Sustainable rural livelihoods: a summary of research in
Mali and Ethiopia
Rosalind Goodrich
July 2001
INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Brighton, Sussex BN1 9RE
England
Contents
Introduction
1
The problem the research sought to analyse
1
Summary of results and conclusion
2
Livelihood diversification
Agricultural intensification
Migration
2
3
4
The intellectual approach
4
What is a sustainable livelihood?
5
Livelihood resources
6
The idea of a livelihood portfolio
7
The influence of institutions and organisations
7
Operational implications of the framework approach to
analysis of sustainable livelihoods
8
The settings of the research
8
Research methods
9
How do poor rural households construct a sustainable livelihood?
12
Economic diversification
Geographical location
Who diversifies – the rich or the poor?
Livelihood diversification and the development of local and
wider markets
Are livelihoods becoming more diverse and if so, why?
How do household development cycles and livelihood
diversification opportunities interact?
The role of institutions in determining livelihood diversification
Opportunities and outcomes
12
Agricultural intensification
16
Migration
20
How does policy influence livelihood strategies and can poor people
influence the policy process?
A model of how policy affects livelihoods
Can poor people influence policy?
Pursuing a policy-centred approach
Annex 1
Research reports from the sustainable livelihoods research programme
Annex 2
Livelihoods Connect – www.livelihoods.org
Annex 3
Other references
22
22
23
24
Sustainable rural livelihoods
Introduction
This report summarises the results of research which explored alternative routes to
achieving more sustainable livelihoods in two countries: Mali and Ethiopia.
Research on the same topic in Bangladesh will not be discussed here. The work
took place over a period of three years and was a joint enterprise between the
Institute of Development Studies, Sussex (IDS), the International Institute for
Environment and Development (IIED), the Poverty Research Unit at the
University of Sussex, the Institut de l’Economie Rurale in Mali and in Ethiopia,
FARM-Africa, SOS-Sahel and Awassa College of Agriculture.
The problem the research sought to analyse is set out below, followed by a
summary of the results and conclusions of the research. Then there is a longer
discussion of the three main areas of work. A list of research publications, all of
which are available from IDS, is at the end of the report.
The problem the research sought to analyse
Many people’s lives are a quest to create a secure, sustainable livelihood for
themselves and their families. Outside forces, be they natural, political, economic
or social all conspire either to make this more or less difficult. This research
aimed to find what particular factors enable some people to be successful in their
quest when others fail, and what interventions by policy makers might help both
groups of people.
The research looked particularly at the part played by local, national and
international institutions on the building of livelihoods. Researchers wanted to see
how institutions could influence the access to benefits like land, money, or
employment, of individuals and households. Access to all of these could affect the
ability to make a living and achieve security.
A major concern of the research programme was to illuminate how poor rural
households adapt to changes in entitlements and in institutions, looking
particularly at whether they resort to migration, adopt a more diverse livelihood
strategy or increase agricultural production through agricultural intensification or
extensification. It focused on the policies already in place that would shape the
choices made by local people about their livelihoods. Making the right choice
could spell the difference between successful, sustainable livelihoods and a
household or whole community continuing in, or returning to poverty and
environmental degradation.
An aim of the research programme, therefore, was to identify new policies that
would enhance the ability of people to construct sustainable livelihoods. The
programme had a subsidiary aim to show how it would be possible to modify
already-existing policies, especially those adopted to further macro-economic
reform (structural adjustment programmes, for instance) – to assist this process.
1
Summary of results and conclusions
·
The research framework identified three strategies pursued by rural people in
furtherance of achieving a more sustainable livelihood: migration, livelihood
diversification and agricultural intensification/extensification. One of the
conclusions drawn is that they are all linked and there are trade-offs that must be
made between them in order to achieve the sustainable livelihoods goal. None can
be viewed in isolation.
·
The research has confirmed the usefulness of adopting a livelihoods
framework to understand the way rural households cope in poor areas.
Livelihood diversification
·
The existence of local opportunities and levels of population density seem to
influence possibilities for diversification as much as factors like levels of rainfall,
geographical location and transport links (see below)
·
Poorer families tend to diversify activities in order to survive a crisis, as
opposed to richer families which diversify to accumulate assets
·
There is likely to be more diversification activity taking place in higher
potential, higher density farming areas, where the local economy provides a
higher level and broader range of options, than in more marginal areas with low
yields, lower population density and a poor range of local opportunities. In Mali,
however, the results were not clear cut. In Dalonguebougou, for instance, there
was a wide range of diversification activities, despite the area receiving less
rainfall and being risk prone. A number of groups had migrated to the village and
part of their diversification activities, thus creating opportunities for trading and
shop-keeping for local families
·
The number of available workers in a household will have an impact on the
potential for diversification, but the quality of labour management will also play a
crucial role in the success of diversification strategies
·
The key policy options stemming from the diversification work are set out
below in Box 1. However, there are limits to what can be achieved through policy
interventions aimed at reducing rural poverty in Ethiopia and Mali, given current
constraints on governments caused by economic structural adjustment
programmes as well as long histories of poor citizen-state relations.
2
Bo x 1 Key pol icy cons id er ation s
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
Recognise the importance of diverse, dynamic and multi-dimensional livelihood strategies
Improve access to credit
Support existing mechanisms for migration to enhance positive benefits
Strengthen collective rights over natural resources
Assess the benefits and costs of infrastructural development
Pay attention to livestock
Understand social institutions and networks, including domestic organisation
(h) Factor-in chance events
Agricultural intensification
·
Different pathways of agricultural change – capital- or labour-led
intensification or extensification - can exist side by side within a site and a
household may follow more than one path concurrently on different parts of their
land
·
The effects of agricultural intensification may be positive or negative: for
example, intensification may have a positive effect on production, but negative
effects on environmental sustainability and equality
·
A household’s decision on which path to follow will depend on a range of
factors, central to which are the resources available to them, the institutions which
mediate access to resources, the historical background, and the policy context
·
Capital-led intensification is more easily influenced by policy than labour-led
intensification providing institutional linkages, like agricultural inputs and credit
supply, are in place. In Mali, for instance the institutional linkages that provide
inputs and credit only cover the ‘high potential’ area of the country, so in the ‘low
potential’ areas capital-led intensification is not more easily influenced by policy
·
If the flexibility of a household to make its own choices about which path to
agricultural intensification to follow is reduced, then the chances of farmers
making the best choice in the light of the available resources, the institutional
arrangements and an assessment of risk are also reduced
·
The research had policy implications in three areas:
- livestock disease: unless this problem is addressed, it is unlikely that any
policies to combat poverty and improve livelihoods will succeed
- flexible extension policies and credit: greater need for flexibility in capitalled intensification packages but also need for policies that do not damage
opportunities for the labour-led path, where this is the only path possible to
3
-
follow for a household. A functioning and flexible credit market is
essential
institutions: policies to support successful and sustainable intensification
of agriculture must take into account that not all institutions can be
influenced directly. The institutions that are the hardest to reach, may be
very effective in facilitating the following of certain paths to
intensification
·
The interaction between these complex local (and often informal) institutions
and more formal institutional arrangements for natural resource management, in
the context of community-based natural resource management on the one hand
and decentralised state-led programmes on the other, is a key area for future
research
Migration
·
Migration plays a central role in the livelihoods of rural households and
communities, rich and poor. Policies should, therefore, be more sensitive to the
existence of regular population movement
·
Different household structures and gender influence who migrates and who
decides about migration and the use of remittances; migration is not strongly
correlated with poverty, assets or education, although types of migration are likely
to be
·
Policies should take account of the possibility that migration increases
inequality. Migration is embedded in social relations which has disadvantages for
some household and community members but creates opportunities for supportive
policies like the provision of information about migration opportunities,
facilitation of remittances and enhancement of the productive impact of
remittances
The intellectual approach
The concept of ‘sustainable rural livelihoods’ is important in the debate about
rural development, poverty reduction and environmental management. There were
parts of the approach, however, that the project researchers felt should be clarified
in order that the ultimate aim of the research programme might be achieved. A
particular issue was how it could be decided when someone had built a sustainable
livelihood for themselves; that is, what livelihood resources, institutional
processes and strategies influenced success or failure for different groups of
people and what were the practical, operational and policy implications of
adopting the approach itself.
