Involuntary Displacement and Resettlement — Policy and ... - CEPA

evidence that Asset Holders suffered the most significant loss of income dueto displacement. To the extent that Type II Labour needed complementaryassets to generate livelihoods, the drop in their incomes was larger than thatof Type I Labour. The latter needed very small amounts of complementarycapital, which made their income more resilient and that it did not fall toomuch in response to displacement.The above information can be used in designing income restorationprogrammes for populations affected by CID. One important strategy thatcan be used is to train the jobless IDPs in work which is in high demand inhost communities and which require minimal complementary capital. InBatticaloa, for example, carpentry and masonry, Type I Labour, have theseproperties. The displaced farmers, fishermen, etc. that constitute Type IIcan, arguably, be trained within a relatively short period to do Type I work.Our work has shown that salary incomes of the Government Servants did notsuffer as a result of the displacement. While the displacement causes manyother problems to Government Servants their salaries were intact, thanks tothe attachment mechanism. Designing income restoration programmes forAsset Holders, in contrast, is not easy. Many of these are very experiencedentrepreneurs, which makes them less pliable and difficult to retrain. Theysuffered the most precipitous decline in income, which experience most ofthem found to be daunting, psychologically speaking. Irrespective of thespecific income generation plan for them, what is paramount is that theyreceive adequate psychological support and counselling on a priority basis.These are some of the ways that resettlement activities could support copingstrategies and productive processes, so that the livelihoods of IDPs arerestored as quickly as possible.80