Annexes

Annex 1: Market analysis checklist

The following checklist supports the practical application of the MISMA’s key actions and associated steps. Organisations may wish to use this checklist on a regular basis and compare assessments over time to assess the quality of their market analysis.

Table A1

Table A1: MISMA key action checklist

Steps

Completed? (X or tick)

Outline of challenges faced

Key action 1: Define the analytical and geographic scope of the assessment

Identify how market analysis will support programme-related decisions and define your objectives accordingly.

Determine the key questions or issues that could influence programme-related decisions and that you want to answer through market analysis.

Choose the critical market system(s) or key commodity(ies) and service(s) you want to assess based on the ones that are central to meeting household’s basic and/or recovery needs.

Identify which critical market linkages and market actors have been affected by the emergency or will be affected by future emergencies.

Focus on the key market actors, linkages and relationships that are directly and indirectly crucial to the target group’s needs.

Delineate the geographical scope of the assessment to include the area and market actors directly affected by the emergency as well as those that will be critical for market recovery.

Ensure the scope of your market assessment is inclusive of all the different groups your agency would want to target.

Key action 2: Build a competent and knowledgeable team for data collection and analysis

Ensure that the market teams have sufficient local and technical knowledge to understand and contextualise the primary and secondary data collected.

Ensure the field market teams have sufficient local and technical knowledge to contribute to the analysis of market functionality.

Define clear terms of reference for the person coordinating the market analysis exercise.

Allocate clear roles and responsibilities within the market teams.

Key action 3: Use data collection methods and information sources of sufficient quality

Identify existing reliable secondary data to map information gaps.

Collect primary data to fill these gaps

Ensure that fieldwork extends to all relevant geographical locations in the market system.

Collect data from all groups in a culturally appropriate manner.

Make sure that the data collected allows you to identify changes in trends that are/will be due to the emergency, the response and/or seasonality.

Coordinate data collection to avoid duplication and leverage existing market expertise.

Ensure that there is sufficient time for analysis and writing up.

Key action 4: Use market analysis to adequately inform programme design and achieve programme objectives

Adjust the level of analysis based on the quality of the existing information, time and resources available, and the risk that the intervention will harm the market.

Prioritise understanding the overall market environment and the impact it has on your key markets.

Triangulate data collected using different methods and from different sources in order to identify unreliable data and inconsistencies.

Analyse trends rather than individual data points, taking into account seasonal effects.

When drawing conclusions, clearly state the assumptions, the type of data on which they are based, and any risks that may be linked to the assumptions.

Clearly show the link between the analysis, conclusions and the ultimate response recommendations. points

Key action 5: Use market monitoring to review assessment findings and enable programme adaptations when needed

From the key market analysis findings and the response plan, identify which assumptions and outcomes are most uncertain or sensitive to change.

Define practical measurable indicators for tracking the assumptions and outcomes that are liable to change.

Determine the frequency with which monitoring should occur by considering the robustness of the initial market assessment, the expected volatility of the market and the relative scale of the programme compared to local markets.

If monitoring reveals market distortions as a result of the intervention, reconsider the design of the programme.

Regardless of the type of programme, regular monitoring of price and the volume of transactions should be carried out in order to identify market distortions at an early stage.

Annex 2: Existing market analysis and assessment tools in emergencies

With the growing recognition of the importance of market analysis in the humanitarian sector, a plethora of tools and guidance has been developed to support such exercises. The below table was developed by CaLP and IRC to:

Provide a basic overview of the different market analysis guidance tools that exist; and
Provide a starting point and support in choosing between tools or combining them to fit the context and project requirements.

All of these tools are based on similar principles, so the MISMA is applicable for all.

Table A2

Table A2: Comparison of humanitarian market analysis tools

PCMMA

RAM

MAG

EMMA

MIFIRA

MARKit

Type of market information collected

Physical damages

✔

✔

✔

✔

Trader capacity

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Population demand

✔

✔

✔

✔

External factors

✔

(✔)

✔

✔

✔

Competition

✔

✔

✔

✔

Bottlenecks

(✔)

✔

✔

✔

Actors

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Price

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Number

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Volume

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Integration

✔

(✔)

✔

✔

✔

Key infrastructure

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Methodological factors

Includes data collection forms

✔

✔

Includes monitoring forms

✔

✔

Includes information on response options

✔

✔

✔

✔

Includes guidance on reporting

✔

✔

✔

✔

Source: CaLP. (2016) Comparison of Humanitarian Market Analysis Tools. [Online] Cash Learning Partnership. The online version of the table also includes the 48hs tool, VAM, and MSMA.