To this end, a framework for analysing the approach, and therefore clarifying the
above, was constructed (see Figure 1 below). It had at its heart one key question:
4
Given a particular context, what combination of livelihood resources results in
the ability to follow what combination of livelihood strategies with what
outcomes?
Cutting across this was the recognition that certain institutional processes would
influence the ability of a household or community to carry out a particular strategy
and achieve an outcome.
The framework could be applied at many levels: to an individual or household, at
village and district, region and national level. It was important to specify the level
of analysis and to analyse any interaction between levels, acknowledging the
associated positive or negative effect on livelihoods.
Figure 1 The sustainable livelihoods framework1
CONTEXTS
LIVELIHOOD
RESOURCES
INSTITUTIONAL
PROCESSES
LIVELIHOOD
STRATEGIES
SUSTAINABLE
LIVELIHOOD OUTCOMES
Livelihood
Policies
'Natural capital'
History
'Economic/ financial
capital'
Agricultural
intensification extensification
Institutions
and
Politics
'Human capital'
Organisations
Livelihood
diversification
Agro-ecology
'Social capital'
Differentiated
social actors
Contextual and
policy analysis
Migration
and others . . .
Analysis of building
blocks: trade-offs,
combinations,
sequences
1. Increased
numbers of working
days created
2. Poverty
reduced
3. Well-being and
capabilities improved
Sustainability
4. Livelihood
adaptation,
vulnerability and
resilience enhanced
5. Natural resource
base sustainability
ensured
Analysis of institutional
influences on access to
building blocks and
composition of strategy
portfolio
Analysis of
strategies adopted
and trade-offs
Analysis of
outcomes and tradeoffs
What is a sustainable livelihood?
The starting point for answering the key question of the analytical framework was
to get a precise answer to the other question: what is a sustainable livelihood?
1
This is the original framework set out by Scoones (1998) and used to guide the research carried
out by the IDS Sustainable Livelihoods Programme. Modified versions have been produced by
(among others) Carney 1998; Neefjes 1999; Toufique 1999; Goldman 2000 and Nicol 2000, but
these have generally involved changes of emphasis or terminology rather than removal or
replacement of the basic elements of the framework.
5
Only by settling this could desirable outcomes be identified. The IDS research
team took as its definition the following:
A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (both material and social
resources) and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is
sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks, maintain
or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource
base.2
While this definition could, in fact, be interpreted to give at least five ways of
assessing outcomes (depending on whether the focus was on livelihoods or
sustainability) it illustrated that the concept of sustainable livelihoods was a
composite of many ideas and interests. Ian Scoones in his paper Sustainable rural
livelihoods: a framework for analysis (Working Paper 72, 1998, IDS) stated that
the important thing to recognise was that the priorities were always subject to
negotiation, with some being more important than others at certain times. Making
the policy choices to achieve the most beneficial outcomes could be a process of
negotiation, enabling the right choices to be made.
Livelihood resources
The analytical framework described by Scoones in his paper adopted an
economics metaphor to describe the basic material and social, intangible and
tangible assets that people have in their possession. These resources were the
‘capital’ base from which livelihoods could be constructed. He offered a simple
set of definitions:
Natural capital – natural resource stocks (soil, water, air, genetic resources etc)
and environmental services (hydrological cycle, pollution sinks etc) from which
resource flows and services useful for livelihoods are derived
Economic or financial capital, including infrastructure – the capital base (cash,
credit/debit, savings etc), infrastructure, and other economic assets which are
essential for the pursuit of any livelihood strategy
Human capital – skills, knowledge, ability to work and good health important for
the successful pursuit of livelihood strategies
Social capital – the social resources (networks, social relations, associations etc)
upon which people draw when pursuing different strategies
Whilst more ‘capital’ sources could be identified, the main point was that in order
to construct livelihoods, people should successfully combine all or some of these
‘capital’ endowments.
Identifying what combinations of capital or livelihoods resources are required for
different livelihoods strategies was a key part, then, of this programme’s
This definition drew upon the work of Chambers and Conway (1992) and Swift (1989) among
others.
2
6
analytical process. As mentioned already, it focused on three particular strategies:
agricultural intensification/extensification, livelihood diversification and
migration. These were considered to be the realistic choices open to people in
rural areas. Understanding, in the context of people’s lives, how different
livelihood resources are combined in the pursuit of different livelihood strategies
was, therefore, critical to the research.
The idea of a livelihood portfolio
The combination of activities that were followed in carrying out a strategy were
termed the ‘livelihood portfolio’. These activities could be carried out at different
levels: as an individual, a household and at village level, as well as at regional or
national level. Each portfolio would be different, containing a range of activities,
carried out at a variety of levels in response to the resources available and socioeconomic conditions – gender, age, and income levels for instance - prevailing.
Over time, indeed over generations, the portfolio of activities might change as
local and external conditions changed. It was important, therefore, that the
research programme included in its analysis the dynamic nature of livelihood
strategies.
In fact, whether livelihood portfolio combinations resulted in positive or negative
change in relation to the range of sustainable livelihood outcome indicators was a
key issue. Both the number of sustainable livelihoods created and their quality
could be increased or improved in an area if livelihood resources were combined
creatively. Scoones (1998) gives the example of degraded land being transformed
with the investment of labour and skill, resulting in the accumulation of natural
capital and an increase in the potential for more livelihood opportunities. But a
course of action taken by an individual or a household might have negative as well
as positive effects, therefore it was vital to look at the net impact of adopting a
particular livelihood strategy on a wider group, over time.
The research examined livelihood strategy choices over a wide range of natural
environments: from areas with low endowment of natural resources to areas where
endowment was high. With an accompanying variance in the level of risk
experienced by resource users, there was a variety of livelihood strategies
followed, and a need for different policy responses in each situation.
The influence of institutions and organisations
Returning to the key question of the analytical framework, it was recognised by
the researchers, that aside from looking at the livelihood strategies adopted in
response to the availability of resources, and the success or failure of the strategies
measured in terms of their outcomes, it was necessary to look at the influence of
external institutions, organisations and processes on the whole process of
achieving a sustainable livelihood. Scoones (1998) stated that whilst it was
important, exploring only the quantitative relationships between measurable
variables - for example, the relationships between economic assets, indicators of
agricultural intensification and poverty levels - would result in a limited
understanding of the process. For this reason, the analytical framework
emphasised the study of institutions and organisations as well.
