Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Textbook A Sustainable Livelihood Approach To Poverty Reduction An Empirical Analysis of Mizoram The Eastern Extension of The Himalaya 1St Edition Vishwambhar Prasad Sati Ebook All Chapter PDF
Textbook A Sustainable Livelihood Approach To Poverty Reduction An Empirical Analysis of Mizoram The Eastern Extension of The Himalaya 1St Edition Vishwambhar Prasad Sati Ebook All Chapter PDF
https://textbookfull.com/product/himalaya-on-the-threshold-of-
change-vishwambhar-prasad-sati/
https://textbookfull.com/product/sustainable-tourism-development-
in-the-himalaya-constraints-and-prospects-vishwambhar-prasad-
sati/
https://textbookfull.com/product/reduction-of-the-pareto-set-an-
axiomatic-approach-1st-edition-vladimir-d-noghin/
https://textbookfull.com/product/balanced-phono-amps-an-
extension-to-the-the-sound-of-silence-editions-burkhard-vogel-
auth/
An Overview of the SIGMA Research Project A European
Approach to Seismic Hazard Analysis 1st Edition Alain
Pecker
https://textbookfull.com/product/an-overview-of-the-sigma-
research-project-a-european-approach-to-seismic-hazard-
analysis-1st-edition-alain-pecker/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-coinsurance-effect-of-
corporate-diversification-an-empirical-analysis-of-the-
accounting-and-economic-implications-1st-edition-dominik-nusmann-
auth/
https://textbookfull.com/product/strategic-motivations-of-inward-
r-amp-d-fdi-an-empirical-analysis-of-the-uk-osagie-igbinigie/
https://textbookfull.com/product/ecological-migration-
development-and-transformation-a-study-of-migration-and-poverty-
reduction-in-ningxia-1st-edition-peilin-li/
https://textbookfull.com/product/an-empirical-analysis-of-
population-and-technological-progress-1st-edition-hisakazu-kato-
auth/
SPRINGER BRIEFS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
A Sustainable
Livelihood Approach
to Poverty Reduction
An Empirical Analysis
of Mizoram, the Eastern
Extension of the
Himalaya
123
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science present concise summaries of cutting-edge
research and practical applications across a wide spectrum of environmental fields,
with fast turnaround time to publication. Featuring compact volumes of 50 to 125
pages, the series covers a range of content from professional to academic.
Monographs of new material are considered for the SpringerBriefs in Environmental
Science series.
Typical topics might include: a timely report of state-of-the-art analytical
techniques, a bridge between new research results, as published in journal articles
and a contextual literature review, a snapshot of a hot or emerging topic, an in-depth
case study or technical example, a presentation of core concepts that students must
understand in order to make independent contributions, best practices or protocols
to be followed, a series of short case studies/debates highlighting a specific angle.
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science allow authors to present their ideas and
readers to absorb them with minimal time investment. Both solicited and
unsolicited manuscripts are considered for publication.
A Sustainable Livelihood
Approach to Poverty
Reduction
An Empirical Analysis of Mizoram,
the Eastern Extension of the Himalaya
123
Vishwambhar Prasad Sati Lalrinpuia Vangchhia
Department of Geography and Resource Department of Geography and Resource
Management, School of Earth Sciences Management, School of Earth Sciences
& Natural Resources Management & Natural Resources Management
Mizoram University Mizoram University
Aizawl, Mizoram Aizawl, Mizoram
India India
v
vi Preface
forest, water, precious minerals and power resources yet, it could not utilize them
sustainably, mainly due to lack in proper development approach and scarcity of
technological advancement. Further, disparities in economic development in all the
Indian states are profound that can be seen in the spatial perspectives and they are
influenced by geographical location and the availability of infrastructural facilities.
Mizoram characterises underdeveloped economy and practices traditional sub-
sistence agriculture as about half of the total population of the state is involved on
it. Further, shifting cultivation dominates agricultural pattern, obtains a maximum
proportion of arable land and is the major socio-economic activity of the native
tribal people. However, output is insufficient and thus, food insecurity situation
exists.
Population distribution in Mizoram is sparse. The urban and rural settlements are
located on the hills and ridges, as the people of Mizoram like to reside on the top
of the hills, and it is one the indicators of their social status, as the term ‘Mizoram’
itself denotes the land of the highlanders. Urban population is higher (51 %) than
rural population and population density is 52 persons living per km2. Social status
of women and men is equal and their number is almost equal in the total population.
