Armenia is an upper-middle-income country in the South Caucasus with a population of three million people. It is landlocked and a net importer of food. The country is vulnerable to natural hazards, including floods and drought, and external shocks, namely global food price fluctuations, which often have negative impacts on food security and nutrition. In 2015, 16 percent of households in Armenia were food insecure and 9.4 percent of children under 5 years of age were stunted.

Evidence shows that integrated approaches involving agricultural and livelihood interventions can enhance the impacts of cash transfers. Meanwhile, improvements in nutrition require a nutrition-sensitive approach to complement the provision of cash. To this end, FAO’s cash+ approach combines the delivery of cash transfers with productive inputs, assets and/or technical training, aimed at supporting beneficiaries to address immediate needs while also engaging in productive activities.

FAO has been supporting the Government of Armenia to find effective pathways out of poverty and food insecurity for rural households. This promising practice factsheet documents an integrated nutrition-sensitive cash+ approach piloted for the first time in the country in the Gyulagarak community in the Lori region, and in the Marmashen community in the Shirak region. FAO complemented the cash assistance of the government‑led family benefits scheme with agricultural inputs, including cattle, poultry and home gardening supplies, and training on nutrition, household budgeting, and financial literacy.

SOME KEY TAKEAWAYS

• On social protection: Building an intervention on a government-run social protection scheme can foster local ownership and further uptake of the approach by the government. FAO’s intervention in Armenia built on a government-run social protection programme, which helped maintain interest of government counterparts and enhanced the government’s uptake of the approach which was already high soon after the end of the project. For instance, the results and lessons from the project fed into the 2019 State poverty reduction policy, while the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs recognized the project as a successful example of social protection and labour-market programming.

• On localization: The engagement of various government counterparts and the collaboration with the interministerial technical working group including representatives from FAO and relevant ministries was crucial in ensuring a sustainable cross-sectoral approach. The main elements supporting the project’s sustainability were the strong interest of beneficiaries and the support of local authorities. Notably, poor households without prior experience in similar programmes were very engaged in the activities and local authorities collaborated intensely across sectors, contributing to strengthening local capacities.

• On cash: The intervention adopted a cash+ approach that improved food security thanks to the combination of regular income support provided by the government-run family benefits scheme and agricultural production assistance. FAO complemented the cash assistance that beneficiary households received from the government scheme with packages of agricultural inputs and training on agriculture, nutrition and financial literacy. This intervention showed that cash+ can serve as a component of long-term social protection and resilience programmes.

• On climate: Armenia is vulnerable to natural hazards, including floods and drought, and external shocks, namely global food price fluctuations, which often have negative impacts on food security and nutrition. Thanks to the combination of cash transfers, productive assets and inputs distribution with agricultural and nutrition trainings households were able to improve their agricultural production, in particular livestock production and sales, allowing them to maintain their agricultural production despite climate-related shocks, such as the drought that hit the two regions in 2019.

• On nutrition: The intervention improved diets for women and children, who also received more frequent meals. Households receiving cash+ packages were better positioned to maintain dietary diversity despite the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to only households receiving the cash transfers of the family benefit scheme and non-recipient households. Overall, the household dietary diversity score (HDDS) was statistically significantly higher among cash+ beneficiaries than among cash recipients and non-recipients.

• On targeting and social inclusion: The experience shows that a clear targeting strategy is important to ensure effective communication with local populations and to ensure inclusivity. The project had a clear targeting strategy based on a government-run social protection beneficiary registry, with additional criteria based on needs assessment and local consultations. Although the beneficiaries showed some diversity, there was no specific objective to involve youth, people with disabilities or other marginalized groups. Potential scale-ups should consider a more inclusive approach, reaching remote areas and the most marginalized and vulnerable groups, such as youth and people with disabilities.

• On replication and upscale: Results achieved by this pilot initiative offer a solid evidence base to advocate, in Armenia and elsewhere, for the combination of national social assistance programmes with productive inputs for small-scale food producers. To obtain full benefit from the interventions, beneficiaries would need more intensive and longer-term support from agricultural extension services, including veterinary and agronomy assistance and assistance in accessing agricultural services and stable markets. Lastly, future such projects should pay more attention to influencing policies and to building and maintaining government capacity to prevent loss of capacity due to changes in government counterparts and focal points.