7
Institutions were seen as dynamic and both formal and informal. They could
operate at different levels and wield varying power. An institution might range
from a piece of local land legislation to a social custom that blocked women from
undertaking certain tasks. But they could, at any time, act as barriers to the
success of certain livelihood strategies, or have the potential to improve access of
a particular social group to particular resources and so it was important to
understand their influence.
Operational implications of the framework approach to analysis of
sustainable livelihoods
Whilst adopting the framework approach was designed to assist the research
process, it was also recognised that to investigate each element contained in the
key question represented a major research undertaking. It was hoped that at the
very least, the framework would supply a ‘checklist of questions’ for the
researchers and a starting point for determining the issues to explore. The research
methodologies varied according to the element being investigated and were often
used in combination to form a ‘hybrid’ approach.
The framework also suggested multiple entry points – opportunities - for policy
intervention, both conventional interventions (skill and technology transfers etc)
and unconventional, in relation to getting the institutional and organisational
setting right. It was hoped that an unconventional approach would extend the
range of livelihood strategy options and support the conventional interventions to
improve their effectiveness.
Planning for and implementing a sustainable livelihoods approach needs to be
iterative and dynamic. It requires the active participation of everyone involved in
the process of defining meanings and objectives, analysing links and trade-offs
and identifying options and choices. This was not always possible to achieve in
this research process. But the analytical framework adopted by the programme
was designed to help in the process, pointing towards areas where actions might
proceed and common goals could be achieved.
The settings of the research
The research sites were chosen to represent a range of higher and lower resource
endowment areas. Research in Mali was carried out in two villages, Zaradougou
and Dalonguebougou, chosen to reflect major differences in ecological and
economic conditions. Zaradougou is in the relatively well-off Sudan-Sahelian
zone of southern Mali, dominated by the cotton economy. The household
economy is based on cotton, cereals and livestock, although migration to Ivory
Coast is a common diversification strategy. Some extended, multigenerational
households remain, but many of these have fragmented into smaller, nuclear units.
In contrast, Dalonguebougou is situated in a dry and isolated part of the southern
Sahel. In this semi-arid zone, the village’s sandy soil is valued for agriculture,
making it a popular choice for incomers seeking to establish themselves as
8
farmers. Despite this, population density is no more than 25 per square kilometre.
The region has a history of both sedentary farming and nomadic herding with
loose boundaries between the two livelihoods. Farming and grazing remain the
principle land uses. Three distinct ethnic groups live in the area; across all three
groups, however, the extended, patrilineal household remains the dominant
structure for managing local livelihoods.
The sites in Ethiopia were chosen to represent some of the major differences in
population density, rainfall and household activities found within the southern part
of the country. Admencho lies in the densely settled southern highlands where
fertile soils have allowed the evolution of a farm economy based on intensive land
use through the cultivation of enset and root crops.
Mundena is in the lower lying plains below the Wolayta plateau. Soils are less
fertile than in the highlands, population density lower, temperatures higher. The
area was opened up for agriculture 30 years ago and now the farming system is
based mainly on cotton and maize, in association with livestock. Access to
markets is reasonably good because of a new road linking the village with
surrounding settlements.
Chokare lies in the lowlands, next to Lake Abaya, and has a much lower level of
rainfall than the other two sites. The soils are relatively fertile and irrigation is
possible and livestock production. The research area included the State Farm
which provides employment for almost nine hundred families. Cultivation of
cotton and maize is mechanised, there is a local cash economy with active flows
of livestock, agricultural products and services within the economy. Outside the
State Farm, people are agro-pastoralists, combining agriculture with livestock.
Research methods
There were two research teams, basing their work on the analytical framework
already described. Researchers were from different disciplinary backgrounds and
the final decisions on research methodology made by each team reflected the
specific contexts of the research areas as well as the areas of expertise of the
researchers.
Qualitative methods, including rapid rural appraisals (RRAs) and common field
observations, and quantitative methods were used. Earlier research by Toulmin
(1992) provided historical depth to the research in Mali.
The migration research adopted different emphases for each research site. In
Ethiopia, the definition taken of migration was wide. A migrant was defined as a
person who had ever lived or worked outside their village. Despite this, only one
quarter of households in a survey had a migrant, and the contribution of migration
to livelihoods was more limited than in Mali. Quantitative information on
migration in Ethiopia was based on a household survey of 300 households across
the different site, the survey was preceded by a Participatory Rural Appraisal
(PRA) and followed up by detailed case studies.
9
In Mali, participatory sustainability ranking brought out the importance of
household structure and management for livelihoods. Research was carried out by
two people using a variety of techniques and building on the earlier research by
Toulmin (1992) and Brock and Coulibaly (1999).
The research on diversification of livelihoods used a ranking exercise to develop
criteria relating to what characteristics are associated with greater or lesser
sustainability of a household. The ranking exercise was then used as a basis to test
whether livelihood diversification was used as a desperate measure in difficult
circumstances or as a means to accumulate assets.
10
Table 1: Characteristics of research sites
Country
Site
Zone and base
livelihood
Household
forms
Ethnicity
Agricultural
intensification
Diversification
Main forms of
labour migration
Who migrates?
Institutions
Ethiopia
(Wolayta)
Admencho
Highland. Root
crop/enset, sedentary
livestock.
Homogenous,
but clan
system.
Long tradition of
circular seasonal labour
migration (rural-rural
and rural-urban).
Mainly men.
Women as urban
domestic workers.
Households (nuclear).
Agents.
Regionalisation.
Lowland settlement.
Dryland agriculture,
formerly much
supported.
Lowland: state farm
(SF), Peasant
Association.
Dryland agriculture,
sedentary and
transhumant.
Sahelian dryland. Risk
prone. Millet, sedentary
and transhumant
livestock.
Capital-led (Global
Package of high yielding
seeds, chemical
fertilisers and credit
promoted).
Capital-led (Global
Package). Loss of
livestock.
High diversification
(trade, labour), more
among rich.
Mundena
Small nuclear
household. Femaleheaded household
may suffer from
male absence.
As above.
Individual / family.
Regionalisation.
Wolayta and
Sidama
(pastoral).
Little agricultural
extension. Irrigation.
Loss of livestock.
Relatively little outmigration.
Some return place
origin.
SF: in-migration.
Non-SF: declining
transhumance.
Labour migration.
Usually young
unmarried men.
As above.
Medium
diversification
(trade), more among
poorer.
SF: agriculture, etc.,
associated with
decline wages.
Non-SF: fishing,
trade (loss livestock).
Families.
Men.
Men and women.
Agents.
Households.
Regionalisation.
Large extended
households. One
female-headed
household.
Four distinct
social groups.
No extension.. Oxen
ploughs and livestock
are important.
Little marketing
opportunity.
Seasonal circular
migration: rural, urban,
Ivory Coast. Permanent
out-migration.
Extended family.
Marriage system.
Regional agreements,
Ivory Coast policies.
Large extended
households, but
practice in decline.
Homogenous,
two immigrant
household.
Capital-led (CMDT).
Plantations in Ivory
Coast. Sales and
services in Sikasso.
Ownership of
cocoa/coffee
plantations/farms in
Ivory Coast
Bambara ethnic
group.