In addition, Oxfam has developed an interactive ‘Markets Compass’ to support the choice of market analysis tool by context. Gachoud, A. (2016). Market Analysis Compass. [Online presentation].

Annex 3: Programme decisions and guiding questions

The key questions for the most critical programme decisions are listed below. They are not presented in the order in which they will necessarily be asked.

Table A3

Table A3: Questions for programme-related decisions

Decision

Key questions

Most appropriate assistance modality for emergency response

Where are the markets for the essential goods—food, non-food items, livelihood support items, and shelter items?
Who provided these goods prior to the crisis?
How do women, men, the disabled and elderly people access those markets?
What is the estimated change in demand generated by the proposed intervention?
Are there restrictions on the movement of goods?
Are local traders able to meet a change in demand within the necessary deadline without significantly increasing prices?
Are there specific traders that need to be targeted for support?
How have the market infrastructure, market chain and market service providers been affected by the crisis?
Have the dynamics between market participants been altered as a result of the crisis?
What innovations have been adopted by key market actors to cope?

Relevance of supporting local markets after the crisis

How have the market infrastructure, market chain and market service providers been affected by the crisis? Can those who were providing goods and/or services before the crisis be supported to restart?
How do women, men, older people and people with disability access those markets after the crisis?
What is the estimated change in demand generated by the proposed intervention?
Will local markets be able to absorb the increase in demand generated by the intended response without support?
Will local markets be able to absorb the increase in demand generated by the intended response with some support?

Relevance of supporting local markets before the crisis

Are local markets currently able to meet the demand for the essential goods being considered?
How do women, men, older people and people with disability currently access those markets?
How will the market infrastructure, market chain and market service providers be affected by the crisis?
What will be the estimated change in demand generated by the proposed intervention?
Will local markets be able to absorb the increase in demand generated by the intended response without support?
Will local markets be able to absorb the increase in demand generated by the intended response with some support?

Indicators to integrate into EWS

What are the market indicators that can be monitored to demonstrate if a slow onset crisis is unfolding?

Annex 4: Bibliography

Albu, M. (2010). Emergency Market Mapping and Assessment (EMMA) toolkit. Practical Action.

Austin, L., & Chessex, S. (2013). The Minimum Requirements for Market Analysis in Emergencies. The Cash Learning Partnership.

The Cash Learning Partnership (CaLP). (2015). Annex 1 of the Multipurpose Cash Grant Toolkit: Multi-Sector Market Assessment (MSMA). In: [Online] CaLP. (2015). Operational Guidance and Toolkit for Multipurpose Cash Grants. CaLP.

CaLP. (2016). Comparison of Humanitarian Market Analysis Tools. [Online] Cash Learning Partnership. Available at: http://www.cashlearning.org/markets/humanitarian-market-analysis-tools

CaLP (2017), CaLP glossary

Child Protection Working Group. (2012). Minimum Standards for Child Protection in Humanitarian Action.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2011). Developing a Response Analysis Framework for Food Security Emergencies.

Food for Peace. (2016). Modality Decision Tool. USAID.

Gachoud, A. (2016). Market Analysis Compass. [Online presentation]. Available at: http://bit.ly/2iL5gc8

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE). (2010). Minimum Standards for Education: Preparedness, Response, Recovery.

International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (IRC). (2014a). Rapid Assessment of Markets (RAM).

IRC. (2014b). Market Analysis Guidance (MAG).

IRC. (2014c). EMMA’s Impact on Program Decision-Making.

Juillard, H. (2016). Pre Crisis Market Analysis (PCMA). IRC.

LEGS Project. (2014). Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards (LEGS) second edition. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.

Maxwell, D., Stobaugh, H., Parker, J. & McGlinchy, M. (2013). Response analysis and response choice in food security crises: a roadmap. London: ODI.

Oxfam. (2015). Emergency Food Security and Livelihoods (EFSL) 48-hour Assessment Tool.

Sivakumaran, S. (2011). Market analysis in emergencies. CaLP.

SEEP Network. (2010). Minimum Economic Recovery Standards.

SEEP Network. (2017). Draft Minimum Economic Recovery Standards. [Unpublished draft]

Sphere Project. (2018). Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response.

United Nations (UN). (2014). World Urbanization prospects. Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

Change Your Password