An Alternative Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

1
An Alternative Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

• Experience from SL workshops at IFAD

2
Background

• 2002 ongoing a series of SL workshops have
  been organised within IFAD (HQ, regions
  countries)
• An opportunity for IFAD staff and consultants to
  reflect on their experience
• An opportunity to explore ways of implementing
  the new IFAD Strategic Framework 2002-2006
• The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach used as a
  thematic guide to organise and analyse
  experience

3
Introduction

• SL framework an effective tool for facilitating
  analysis and identifying ways forward
• Dependent on mode of presentation
• Several short-comings identified by facilitators

4
Key issues in the SL framework

• Poor not central enough easily lost from
  vision
• Key processes gender, age, ethnic group,
  class/caste not explicitly highlighted
• Tradeability of livelihood assets not
  indicated
• Linkages between different elements not
  sufficiently highlighted
• Too sequential left-to-right
• Aspirations and opportunities missing
• Little assistance in dealing practically with
  PIP box

5
The SL Framework
6
Focussing on the poor
Ethnic Ability
Gender Age Class
The Poor
7
Livelihood Assets
8
Unpacking Policies and Institutions
9
Unpacking Processes
Markets Politics Culture Rights
10
An Envelope of Action
11
Strong Envelope People Less Vunerable
12
Weak Envelope People More Vulnerable
13
Markets Politics Culture Rights
ACTIONS
OUTCOMES
14
Uses

• A guide for people in the analysis of
  development practice and issues
• Encourages discussion and probing
• Not necessarily easier to explain but more
  complete
• Specifically identifies many features
  politics, rules, social norms, gender/age/class/et
  hnic issues that will help make it more culture
  specific
• Still not a magic bullet!

15
Advantages

• Addresses some of the grey areas identified
  regarding SL
• Places the poor firmly at the centre makes
  people visible
• Suggests the importance of clear definition of
  who is at the centre of the analysis
• Unpacks the PIP box more specific regarding
  key institutions and processes and provides a
  more practical approach to analysing
  institutional and policy issues
• Incorporates political dimension more explicitly
• Helps understand entry points based on
  opportunities and aspirations, possible at
  different levels (identifying them still depends
  on good analysis)