Men and women
migrate, in different
systems
Mainly men., but also
families for long term
settlement on cocoa
plantation
Chokare
Mali
Dalonguebougou
Zaradougou
Sudano-sahelian cotton
zone. Cash crop.
Cotton, cereals,
sedentary livestock.
Homogenous.
Extended family.
Regional agreements,
Ivory Coast policies.
Notes: the columns on agricultural intensification and diversification present comparisons within countries between the sites, not across countries. Definitions are discussed in the country reports.
11
How do poor rural households construct a sustainable livelihood?
Economic diversification
The detailed look at diversification activities was an attempt to see how poor rural
households worked, and to counter the view that they were purely agriculture-based.
As a result, it was hoped that policy makers could be encouraged to look, if necessary,
at policies outside the agriculture sphere that might be more effective in assisting the
households concerned. As Toulmin et al said in their report (Diversification of
Livelihoods: evidence from Mali and Ethiopia, Toulmin et al, Research Report 47,
2000, IDS), ‘If equity and gender issues are of particular importance, may
diversification provide a more effective pathway to improving livelihoods than
reliance on raising crop yields alone?’ Indeed, they questioned whether a poor
household would ever be able to generate enough assets and labour to run a farm and
whether it would be better for them to focus their efforts on a specific niche activity
such as trade, market gardening or firewood collection.
The many contextual factors that might influence the choice of livelihood
diversification strategy have been examined on several occasions. In Factors
influencing the dynamics of livelihood diversification and rural non-farm employment
in space and time (Jeremy Swift, 1998, IDS), Swift points out that high population
density, good road networks and incoming migrants might all increase the potential
for economic diversification, but that the range of off-farm activities that were
actually employed depended, in the end, as much on factors like access to credit and
savings, household size and composition, levels of education and in some places, on
cultural constraints. Ellis in Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in developing countries
(2000, OUP) adds geographical location, household characteristics, market
opportunities, the relationship between farm and off-farm activities and the influence
of formal and informal institutions as factors that will influence the choice of
livelihood diversification strategy undertaken.
The research carried out in Ethiopia and Mali identified the contextual factors
influencing diversification choices and analysed what impact the diversification of
activity had on household income, well-being and sustainability. The researchers
sought the answer to the question of whether livelihood diversification by individuals
leads to households breaking up, or provides the space that individuals seek while
contributing to a more cohesive domestic group or household. The results from the
two countries were compared. Bangladesh was not included because the methods and
approach followed by the country research team generated results which could not be
compared with the other two countries.
Geographical location
In Mali, most farmers had attempted to spread the effects associated with being in a
high-risk area by developing non-farm activities. In the case of Dalonguebougou –
situated in a low rainfall, high risk area - these were trading and shop-keeping, hiring
themselves out as agricultural wage labourers, cotton weaving and spinning, small
stock rearing, granary making, migration and fortune telling.
In Dalonguebougou, there had been a significant amount of in-migration by herders
from other areas who, finding livestock rearing alone no longer provided them with a
12
livelihood, perceived the village as having potential for settling and starting to farm.
Whilst this process of settlement reduced the amount of available cultivable land for
the traditional inhabitants of the village, it had also increased local opportunities for
trading and shop-keeping (the comparison of items for sale in Babou Dembele’s shop,
see Box 2 below, makes clear how much the activity has grown). As such, there had
been a trade-off between the livelihood diversification of some groups and
agricultural development of others.
Box 2 Di ve r si fi cat ion in t rad e:
Wh at c an I bu y in B a bou De mb el e’ s s hop ? A c omp a ri son of 1 9 80 and
19 9 8
1980
Green tea, sugar, soap, cigarettes (Liberté brand only), salt, kerosene, sweets, kola nut, dates
1998
Green tea, brown tea, sugar, soap, cigarettes (many brands), salt, kerosene, sweets, kola nuts, dates, nail
varnish, biscuits (3 types), scissors, honey, children’s toys, rope (plastic), rope (baobab bark), string, razor
blades, oil lamps, milk powder, condensed milk, soap powder, bicycle parts, spare parts for mobylette, tyres,
clothes, buckets, plastic pots, metal cooking pots, knives, tomato paste, bicycle pumps, local cloth, factory made
cloth, batteries (4 kinds), plastic sandals, instant coffee, matches, orange drink (powdered in a sachet)...
In Ethiopia, there was no clear difference in levels and patterns of diversification
between the higher rainfall area of Admencho and lower rainfall Chokare. In
Mundena, which fell in between the two in rainfall terms, there appeared to be a wider
range of diversification activities. It seemed therefore, that there wasn’t a particular
connection with climate, but more with the opportunities available locally. A road had
recently been built close to Mundena, creating new marketing opportunities. In
Chokare, the employees of the State Farm provided a captive market for local small
businesses to develop. The researchers did find a link between population density and
diversification, with non-farm activities like trading and shop-keeping being more
evident in higher density areas like Admencho.
Who diversifies – the rich or the poor?
The researchers assumed that the purposes and outcomes of livelihood diversification
would differ between households according to their social and economic status
(Toulmin et al, 2000). Poor households would diversify in order to survive; richer
households would do it in order to accumulate. Poorer families could never earn
enough from diversification of their activities to accumulate assets, whereas people
from the richer families, being under less pressure to contribute to the central purse,
could pocket the income from their various subsidiary activities themselves.
In Mali, in the two case study areas, this assumption seemed to be borne out.
However, in Zaradougou, Mali, pursuit of diversification activities could be a source
of tension within wealthier families because it increased competition within the
household. Whilst the activities themselves might make a family financially better off,
well-being and sustainability sometimes decreased, with some families coming close
to splitting up. In Dalonguebougou, however, diversification was undertaken by
different members of the household at different times, essentially within the structure
13
of the extended multigenerational household. There was a close association between
asset ownership and household size and asset ownership with sustainability. Those
families with more assets had larger more stable family groups. Likewise there was a
direct link between successful crop production and cattle ownership and well
holdings.
In Ethiopia, different correlations were found between livelihood diversification and
wealth rank in the three research sites: for all groups in Admencho, the largest
proportion of income came from non-farm sources, whereas in Mundena and
Chokare, off-farm income seemed to be more important for poorer groups than for
those in the higher weath ranking groups.
In all case study sites in the two countries, it was noted that it was the younger
members of the household who were encouraged to pursue alternative livelihood
strategies. In Zaradougou, Mali, for instance, it was the young men who were sent to
establish plantations in Ivory Coast. Similarly, in Ethiopia, it was the younger men
who left home, particularly in the Wolayta plateau region where it was not possible to
give them land locally on which to set up their homes.
But from the limited data collected, it seemed that neither the richer or poorer families
were particularly involved in migration. The poorer households because they could
not spare any family members but needed them as labour on their own farms, the
richer families because there was less need to travel.
In Ethiopia, around two thirds of all households had a member who was carrying out a
secondary activity as well as the core activities. But, as said above, different
correlations were found between wealth and diversification in the three sites.
Does livelihood diversification lead to a sapping of the agricultural sector?
There was no simple answer to this; a variety of capital and labour flows between
agriculture and other household activities evolved over time, having a positive impact
on farming in some cases, and negative impact in others.