Further, social structure of Mizoram has largely been influenced by the western
culture and women also participate in all the family affairs including
decision-making. Church plays a greater role in the social integration and trans-
formation. About 83 % populations, including all ethnic Mizos, (2011) is Christian.
It was a disturbed area during the long-lasting movement of the Mizos for statehood
(the 1960s). After emerged as a full flagged state of Republic of India in 1985,
Mizoram has become India’s peaceful state.
The landscape is mountainous. Structured hills, valley fills and flood plains form
it and constitute the panoramic landscapes. Tourism may obtain a prominent place
in economic development and may enhance livelihoods. Diversity in faunal and
floral species further accelerates livelihood options, if they are harnessed optimally
because the economic viability of biodiversity resources is high. Water resource
availability is enormous. There are many perennial streams and rivers that originate
and flow from the state. Climate, in the whole state, is very feasible. Average annual
temperature remains about 23 °C. Intensity and frequency of rain is high that occurs
mainly during the monsoon season and stretches for about six months from May to
October. Winter, mainly four months—November, December, January and
February remain dry and moderately cold.
Infrastructural facilities are poor. Difficult terrain and unavailability in financial
resources are the main constrains in development processes, as the state charac-
terises fragile landscape/ecology and underdeveloped economy. A large part of the
state is remote. Transportation facilities are lagging behind. Lacking in educational
institution, banking, energy sectors and others are the main hindrances for
socio-economic development, leading to poverty and malnutrition.
Sustainable livelihood approach is the key driver to reduce poverty in the
countries, which characterise poverty and malnutrition. It comprises of the five
livelihood assets—natural, human, financial, physical and social. Availability and
use of these assets optimally will lead to sustainable livelihoods. This study
Preface vii
illustrates potential of assets and applies them in Mizoram context for livelihood
sustainability and poverty reduction.
A geo-empirical analysis of land resources and livelihood assets was carried out
to conduct this study. A case study of 16 villages lie in eight districts of Mizoram
was carried out, and the household level survey (random sampling) was conducted.
Further, a structured questionnaire was constructed and questions were framed on
the various socio-economic and livelihood aspects. Secondary data on natural and
human resources were also collected for assisting and enhancing the study. We used
a set of qualitative and quantitative approaches to elaborate the gathered data and
applied a participatory rural appraisal after rapid field visits.
This study is unique in the field of sustainable livelihoods in Mizoram and other
areas where the similar socio-economic and geographical conditions exist.
Livelihood options are mainly related to and obtained from agriculture and forest
products/resources. We elaborate livelihood patterns and socio-economic devel-
opment of the study villages and suggest several measures to develop method-
ologies for livelihood sustainability and poverty reduction. This study supports the
researchers, academicians, farmers and all other stakeholders who are involved in
rural development.
The Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), New Delhi, funded this
study. We acknowledge our sincere thank to ICSSR for the support, otherwise, it
was merely impossible to conduct the study. We thank Dr. C. Uday Baskar Rao for
his valuable support. We are thankful to the Department of Geography and
Resource Management, Mizoram University for providing basic facilities. We also
thank the people of 16 villages for their cooperation in providing household level
information. Finally, we thank the almighty for all—courage, strength and peace of
mind.
ix
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2 Geographical Backdrop and Sustainable Livelihoods . . . . . . . . . . 17
Location and Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Physical Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Structural Hills. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Valley Fills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Flood Plains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Linear Ridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Major Rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Major Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Rainfall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Relative Humidity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Forest Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Use Pattern and Conservation of Forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Soil Types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3 Geostrategic Location, Political History and Development. . . . . . . 31
International Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
National Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Political History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Socioeconomic Development After Statehood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4 Population and Socio-economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Population Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Culture and Religion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
xi
xii Contents
Socio-economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Potential of Industrial Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Food Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Handlooms and Handicrafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Airways. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Railways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Waterways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Hydropower Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Potentials of Tourist Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5 Land Use: Agriculture and Livestock Farming. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Land Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Land-Use Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Agricultural Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Shifting Cultivation and Its Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Land Tenures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Agro-Climatic Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Cropping Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Changes in Shifting Cultivation and Decrease in Cropped Land . . . . . 59
Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Cropping Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Major Drivers of Changes in Land Use and Cropping Pattern . . . . . . 62
New Land Use Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Low Production and Productivity of Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Modernization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
6 Livelihood Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Sources of Income and Occupation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Expenditure on Major Heads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
7 Climate Change: People’s Perception, Adaptation,
and Resilience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 71
Climate Change: People’s Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 73
Is Climate Changing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 74
What Is the Impact of Climate Change on Agriculture
and Livestock Farming?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 74
Climate Change Impact on Agriculture and Livestock Farming ..... 75
Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 76
How the Marginal Farmers Adapt and Resilient
with Climate Change? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 76
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 79
Contents xiii
xv
xvi About the Authors
xvii
Acronyms
Chhawrpial Run Chhawrpial means a peaceful culture and run means home.
