How Many People Are Surviving on Leaves in the Nuba Mountains?
New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof Tweeted that 800,000 people in Sudan's South Kordofan state are surviving by 'eating just leaves.' When does overestimation do harm to a just cause?
(Page 2 of 2)
Darfur - 3.0 million
South Kordofan - 200,000 – 250,000 in SPLM-N areas; 150,000 –200,000 in GoS areas
Blue Nile - 100,000 – 150,000 in SPLM-N areas; 100,000 in GoS areas
Red Sea, North Kordofan, White Nile, and Kassala - 1 million
Abyei - 100,000 – 120,000
Total food insecure population - 4.7 million people
Recent posts
-
05.16.13
President at home, on trial abroad: How Kenya's new leader is coping -
05.10.13
Why is Africa's healthcare so far behind the rest of the world? -
05.09.13
In fight against insurgents, Nigerian Army cracks down on civilians -
05.08.13
UK axes aid to South Africa, says it's time for partnership of equals -
05.06.13
Are South Africans 'backward'? Zambia's white VP says so.
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
See map here:
That is not to say that it isn't a striking story. 100,000 people who are forced to live in caves and gather whatever small food they can find is horrific and deplorable. Roughly 200,000 people facing food insecurity in South Kordofan and 4.7 million people in the region at risk deserves attention.
800,000 appears to be a massive overestimation. That more than doubles the number of people estimated to have been displaced by the conflict. Doing so also neglects the other factors contributing to food insecurity. In addition to conflict, the region had poor harvests over the past year, low food stocks and high prices.
It is worth repeating, what has happened in the region is terrible and must be stopped as soon as possible. However, understanding what is happening to the people in the region is of the utmost importance so the proper humanitarian and international responses can take shape. The difference between 800,000 and 200,000 when it comes to malnutrition is very big and it carries a cost. Furthermore, the fact that conflict is not the only problem means that relief and recovery will require a varied set of interventions.
The Sahel is an example of a stalling yet extremely necessary appeal. Efforts by UNICEF to raise money and awareness about the Sahel show how hard it is to get the right support to provide a proper response. The same applies to the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Horn of Africa and in the Nuba Mountains.
Getting the data as close to correct as possible is crucial, so the request can be extremely targeted, the response can meet the needs on the ground and the expectations of the donors can be met. As much as I hate to admit the last part, it is important. Donors want to see their money put to work in the manner they were told.
Providing the appropriate response to people living in the Nuba Mountains matters most. It is exactly why being precise as possible is so important.
Later this week (I hope), I want to finally take on the question of the power of twitter/social media/slacktavism. There are certain benefits to raising awareness, it is why I strongly believe that DAWNS is necessary, but there are also some serious limitations that should be considered. This seems to be a good example of how easy it is to participate even when the information shared is less certain.
*It has been pointed out by a few people prior to posting this that vegetarians around the world eat only leaves.
Tom Murphy is a former aid worker who blogs about development, aid, and healthcare reform on "A View From the Cave."
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of Africa bloggers. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here.



Previous





These comments are not screened before publication. Constructive debate about the above story is welcome, but personal attacks are not. Please do not post comments that are commercial in nature or that violate any copyright[s]. Comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence will be removed. If you find a comment offensive, you may flag it.