In southern Ethiopia, for example, the highest ranked households had become wealthy
by pursuing both trading opportunities and agriculture, the income from trading being
invested in intensified farming. Poorer households with little financial capital to invest
relied upon other resources, particularly social capital, to be able to intensify their
agricultural practices.
In Dalonguebougou in Mali, farming was still the most important activity. In most
households the demands of farming imposed constraints on diversification activities,
even though sending a family member away in the dry season to earn an income could
generate much-needed cash. In Zaradougou, the poorer households found it hard to
run a productive cotton and cereal farm so diversification – trade-related activities in
the nearby market town – actually provided them with an alternative to agriculture.
The wealthier families could rely on money and labour flowing between the
plantations in Ivory Coast and their farms in Mali.
14
Livelihood diversification and the development of local and wider markets
The evidence from both Ethiopia and Mali backed up the argument made by Wiggins
(2000) that diversification activities would be greater in areas of high potential, and
high density farming because the opportunities would be greater. The high levels of
trade in Admencho, Ethiopia were there because of the high population density. In
Mundena, the building of a new road increased the potential for livelihood
diversification and in Chokare the State Farm provided trading opportunities in food
and services for local people. Zaradougou in Mali had the market town of Sikasso
nearby which generated opportunities. By contrast, Dalonguebougou was more
isolated but the significant flow of people into the area had created a captive market
of its own, enabling trade and shop-keeping activities to develop.
Are livelihoods becoming more diverse and if so, why?
The evidence was mixed on this point. In Mali, whilst the number of incomegenerating activities had increased over the years in the two research sites and people
relied more on off-farm activities to satisfy their needs, they still defined themselves
as farmers and continued with their agricultural activities. They invested in the
expansion and intensification of their farming enterprises and lived in traditional
farming households.
In Ethiopia, natural disaster – drought - forced people into alternative livelihoods such
as the collection and sale of firewood and grasses. Outbreaks of cattle disease forced
herders to settle and start cultivating the land in Chokare, and in Mundena, the loss of
draft power made farming less viable, forcing poorer households to pursue alternative
sources of income.
How do household development cycles and livelihood diversification
opportunities interact?
Interaction depends particularly on the type of household in question. Nuclear
families will follow a marked cycle linked to their structure and dependency ratio; at
times there will be a high number of young children and a high dependency ratio, then
as the children grow up they will become a considerable asset – a valuable source of
labour. The household may become weaker as children leave home and become
independent. In an extended household this cycle is less marked as there is likely to be
a broader spread of ages.
In Ethiopia, households tend to be small with a nuclear structure. This structure and
immediate kinship networks are central to defining the breadth of choice in
developing diversification activities. The large, complex households of Mali are less
affected by the development cycle, but nevertheless households will differ in the kind
of labour force that they have available at any time. The capacity to mobilise a large,
energetic labour force ( particularly of young unmarried men) is a key to the
development of diverse activities and assets. It is not enough to guarantee
sustainability, however; good management of the labour is crucial to maintain the
balance between individual and collective interests and incomes.
The role of institutions in determining livelihood diversification opportunities
and outcomes
Institutional influences could also affect the ability of households to diversify by
gaining access to credit, land and so on. These institutions were identified by the
project researchers as being both informal and formal, from local councils,
15
government credit schemes and crop marketing bodies to savings clubs and village
schemes for sharing plough teams, donkeys or wells.
The household remained the primary mechanism for the pooling of incomes, division
of labour and the sharing of risks in all sites. Yet, households took on different forms
in Ethiopia and Mali; different sizes, structure, rights and responsibilities, status and
degrees of individual freedom within the wider domestic group.
Evidence from all the sites suggested that the influence of formal and informal
institutions will vary over time, as the ‘balance of power’ between them changes.
Agricultural intensification
What has been highlighted so far is diversification activities that involve moving off
the farm, either to build up activities away from agriculture or to supplement farm
activities with a secondary form of income. A major part of the work by the project
researchers looked at an alternative strategy: staying on the farm and intensifying
activity and production.
Agriculture remains, for many rural households in Sub-Saharan Africa, the single
most important source of income. Increasing outputs from agriculture, in the face of
increasing pressure on resources, is a major challenge for all policy makers. The
intensification process can be highly complex and policy responses have to reflect
this.
The research team identified the factors that inhibited or facilitated the process of
agricultural change. In the course of doing so, the issues of access to the resources
necessary for intensifying activity and the way that richer and poorer households
therefore intensified agricultural activity were examined. As Grace Carswell stated in
her report (Agricultural intensification in Ethiopia and Mali, Research Report 48,
2000, IDS), it was vital to understand the trade-offs between adopting different
livelihood strategies and seeking to gain access to resources in order to understand the
dynamics of agricultural change.
An alternative to agricultural intensification is extensification, that is, the expansion
of an area under cultivation into previously uncultivated areas with no increase in the
ration of inputs – labour or capital – to land. In as much as extensification is also a
means of increasing agricultural production, it was examined in the research alongside
agricultural intensification.
The major focus of state policy in Ethiopia and Mali is the promotion of capital-led
paths of agricultural intensification, that is, intensification which entails substantial
use of capital, be it artificial inputs like fertiliser and high-yield seeds or access to
credit. (Labour-led intensification involves the use of more labour and effort and is a
strategy intended to save capital.) This has been achieved in a range of ways across
the sites: through extension programmes (new technology and inputs), price policy
(subsidies on fertiliser), infrastructure-based services (cotton marketing boards), credit
provision and irrigation promotion. Intensification policies in Mali have focused on
the cotton and rice industries and agricultural intensification outside these areas has
largely been left untouched.
16
These policies of capital-led agricultural intensification help those households and
individuals who fall within their remit and are able to follow a capital-led path, but do
nothing to help those who cannot. The research, therefore, sought to find out who
could follow this path and who had to follow a labour-led model and why, and the
institutional arrangements that would facilitate both.
In Ethiopia, there was a wide range of formal and informal institutions that facilitated
the capital-led path of intensification promoted by the Bureau of Agriculture (for
instance, the ‘Global Package’ extension programme promoted particularly by the
Sasakawa Global 2000 programme). In Mali, the Compagnie Malienne pour le
Dévéloppment des Textiles (CMDT), operated in Zaradougou but not in the milletproducing area of Dalonguebougou. In both Ethiopia and Mali, however, the
institutions that facilitated the labour-led path were principally informal. Indeed in
Mali, it was the household that emerged as a key mediating institution for decision
making about investment in agriculture. Large, multi-generational households were
involved in complex decision-making around resource management, including the
investment of capital and labour (See Table 2 below).
These various institutional arrangements functioned in each research site in a way that
enabled the necessary resources to be accessed by different groups in the face of
different scarcities. Political and social change led to institutional arrangements
changing (for example, land, labour and livestock accessing arrangements in Ethiopia
following the Revolution) as did an increase in livestock disease. In fact, whilst some
institutions declined in importance under pressure from various factors (hara
arrangements for sharing the use of livestock declined in Mundena as disease
incidence increased), others took their place (church working parties particularly
helped poorer households in these circumstances).
The changes in institutional arrangements could be a critical influence on the choice
of path followed towards agricultural intensification. But there were additional factors
like climate, transport links and macro-economic policies that also had an impact.