So Mizoram is also called Chhawrpial Run because, it holds
peace
Duhlian Duhlian is the original dialect of Mizos
Head Hunter During the past, Mizos were involved in keeping slaves,
fighting with other tribal groups, cutting of the head of
fighters and displaying them at the entrance of village
Highlanders Mizos prefer to live on the hill tops and they are called
highlanders
Hnatlang It means social work. Mizos are socially integrated and they
work together and assist each other
Jhuming cultivation It is an old practice of cultivating crops in which agricultural
fields are shifted from one area to other after a certain period
of time. It is also called lashing and burning agriculture,
characterises rainfed agriculture
Jhum cycle It is cycle of jhum fields. Earlier, it was about 20–25 year’s
cycle now, it has been reduced to two–three years
Lal Lal is the head of a village who decides the agricultural and
natural resources use and manages them
Lushai Lushai is the mizo clan. The king of this clan was very
powerful and thus Mizoram was called Lushai hills earlier
Tlawmngai It is a person who is well behaved, brave, respects others and
assists them. Mizos have all these qualities
Wet rice cultivation It is a system where paddy is cultivated in irrigated fields,
mostly lie in the flood plains and valley fills
Zau Agriculture Zau denotes a vast agricultural land, collectively used by a
number of families
xix
Chapter 1
Introduction
The sustainable livelihood idea was first introduced by the Brundtland Commission
on Environment and Development as a way of linking socioeconomic and eco-
logical considerations in a cohesive, policy-relevant structure. In 1992, the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) expanded the
concept, especially in the context of Agenda 21, and advocated that achieving
sustainable livelihoods may be a broad goal for poverty reduction. It stated that
sustainable livelihoods could serve as “an integrating factor that allows policies to
address development, sustainable resource management and poverty reduction
simultaneously” (Krantz 2001). The term sustainable livelihood has been defined
by the scholars, worldwide. Chambers and Conway (1992a, b) defined it as “A
livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets, (stores, resources, claims and access)
and activities required for a means of living: a livelihood is sustainable which can
cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities
and assets, and provide sustainable livelihood opportunities for the next generation;
and which contributes net benefits to other livelihoods at the local and global levels
and in the short and long term.” Scoones (1998) modified and defined it as “A
livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including 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.” Sati et al.
(2014) while conducting a study on the options and strategies of sustainable
livelihoods in the upper Minjiang River basin of China defined livelihood strategies
as increased well-being, reduced vulnerability, improved food security, and more
sustainable use of natural resources base. It largely depends on the availability of
livelihood assets/capitals—natural capital, human capital, financial capital, physical
capital, and social capital. Vulnerability context—shocks, trends and seasonality—
and institutional and policy context are the other aspects of livelihood strategies.
A sustainable livelihood is a situation, where all these aspects are controlled and
they have a greater potential to future livelihood sustainability.
Methodology
The study was conducted using a mix-set of qualitative and quantitative approa-
ches. Data was obtained mainly from the primary sources. A case study of 16
villages was carried out and a household level survey was conducted to gather first
hand data. Random sampling method was employed to select the households. We
have used geographical location, population, and socioeconomic indicators for
selecting villages. Geographical indicators include location (flood plains, valley fills
and hills) and distance from urban center and road; population size, the levels of
infrastructural facilities such as transportation, banking, educational institutions;
income levels, and employment opportunities were the socioeconomic indicators.
Mizoram comprises eight districts. We selected two villages from each district,
considering the given indicators. Household level survey was conducted using a
structured questionnaire. Out of 2010 households in 16 villages, 1527 households
(76 %) were surveyed. The questions were raised on the different aspects such as
population, education, occupation, land use, cropping pattern, natural resources
availability, use pattern, major livelihood options, sources of income, expenditure
on the major commodities, climate change impact on agriculture and livelihood
options, and people’s responses to climate change. Data was collected on food
security levels, poverty, and malnutrition. Rapid field visits of the selected villages
were made and participatory rural appraisal was adopted to compare the gathered
data. Finally, collected data was calculated using SPSS software. Statistical meth-
ods such as descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression were largely used to
calculate data on population profile, occupational structure, income sources,
livelihood options, land use/cover change and cropping pattern. Special focus was
given to socioeconomic relevance of shifting cultivation and its ecological impli-
cations. Changes in area under different crops, production, and per ha yield was
calculated. We calculated nutritional value and energy intake (Kcal), poverty and
infant mortality of the selected villages. The methodology of calculating data is
discussed in the respective chapters. Table 1.1 shows a detailed description of the
villages—number of households and surveyed households of case study villages.
