Training and learning materials
Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets: sections 4.1 to 4.7
Methods of the Sustainable Livelihoods approach
Authors:
; Department for International Development
Publisher:
Eldis Document Store, 2000
This is the fourth of a seven part series of Guidance Sheets on Sustainable Livelihoods. This fourth section, for manageability purposes, is broken into two documents: sections 4.1 - 4. 7 and sections 4.8 - 4. 13; this is the former. This part of the section is about the process of investigating livelihoods for project and policy purposes. The aim of the section is to provide the reader with an approach to gaining an overall understanding of livelihoods, and a range of methods for tackling the key components of the SL framework. The layout of part 4 is as follows:
- sections 4.1 – 4.4 examine the process of livelihoods analysis and provide an introduction to a
range of common tools. It looks at the scope and scale of livelihoods analysis, and recommends a broad and contextual understanding of livelihoods, leading to an in-depth investigation of critical issues. Sections 4.3 and 4.4 provide an introduction to a set of tools, including environmental checklists; gender analysis; governance assessment; macro-micro linkages; and stakeholder analysis
- sections 4.5–4.6 provide more detail on rapid and participatory methods and sample surveys. The SL approach builds on the success of participatory methods in making local-level development initiatives much more people-centred. This section argues that learning within the community is maximised by inviting community members to facilitate participatory exercises. Sample surveys are discussed in the way that they are complementary to, and often informed by, participatory methods, especially when they are preceded by an initial overview of the community or context in which they are carried out
- section 4.7 looks at some of the issues and dilemmas that can arise during the course of livelihoods analysis. This sheet brings together and begins to address some of the concerns and tensions identified by those already involved in livelihoods analysis. Other challenges are likely to arise as livelihoods analysis becomes more common. It is hoped that many of these can be addressed through exchange of information between practitioners, though some may require more deliberate policy-oriented research.