Where all these factors led to a scarcity in certain types of capital there were tradeoffs made between different paths and different use of capital. For example, an
absence of financial capital that would enable a capital-led path of intensification to
be followed, might be compensated for by an availability of social capital. Social
capital could allow the same path to be followed (by providing, for example, informal
credit through a local credit association based upon social capital), or a different
labour-led path to be followed (through work groups also based on social capital). The
ability to adapt and trade off one path against another would involve varying levels of
risks and might require different timescales, with varying impact on the sustainable
livelihoods’outcomes. Following a labour-led path of intensification, for instance,
might have a beneficial impact on the number of working days created, but an
increase in working days might not necessarily lead to long term alleviation of
poverty, despite the household working harder.
The research looked at the differences between households in agricultural paths
followed. Richer and poorer households were compared, female- and male-headed
households and different ethnic groups. Then the differences in strategies within a
household were examined, often depending on the different plot and crop types.
17
In Ethiopia, the research showed that for poorer households with adequate labour (and
without access to capital), capital saving intensification strategies were especially
critical for constructing a sustainable livelihood. Labour decisions were made at the
household level and there was a high degree of involvement in local social networks
to share labour and resources. Female-headed households often had a shortage of
male labour – particularly crucial for ploughing – which impacted on both a capitalled and a labour-led intensification path. In this situation, options for achieving a
sustainable livelihood were considerably constrained. The greatest flexibility could be
achieved in a household with several young males who represented the necessary
workforce for a labour-led approach, but could also go off farm to earn money
through other non-agricultural activities, bringing back capital to be invested in the
farm. A household like this was in the ideal position of being able to follow both
strategies towards intensification and diversify its income source.
The research site of Dalonguebougou in Mali is home to three different ethnic groups.
There was a difference in the agricultural intensification paths followed, in part due to
the different traditional livelihood practices of each group and in part due to varying
access to resources and institutional involvement.
In Ethiopia, within a household, families treat different parts of their farmland in
different ways: the area around the house being farmed more with a labour-led
strategy, and the part beyond this, a capital-led approach. This more distant farm
would be ploughed more and there would be greater use of chemical fertilisers. The
gender divisions in labour would require more female workers in the plot near the
house (the darkua) and more men to do land preparation,weeding and ploughing in
the other area (the shoqa). Consequently, again the make up of the household itself
would influence the choice of intensification process which could be followed.
There were other explanations for the intensification path followed across the five
research sites in Mali and Ethiopia. Different historical traditions and experiences,
levels of social capital and institutional arrangements that enabled access to resources;
ecological niches and social norms all influenced the decision on which course to
follow or which combination of strategies to follow.
18
Table 2 Institutions to access key resources (in addition to those resources already owned by the household)
Capitals
Resources
Admencho, Ethiopia
Mundena, Ethiopia
Chokare, Ethiopia
Zaradougou, Mali
Dalonguebougou, Mali
Land
Sharecropping arrangement
(Kotta-land)
Sharecropping arrangement
(Kotta-land)
Sharecropping arrangement
(Kotta-land)
Dominance of village Bambara in
customary land and water tenure.
All other groups negotiate access
through village Bambara.
Water
n/a
n/a
PA, SF
Land stays in hh on death of hhh;
Women gain access to individual
plots through marriage; hh
breakup causes division of land
holdings; Access for immigrants
is negotiated through the village
chief (‘customary land tenure’).
n/a
Inputs
BoA (Global); PA; market
BoA (Global); PA; market
None for fertiliser (illegally
through State Farm for seeds).
Livestock
Inheritance; purchase (whole or
part); share ownership (kotta);
share rearing (hara); ownership
under ‘share-for-profit’
arrangement (tirf yegera); pairing of
oxen (gatua); borrowing for free
(woosa); in exchange for labour.
Inheritance; Purchase (whole or
part); share ownership (kotta);
share rearing (hara); ownership
under “share-for-profit”
arrangement (tirf yegera); pairing
of oxen (gatua); borrowing for
free (woosa); in exchange for
labour
Inheritance; Purchase (whole or
part); share ownership (kotta);
share rearing (hara); ownership
under ‘share-for-profit’
arrangement (tirf yegera); pairing of
oxen (gatua); borrowing for free
(woosa); in exchange for labour.
Natural
Physical
Equipment
Association Villageois administers
credit for inputs, oxen and
tractors from CMDT at village
level, and provides fertiliser.
Ownership of livestock and
equipment by individuals and hh;
draft power/labour exchange
agreements; draft power
borrowing agreements; CMDT
credit provision for draft oxen;
use of hh agricultural equipment
for individual or sub-household
fields; hire of tractor for cash.
Association Villageois administers
credit (for inputs) from CMDT
(through BNDA and Kafo
Jiginw); Loans from Association
Villageois under difficult
circumstances
“Informal contracts” of rights
and obligation between a hh and
its members; involves payment
for some members of hh;
Management and distribution of
labour between Zdg and
plantations in Ivory Coast
Economic
/ financial
Credit
BoA (Global)
Traditional credit and savings
groups (iddir, equb)
BoA (Global)
Traditional credit and savings
groups (iddir, equb)
SF (SF workers only)
Traditional credit and savings
groups (iddir, equb)
Human
Labour
skills
Management
skills
Various working groups (hashiya,
zayea, dago); begging for labour
(woosa); Church group (asrat)
Various working groups
(hashiya, zayea, dago); begging for
labour (woosa); Church group
(asrat)
Various working groups (hashiya,
zayea, dago); begging for labour
(woosa); Church group (asrat)
Social
Social
networks
Clan, Church, Iddir, PA
Clan, Church, Iddir, PA
Ethnicity, Clan, Church, Iddir, PA, Age groups
SF
Dominance of village Bambara in
customary land and water tenure.
All other groups negotiate access
through village Bambara.
No credit available, limited inputs
on open market.
Draft-water exchange; draft
borrowing; draft-labour exchange;
water-manure exchange.
Informal credit available through
kinship networks.
Family labour; visiting women,
harvest workers and hired agric.
workers (both paid in millet); ton:
age group based work parties; nyo
gisi ton: threshing/winnowing work
groups; labour-labour exchanges
(especially during seasonal
bottleneck; hired herders (wage:
millet)
Ethnicity, marriage paths, age
groups, religious groups
hhh, head of household
PA, Peasant Association
SF, State Farm
BoA (Global), The Bureau of Agriculture's extension package
19
Migration
The aim of this research programme was to inform policy and to ask the key question,
‘What policies could facilitate the contribution of migration to sustainable
livelihoods?’. It started from the position that migration as a strategy could have a
positive effect on constructing a sustainable livelihood and that policies, instead of
trying to limit migration, should support it where it could help poor communities
(Migration and livelihoods: case studies in Bangladesh, Ethiopia and Mali, Arjan de
Haan et al, Research Report 46, 2000, IDS).
Much migration research has emphasised the importance of the structure of migration
streams, how migrating people use networks and social contacts to help them and how
migration movements are determined by the rules of their home society. Migration is
not necessarily an unplanned reaction to an environmental shock or economic
pressure, but is often a regular practice and considered quite normal. This was
certainly backed up by the history of the areas in Ethiopia and Mali in which this
research was carried out.
The sites in the two countries studied had markedly different migration practices.
In Ethiopia, the history of the research district was one of mobility, though how this
had impacted on livelihoods had varied. A melting pot of peoples and cultures, it had
seen several different political regimes, some of which had severely limited
population movement. Perhaps because of this, rates of migration were generally low.