Another case study of five villages, located in Aizawl district, was carried out
(Table 1.2). About 20 % households from each village were studied randomly.
Located on the different altitudes and distance from Aizawl city, these villages have
agricultural economy, as a large number of people are engaged in practicing
agriculture. During the recent decade, changes in agricultural and livelihood pat-
terns, occupation, and sources of income were noticed in these villages.
We observed latitude, longitude, slope, altitude, and distances of the study vil-
lages from district headquarters using Global Positioning System (GPS) (Table 1.3).
Methodology 5
Table 1.2 Case study villages, total households, surveyed households (20 %)
Name of village Total household* Surveyed households Total population
Melriat 199 40 222
Kelsih 149 30 156
Hmuifang 53 12 58
Samtlang 152 30 161
Nausel 61 13 75
Total 614 125 672
Source Surveyed by author (August 2015)
*
COI, 2011
The secondary data, relating to socioeconomy and geography of the state, was
collected from the various government records such as state statistical diary, the
forest survey of India and from the State Agricultural Department. Two time series
data were calculated on land use and cropping pattern. Forest products and their use
pattern were illustrated. District wise data on population and occupational structure
were gathered from secondary sources.
6 1 Introduction
Literature Review
development and the priorities for policy and practice. This change came at a time
when previous dominant theories and practices—particularly those associated with
integrated rural development—were losing their intellectual and political appeal.
Norgaard (1994) describes one of the more significant recent achievements in the
study of ecological and economic systems are that the economy and its environment
are jointly determined systems and the economic activity scale is such that it
matters. This applies specifically to food systems that are genuinely jointly deter-
mined socioeconomic ecological systems.
The sustainable livelihood approach shows the variety of activities that people
carry out, often in combination, to make a living. As several authors have pointed
out, this is particularly important in the case of the poor, who often rely on a
number of different types of economic activities for their livelihoods, and where it is
not any activity but their combined effect for the household economy that matters
(Chambers 1995; Hussein and Nelson 1998).
FAO (1996) discusses the two main themes of the rural development agenda of
the 1990s has been characterized by: a strong emphasis on the environment and the
protection of natural resources and a continued focus on macro-policy, liberaliza-
tion and the role of government in relation to the private sector, and the importance
of effective public management. It stresses the need for new investment in both the
technical and the policy dimensions of agriculture in order to keep tip production
and extend access to food to the poorest sections of the population.
UNDP (1997) highlights the sustainable livelihood idea that was first introduced
by the Brundtland Commission on Environment and development as a way of
linking socioeconomic and ecological considerations in a cohesive, policy-relevant
structure. The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED) expanded the concept, especially in the context of Agenda 21 and
advocated for the achievement of sustainable livelihoods as a broad goal for poverty
eradication. It stated that sustainable livelihood could serve as “an integrating
factor” that allows policies to address “development, sustainable resource man-
agement and poverty eradication simultaneously.” Most of the discussion on sus-
tainable livelihood so far has focused on rural areas and situations where people are
farmers or make a living from some kind of primary self-managed production.
Carney (1998) describes about 70 % of the world’s poor live in rural areas.
Though urban poverty is rising, the correlation between poverty and remoteness
from urban centers is strong in most countries and it is expected to remain so until
at least the second decade of the next century. The International Development
Target of halving the number of people living in extreme poverty by 2015 will be
achievable if the problem of rural poverty is confronted head-on. Food security
remains a key concern. Over 850 million people in the world are undernourished. It
is therefore important to ensure that the new approaches contribute to improved
agricultural productivity and that they help increase the poor people’s access to
Literature Review 9
and even if it the social or economic differences are not clear to an outsider, they
exist and the poor are living side-by-side with more affluent households.
Communities usually do not represent such homogeneous collective social units as
most development projects or programmes tend to assume.
Frankenberger et al. (2000) observes “rapid and participatory livelihood security
assessment has become a major tool for the collection and analysis of information at
the community level, over the last five years.” The main purpose of these partici-
patory assessments is to understand the nature of livelihood strategies of different
categories of households (social differentiation), their levels of livelihood security
and the principle constraints and opportunities to address through programming.
This information is also disaggregated by gender and generation.
