A ripple in development? - Channel Research

Additional issues need to be considered in the context of conflict
affected countries such as Sri Lanka, where there is no central government
commitment to uniformly reducing poverty across all groups. This
translates into the lack of monitoring of poverty. A case in point is that
in the conflict areas studied, accurate “poverty line” information dating
back to 2004 is not available. As such, the focus of poverty is mainly in
monetary terms.
The relationship between poverty and livelihoods can be seen in
terms of households having opportunities for income generating activities.
The availability of such opportunities should ideally be stable and
predictable, where livelihoods security is then achieved. The contribution
of external aid for promoting these opportunities for income generating
activities is not at all clear from the document review and generally
available analyses. Many of these livelihood opportunities were
primarily identified and created by the poor on their own. However
there is still a large question about the extent to which small investments
of external aid (through micro-credit schemes or micro-grants) have
facilitated livelihoods. This evaluation limits itself to small investments,
because household livelihoods are formed at the micro or small scale
level of local economic activity.
Three questions structure the evaluation around this theme as follows:
• To what extent has livelihood security improved for those most
directly affected by the Tsunami and if so for whom and how?
• To what extent can improvements in livelihood security be attributed
to the tsunami aid effort and if so what are the possible mechanisms
by which this has worked?
• What are the perspectives of the household concerning efforts made
to support its livelihood recovery?
Recovery 39 and LRRD contributions to livelihoods can occur in terms
of efforts to move households out from a position of transitory poverty.
If the position is still systemic poverty, there may be improvements when
looked at from a multidimensional perspective, improved access to
housing.
The concept of livelihood security, which draws broadly from livelihoods
frameworks, emphasises that what characterises the lives of
most poor marginal people is a context of risk and insecurity derived
from an uncertain institutional landscape (how governments and markets
behave), natural hazards and the actions of others (conflict).
39
Drawing from the social protection literature, recovery can be conceptualised in three stages:
firstly households achieving protection (shelter, food, water etc to ensure survival), secondly prevention
(households gaining sufficient resources to buffer themselves against risks or shocks) and
thirdly promotion (household gain greater livelihood security – income, health etc.) leading ultimately,
it is hoped, to greater livelihood security overall.
50