approach for Eastern Africa — one that is proactive, innovative, and collaborative. ICPAC emerged not just as a climate service provider, but as a central architect and thought leader, demonstrating the tangible tools and strategies to build a safer, more resilient future for all.

More on: International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction

Linda Ogallo, Joyce Jelagat, Masilin Gudoshava and Alex Ogelo, with contributions from the IGAD Climate Change Technical Working Group

Weather forecasts generally present information on what the weather will be. This is usually given in terms of how the weather will deviate from the normal conditions when speaking from a seasonal timescale, to how much rainfall is expected in a week or in a day. Many users of climate information cannot translate the amount of rainfall or temperature into actionable outputs. In addition, forecasts advisories are usually given over a large area and as a result end up being very general. Globally, there is a consensus among climate producers on the shift from communicating what the weather will be to what the weather will do (WMO, 2021).

An impact-based forecast (IBF) is a type of weather forecast that focuses on the potential consequences of weather events, rather than just describing the weather conditions themselves. This is a huge task that requires a detailed understanding of what the weather will actually do. ICPAC, in partnership with NORCAP, through support of the Gates Foundation, is embarking on a study to understand the journey of the development of an IBF through a pilot study. The sites selected for the study are Makueni and Machakos counties in Kenya, as this allows the learning grant to build on existing engagements by ICPAC through the Climsa project and the AICRA project. In order to understand the investment needed to undertake an IBF at a regional level, a testing of existing methodology was decided on, with a focus on Agriculture. Consultation of national data on priority crops for Machakos and Makueni that would make an ideal pilot was conducted, and maize and beans were selected as the main priority crops for both counties (KNBS & MoLAD, 2024).

With a narrowed focus to enable the development process in the implementation of an operational product for IBF, the first step was to conduct a vulnerability assessment to understand the context in which the product is to be developed. This was then followed by a stakeholder engagement to better understand the needs of the relevant users and to get feedback on the desired indicators and the available data.

The first component in an IBF is the forecast itself, and while this is available in various time scales, challenges linked to the uncertainties still remain. IBF is meant to help communicate the uncertainties better by communicating the level of risk; its preferred usability over a traditional forecast has been widely acknowledged (Coughlan de Perez, et al., 2015; Wilkinson, et al., 2018; WMO, 2021).

Developing impact-based forecasts (IBF) for agriculture is inherently complex. Unlike conventional forecasts that focus primarily on meteorological variables, IBF requires the integration of data across multiple sectors. Some of this information, such as rainfall or temperature, follows linear and measurable patterns, while others, particularly those shaped by human behaviour and decision-making, are non-linear and harder to model. To better understand farmers' needs in the design of IBF products, an assessment of the agricultural calendar was carried out in Machakos and Makueni counties. This process helped validate existing literature on Kenyan farming practices while capturing spatial and temporal variations in climate at the local level.

Farmers emphasised that current zone-based forecasts often fail to reflect microclimatic differences that occur over short distances. They expressed a need for forecasts at finer spatial scales, ideally grid-based, to better capture these variations. Temporal shifts in weather patterns were also highlighted: farmers in lowland areas reported that they now rely almost exclusively on the October–December (OND) rains, as the March–May (MAM) season has become increasingly unreliable.

Although most farmers in the two counties receive climate information, its application to decision-making varies. Many integrate forecasts into crop planning, but others continue to rely on traditional calendars and indigenous knowledge systems. For example, some farmers determine planting times by observing the flowering of certain plants, an indigenous signal of the onset of rains. Others practice dry planting at fixed times regardless of forecasted rainfall, while fertiliser application is often tied to crop flowering stages. While such practices are deeply rooted, they have also contributed to losses, including wasted seed due to false onsets, financial losses from repeated fertiliser applications after unanticipated rains, and post-harvest losses caused by off-season rainfall. These challenges underscore the need for IBF products that can translate forecasts into actionable advisories.

Financial institutions operating in Machakos and Makueni offered additional insights. Contrary to common perceptions of women’s exclusion from financial systems, microfinance institutions reported that women make up the majority of their clients in both counties. Women’s increasing engagement in microfinance, both as borrowers and contributors, has been central to rural enterprise growth. For these institutions, IBF represents a critical tool for decision-making: forecasts that disaggregate affected populations by location and vulnerability can support more demand-driven services, particularly in planning for climate-related risks. Stakeholders stressed that timely, impact-oriented forecasts would enhance proactive financial planning and more efficient allocation of resources during climate shocks.

Finally, engagements with stakeholders from government, the private sector, and academia across Machakos, Makueni, and Nairobi yielded four key conclusions:

1. Acceleration of IBF production: There is an urgent demand for operational IBF forecasts.

2. Clarity of communication: Forecasts must be presented in formats that are easy to interpret and apply.

3. Gender-responsive advisories: IBF products should integrate gender-specific needs and realities.

4. Localised socio-economic indicators: Data used to identify vulnerable groups should reflect county-level realities rather than rely solely on national-level assumptions.

Together, these findings highlight both the opportunities and challenges in operationalising IBF for agriculture in Kenya’s semi-arid counties. By integrating local knowledge, gendered realities, and institutional perspectives, IBF can evolve into a powerful decision-support tool that strengthens resilience across farming communities.

Acknowledgements

Gates Foundation

NORCAP