In Mali, both research sites had high levels of migration, consistent with the historical
context of the West African region but with very different patterns. In Zaradougou, as
was seen earlier, there was a regular and accepted migration by part of the family to
the coffee and cocoa plantations owned by them in Ivory Coast. Families spread their
risks in this way and often had very substantial income to bring back to invest in the
farm. This was not a totally risk-free strategy, however, as the process of obtaining a
plantation had become increasingly difficult and expensive. In the other Malian site,
Dalonguebougou, the pattern of migration varied with the ethnic groups. Migration
had long been a feature of the Bambara livelihood system and an important source of
income; for the other groups, it was less so.
The research looked at the activities and background of people migrating. In Ethiopia,
information was not readily available, but education and daily work seemed to be the
two most important categories of activity. Migrants from Zaradougou in Mali worked
on the plantations in Ivory Coast. Migrants from Dalonguebougou were active in a
variety of areas including bricklaying, loading and unloading cargo lorries, welldigging in Ivory Coast and working on irrigated rice and vegetable production near
the town of Niono. The activities of these migrants had also changed since the 1980s
when young men would spend several months away in weaving jobs at Segou,
harvesting rice or digging wells in Ivory Coast.
Age and gender were two important factors. Migrants tended to be young and male,
but women migrated as well. In Ethiopia, migrants were mainly male and there was
relatively more migration of unmarried men in the Ethiopian sites than in Mali. In
Dalonguebougou in Mali, women had always migrated for seasonal work in rural
areas, but recently they had taken up migration to urban areas (although this didn’t
seem to be particularly profitable).
20
In any study of how migration impacts on constructing sustainable livelihoods, it
might be expected that there would be high levels of activity amongst people and
households with few assets and from poor areas. In the Ethiopian research sites this
was clearly the case: migration was predominantly by those who did not have a plot
of land or had no animals to support the household. It seems overall, however, that the
type of migration and conditions at the destination are crucial factors, muddying the
relationship between economic status and migration.
There was no doubt that local institutions had a strong influence over patterns of
migration. Personal contacts and networks and the role of the family in planning
migration were all important. Personal networks played a role in all three research
sites in Ethiopia: a young man from Admencho migrated to a nearby town to join his
uncle and become a shoe polisher, for example. A surprising find in Ethiopia,
however, was that many people did not know where their relatives had gone. Some
went away for years and did not keep in touch. Migration was more an individual
affair and less determined by the household than in Mali. In Zaradougou, Mali,
networks were exceptionally close and in Dalonguebougou, migration patterns were
strongly determined by ethnicity.
Education appeared to play little role in whether or not people migrated, although the
different activities were so diverse that it would be hard to make a significant link.
The different forms of household – small nuclear families or vast extended
households – however, did influence migration patterns. In Ethiopia, family members
proposed that a younger member of the household should migrate, even though in
most cases, it was largely the migrant’s savings that subsidised the trip. In Mali, the
structure of the household was central to access to migration opportunities. In
Zaradougou, large multi-generational households were beginning to breakdown and
migration caused tensions at home with the issue of trust being of crucial importance.
There was always the possibility that a young man would leave his family and set up
on his own. In Dalonguebougou, however, the traditional structure was maintained.
Whilst migration allowed the younger male members more freedom away from quite
a controlled labour management system, in Dalonguebougou the incidence of young
men ‘setting up on their own’ was virtually nil. It was more likely that in families
where labour and men were short, the household head would not allow the young man
to leave anyway.
Young women migrate too and this was seen particularly in Mali among the Bambara
in Dalonguebougou. The main motivation to earn money was to raise enough for the
bridal trousseau and it was the mothers who decided when their daughter should first
start to migrate. The movement was based on kinship networks and was linked in with
the whole complex institution of marriage. Only women in the poorest households
used any of their migration earnings to make a direct contribution to the central
household pot, otherwise it was considered to be an important contribution towards a
family’s marriage obligations. Whilst most female migration was within rural areas,
there was urban migration, with many women becoming domestic servants.
Migration was a central part of the livelihoods of households and individuals in
several of the research sites. It was strongly embedded in local institutions and seen as
socially and culturally ‘the norm’. Migration contributed to reducing the vulnerability
21
of households, and had a positive effect on incomes and social relations. On the
negative side, it could lead to a lack of labour for certain key agricultural tasks and
therefore reduced rural production.
The research did not produce comparable quantitative estimates of the impact of
migration on livelihoods. In fact, one of the lessons learned was that it was difficult to
generalise about this. In policy terms, particularly, it was seen to be important to be
aware of specific contexts in order that policies could be as supportive as possible.
They needed to take account of the possibility that migration could increase
inequality, that it was an activity embedded in social relations and that this could have
disadvantages for some people. At the same time, it could create opportunities for
supportive policy making.
How does policy influence livelihood strategies and can poor people
influence the policy process?
In Analysing policy for sustainable livelihoods (Alex Shankland, Research Report 49,
September 2000, IDS) a key strength of the sustainable livelihoods approach is held to
be its potential for ‘linking the micro to the macro’, that is for linking what is actually
happening at village level with the higher levels at which policies intended to make
changes are formulated.
Shankland (2000) identifies some specific limitations to the framework approach as a
tool for policy analysis and outlines strategies to address these.
A model of how policy affects livelihoods
One strategy is to draw up a model of how policy affects livelihoods. Policy analysis
should be linked with sustainable livelihoods analysis so that the connection can be
made between the macro- and the micro-level. If the role of certain institutions and
organisations in implementing policy can be identified, through policy analysis, it can
then be seen through sustainable livelihoods analysis whether those same institutions
and organisations are present within a local community and how much local people
interact with or influence them. Policies that can change, reinforce or reduce the
supporting or constraining role played by these existing institutions and organisations
will be the most effective for supporting the construction of sustainable livelihoods.
The research shows that people are not merely passive victims of ‘bad’ policy or
beneficiaries of ‘good’ policy, rather that they may not always have the leeway to
adapt livelihood strategies to respond to new or different policies. In this situation, the
response may be merely a negative coping strategy. It is within this whole context that
Shankland (2000) formulates a model, consistent with the analytical framework, of
how policy affected livelihoods, summarising it as:
Policy operates through specific institutions and organisations to influence people’s
choice of livelihood strategies, by changing their perception of the opportunities and
constraints which they face in pursuing different strategies, and the returns which
they can expect from them.
This can be presented visually using the diagram in Figure 2 below. The diagram
illustrates the range of elements that should be taken into account in a policy analysis
22
and the complexity of some of the linkages between them. It also highlights the
overlap with the aspects of policy analysis that might also be dealt with in a
sustainable livelihoods analysis.
Figure 2 Links between people-centred & policy-centred analysis3
Policy Process and
actors
How policy is made, and
who influences the
Social Capital
Peoples capacity to
articulate demand or
influence the policy
process.
Livelihood Priorities
Priorities of the poor
and the policies
shaping them
process.
Policy Context
Political, social and
economic envrionment.
Institutions and
organisations
The interface
between policy and
people.
Livelihood Strategies
How policy impacts on
peoples livelihoods.
Sustainable Livelihoods Analysis
(people centred)
Policy Measures
Programmes,
regulations, laws, etc.
for implementation of
policy.