Ellis (2000) recognizes five types of livelihood assets (capitals) such as natural,
physical, human, financial, and social capital. This categorization is assumed to be a
settlement for the various lists of assets identified by different researchers. Natural
capital refers to environmental resources such as land, water, and biological
resources, whereas physical capital stands for those assets created by production
processes such as buildings, roads, farm equipment, tools, and irrigation canals. He
considers them as critical mediating factors that inhibit or facilitate household’s
exercise of capabilities and choices. They are distinct from the vulnerability context
as they are predominantly endogenous to the social nouns and structures of which
households are a part. Livelihood strategy is a dynamic process in which house-
holds combine activities to meet their various needs at different times. He identifies
two broad categories: natural resource-based activities such as collecting or gath-
ering, crop/food cultivation, livestock keeping pastoralism, brick making, weaving,
thatching, etc., and non-natural resource-based activities such as trade and services.
Ashley and Hussein (2000) determine a livelihood-based assessment of the
impact of an intervention will consider current livelihood strategies of people, their
achievement and priorities, how these are influenced by the intervention and dif-
ferences between different groups with regard to such impacts. Based on this
understanding positive and negative livelihood impacts and the underlying motives
of participation or reaction of different groups of people can be identified.
Frankenberger et al. (2000) describes rapid and participatory livelihood security
assessments have become a major tool for the collection and analysis of information
at the community level livelihood data. The main purpose of these participatory
assessments is to understand the nature of livelihood strategies of different cate-
gories of households, their levels of livelihood security and the principle constraints
and opportunities to address through programming.
Barrett et al. (2001) highlights that livelihood diversification decisions are
influenced by vulnerability contexts such as seasonality and shocks, ownership and
access to assets, and factors related to transforming structures and processes
including macro-economic policies and market failures.
Baumann and Sinha (2001) discuss the sustainable livelihood framework has
become an analytical framework or an approach to planning development projects
and programmes. Castro (2002) describe the sustainable livelihoods approach helps
the analyst to generate questions focused on the ability of people to support
12 1 Introduction
themselves with a view of the entire context of their livelihoods—both physical and
social environments, and at the local to the global level.
Krantz (2001) explains the concept of sustainable livelihood is an attempt to go
beyond the conventional definitions and approaches to poverty eradication. These
had been found to be too narrow because they focused only on certain aspects or
manifestations of poverty, such as low income, or did not consider other vital
aspects of poverty such as vulnerability and social exclusion, it is now recognized
that more attention must be paid to the various factors and processes, which either
constrain or enhance poor people’s ability to make a living in an economically,
ecologically, and socially sustainable manner. The sustainable development concept
offers the prospects of a more coherent and integrated approach to poverty.
Orr and Mwale (2001), Barrett et al. (2001), Brown et al. (2006), Devereux
(2006), Ellis and Freeman (2007), and Babulo et al. (2008) provide a way to order
information and understand not only the nature of poverty but also the links
between different aspects of people’s livelihoods. In this way, they help users to
understand complex and changing situations. They broaden the policy dialog and
assist in identifying the relevance of programmes as well as where key constraints
and opportunities lie. Furthermore, livelihoods approaches are still essential within
social and economic research on poverty and food security, both as embedded in
research strategies or as a research tool.
De Stage et al. (2002) discusses how people operate within a vulnerability
context that is shaped by different factors—shifting seasonal constraints (and
opportunities), economic shocks, and longer term trends how they draw on different
types of livelihood assets or capitals in different combinations, which are influenced
by the vulnerability context a range of institutions and processes how they use their
asset base to develop a range of livelihoods strategies to achieve desired livelihood
outcomes.
Kollmair et al. (2002) highlights two steps to investigate sustainable livelihood
approach; a detailed investigation of the living conditions of the target population is
the starting point of a development project based on the sustainable livelihood
approach and to identify limiting factors, which hinder the adaptation of sustainable
livelihood strategies on the one hand and recognize the factors that reduce vul-
nerability on the other. The sustainable livelihood approach might serve as an
analytical tool in order to identify development priorities and new activities prior to
any development activity. A livelihood analysis therefore applies a broad range of
conventional methods and instruments, for example, from participatory poverty
assessment (PPA), participatory rural appraisal (PRA), and good governance
assessment techniques.
Dorward et al. (2003) describes the widely appreciated feature of livelihoods
thinking and approach is that it directs attention to a holistic approach, to the
multiple forces and influences on people’s livelihoods, to the assets and access to
assets and to the options people possess in practice to pursue alternative activities.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
SECONDARY OR REMOTE RESULTS OF
LIVER DISEASE.