Policy Statement
Written or formal
statement of policy
intent sanctioned by
government.
Policy Analysis for SL
(policy centred)
Can poor people influence policy?
Secondly, analysing the vertical dimension of social capital and determining which
groups of people are aware of their rights and in a position to make claims on the state
should be combined with an examination of the opportunities for direct participation
by the poor in defining policy priorities and holding to account those who are
responsible for implementation. Citizens might seek out as allies alternative structures
like NGOs or church groups to increase their opportunity, especially where there is a
high degree of rights awareness on the part of the community but little capacity in
state structures to respond. NGO or church groups may represent too the groups that
have little awareness or which lack organisation. In communities where there is a high
level of inequality, with a local governing elite and marginalised groups, the
marginalised people may find that the NGOs or state structures independent of the
local elite may be in a position to help them.
If these relationships could be developed to increase the vertical social capital of a
poorer groups, the chances of poor people having a greater say in the policy making
that had an impact on their attempts to build a sustainable livelihood would also
increase. In Mali, for instance, the establishment of newly-elected decentralised
structures (communes rurales) may provide an opening for greater debate and
negotiation of local policy by local people. Shankland pointed out, however, that
where the aim of research is to identify entry points for influencing policy processes
there should be a distinction made between situations where poor people have a voice
themselves to do this and where in fact, their voice is controlled by other institutions.
3
This diagram is taken from Tools for Sustainable Livelihoods Policy Analysis, Katherine
Pasteur, 2001 (forthcoming on www.livelihoods.org))
23
Pursuing a policy-centred approach
From this discussion around the interaction of policies and livelihoods and the links
between people and policies, Shankland (2000) drew up a five stage process for
moving from an initial identification of who were the poor people striving to construct
a sustainable livelihood to how they might be helped to find entry points for
influencing the policy process more effectively themselves (see Box 3 below).
Box 3
Analysing policy for sustainable livelihoods: a checklist
Part 1: Livelihood priorities
1
Who and where are the poor?
2
What are their livelihood priorities?
3
What policy sectors are relevant to these priorities?
Part 2: The Policy context
1
What is policy in those sectors?
2
Who makes policy in those sectors?
3
What is the macro policy context?
Part 3: Policy measures
4
What measures have been put in place to implement each policy?
5
What are the characteristics of these policy measures?
6
Through what institutions and organisations are these measures channelled?
Part 4: Policy in the local context
7
In what shape do these institutions and organisations exist locally?
8
What other institutions and organisations affect local responses to policy?
9
What other local institutions and organisations might policy affect?
Part 5: People and policy
10
What resources can poor people draw on to influence policy?
11
What opportunities exist for poor people to influence policy directly?
12
What opportunities exist for poor people to influence policy indirectly?
24
Annex 1
Research Reports from the Sustainable Livelihoods Research
Programme
Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis
IDS Working paper 72
Ian Scoones
1998 22pp 1 85864 224 8
Sustainable Rural Livelihoods in Mali
IDS Research Report 35
Karen Brock and N’golo Coulibaly
1999 162pp 1 85864 269 8
Sustainable Livelihoods in Southern Ethiopia
IDS Research Report 44
Grace Carswell, Ajan de Haan, Data Dea, Alemayehu Konde, Alex Shankland and
Annette Sinclair
1999 278pp 1 85864 311 2
Migration and Livelihoods: case studies in Bangladesh, Ethiopia and Mali
IDS Research Report 46
Arjan de Haan with Karen Brock, Grace Carswell, N’golo Coulibaly, Haileyesus Seba
and Kazi Ali Toufique
2000 36pp 1 85864 320 1
Diversification of Livelihoods: evidence from Mali and Ethiopia
IDS Research Report 47
Camilla Toulmin, Rebeca Leonard, Karen Brock, N’golo Coulibaly, Grace Carswell
and Data Dea
2000 59pp 1 85864 324 4
Agricultural Intensification in Ethiopia and Mali
IDS Research Report 48
Grace Carswell
2000 46pp 1 85864 325 2
25
Analysing Policy for Sustainable Livelihoods
IDS Research Report 49
Alex Shankland
2000 42pp 1 85864 326 0
For a summary of the Mali work see a working paper from the IIED Drylands
programme entitled Sustainability Amidst Diversity: Options for Rural Households
in Mali
www.iied.org/drylands/research.html#poverty
For details of the next phase of the sustainable livelihoods research programme,
focusing on southern Africa, please refer to the Environment Team pages of the IDS
website at: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/env
26
Annex 2
Livelihoods Connect – www.livelihoods.org
Livelihoods Connect is a website that has been up and running since the beginning of
2000. Aimed primarily at DFID sustainable livelihoods advisers, it also has a wider
appeal for anyone working in this area. It is extremely practical and provides learning
tools for following the sustainable livelihoods approach, a database of relevant
documents and distance learning materials. The site is regularly updated.
Three other key sections to look at are:
Sustainable Livelihoods Resource Group – Network page
http://www.livelihoods.org/resourceGroup/ResourceGroup_network.html
This section showcases the capabilities and work of the sustainable livelihoods
resource group member institutions, highlighting opportunities for collaboration and
indicating how to get in touch.
Organisations links and events
http://www.livelihoods.org/info/info_linksEvents.html
Here is the guide to the links worth accessing on the websites of the sustainable
livelihoods practitioner organisations and a list of events and latest developments in
the area.
The Post-it Board
http://www.livelihoods.org/post/postItBoard.html
This section gives anyone the opportunity to share their knowledge and insights,
experience and views on the sustainable livelihoods approach. Details of a project
under development entitled Transforming bureaucracies and understanding policy
processes for sustainable livelihoods (James Keeley, Kath Pasteur and Ian Scoones:
Institute of Development Studies, Sussex) can be found on the Post it board and
comments on the research plan are invited.
27
Annex 3
Other references
Carney, D., 1998, Implementing the sustainable rural livelihoods approach. Paper
presented to the DfID Natural Resource Advisers’ Conference, London: Department
for International Development
Chambers, R., and Conway, G., 1992 Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical
concepts for the 21st Century, IDS Discussion Paper no 296, Brighton, IDS
Ellis, F., 2000, Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries, Oxford:
Oxford University Press
Goldman, I., 2000, Micro to macro: policies and institutions for empowering the
rural poor, report for DfID (available through www.livelihoods.org)
Greeley, M., 1999, Poverty and well-being in rural Bangladesh: impact of economic
growth and rural development, Main Research Report produced for ESCOR,
Brighton: IDS
Neefjes, K., 1999, Oxfam GB and sustainable livelihoods: lessons from learning,
paper presented at IDS Sustainable Livelihoods Programme Workshop, Brighton,
June 1999
Nicol, A., 2000, Adopting a sustainable livelihoods approach to water projects:
implications for policy and practice, ODI Working Paper no 133, London: Overseas
Development Institute
Swift, J., 1989, Why are rural people vulnerable to famine?, IDS Bulletin, vol 20, no2
Toufique, K., 1999, Sustainable livelihoods in Bangladesh, mimeo, IDS Sustainable
Livelihoods Programme Research Report, Brighton: IDS
Toulmin, C., 1992, Cattle, women and wells. Managing household survival in the
Sahel, Oxford: Clarendon Press
28