Understanding & Analyzing Livelihood Intervention

IMM
DFID
CARE
OXFAM
IFAD
BASIXS
Collection of SLA
Framework diagrams at
the end of the document
S.Rengasamy – Understanding & Analyzing Livelihood Framework
Analyzing Sustainable Livelihood Framework

Framework means a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of
viewing reality.. a particular set of beliefs, ideas, or rules referred to in order to solve a problem:
The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SL Framework) is a schematic view, model, diagram or
visualization tool that should help us to understand the different components of a livelihood and how
different elements in people’s livelihoods interact. The livelihoods framework can be used to help us
analyze livelihoods but it does not attempt to provide an exact representation of reality. It is a
simplification and it should be adapted for use in different circumstances. Real livelihoods are complex
and varied, and can only be properly understood through direct experience. As with the Sustainable
Livelihoods Approach as a whole, there is no “definitive” Sustainable Livelihoods Framework – different
frameworks need to be developed in different settings to reflect local realities. The important thing is to
create some kind of framework and to make sure that it includes certain basic elements. Different
organizations and agencies have developed their own frameworks to reflect their own priorities, but all of
these tend to have these basic elements in common. A key aspect of any SL Framework is that the
people or agencies working with the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach need to construct the
framework themselves. The process of developing a Sustainable Livelihoods Framework forces
people: to think about livelihoods and thoroughly appreciate what factors contribute to the livelihoods of
the people they work with. It also helps people to acquire a greater sense of ownership over the
framework and ensures that they fully understand all its different components and how they are related
to each other.
Human Capital
5 Existing Situation
4 Desirable Situation
3
1 Social Capital
Physical Capital
Financial Capital Natural Capital
2
Understanding the Livelihood Framework for Analyzing

Livelihood Intervention Choices
While making a livelihood intervention, livelihood promoters are continuously engaged in
making choices. These choices include decisions on the
1. Objectives, the livelihood promoters want to achieve,
2. the communities, groups or individuals livelihood promoters seek to help,
3. the sector in which livelihood promoters work in,
4. the scale of impact livelihood promoters desire,
5. how livelihood promoters organize the livelihood activity, and so on.
The livelihood framework that helps livelihood promoters to think analytically and
systematically about the choices and
The Sustainable Livelihood Approach (SLA) uses a
Sustainable Livelihoods Framework to understand
help design a livelihood strategy.
better the livelihoods of people, and in particular the
poor. It also consists of a set of Sustainable The livelihood framework is not a
Livelihood Principles which give guidance about how planning or evaluation tool - its utility
to respond to the learning about livelihoods that the lies in the fact that, it helps livelihood
framework helps us to achieve and how to initiate promoters to be more conscious and
action for positive change. The approach also makes thoughtful about the choices that they
use of a range of Sustainable Livelihoods Tools,
which are not exclusive to the Sustainable Livelihoods
are making. When planning for a
Approach but tools that are widely used in other livelihood promotion, livelihood
contexts as well. The Sustainable Livelihoods promoters need to reflect on what
Approach seeks to “add value” to these tools by using choices they have made in the past,
them within a more comprehensive framework of why they made them, and whether
understanding and action, so that different tools they were the best choices in the
complement each other and can be used most given context is crucial. All too
effectively.
Even these three basic elements in the approach –
often, organizations do not believe
framework, principles and tools – are not fixed and they have choices, and are not
they need to be modified and adapted to suit local conscious of the implicit choices they
circumstances and priorities. In particular, all three are constantly making.
elements need to be adapted to the capacities and
priorities of the people involved, including the people Real learning from the framework
or agencies who are “using” the Sustainable will emerge after it is applied to cases
Livelihoods Approach and, most importantly, the
people who are the “subjects” of the approach.
or to livelihood promoters own
organization’s experience.
Sustainable
Livelihoods Approach Choices in one element of the design
SL SL may depend on choices made in
Principles Tools another part. This means that when
PEOPLE
we are designing an intervention we
may need to go back and forth to
SL
Framework different design elements, as one
choice influences another.
Elements of Design of Livelihood Intervention

There are three elements of design of a livelihood intervention. These are:
1. the objective of the intervention,
2. the nature of the intervention and
3
3. the design of the livelihood activity.
Livelihood intervention could be done with an objective to hold migration, as was in the case
of PRADAN Lift Irrigation, or for assuring a regular market, as in NDDB, or for ensuring
that people got what they were entitled to by law, as in SEWA. In other words, there could be
different objectives of a livelihood intervention. As most livelihood interventions evolve
around some economic activities, there is also an element of design of the livelihood activity.
Interventions of different nature, such as introduction of a technology, or treatment of a
watershed, or making credit available could have significant impact of the livelihoods of
people.
Further, the Nature of Intervention proposed and the Design of the Livelihood Activity
depends on the chosen Objective. This relation can be depicted schematically as follows:
Three Elements of Design of a Livelihood

Objective of the
Intervention
Nature of Design of the

Intervention livelihood Activity
Livelihoods Framework Implications

A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets, and activities required for a means of living;
a livelihood is deemed sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and
shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities, assets, and activities both now and in the
future, while not undermining the natural resource base
• The livelihoods approach is based on evolving thinking about poverty reduction, the way
the poor and vulnerable live their lives, and the importance of structural and institutional
issues; they suggest
development activities that are people-centered, responsive and participatory, multilevel,
conducted in partnership with both the public and private sectors, dynamic, and sustainable
• The livelihoods approach helps to organize the factors that constrain or enhance livelihood
opportunities and shows how they relate to one another; it aims to builds on strengths; it
is more than an analytical it aims to builds on strengths; it is more than an analytical
framework
Livelihoods Framework Implications
The livelihoods approach encourages thinking out of the box; it frees development
practitioners from conventional approaches that are often restricted to identifying problems
and finding solutions
• The livelihoods approach invites development practitioners to look at contexts and
relationships so that development initiatives can become more process-oriented
• The livelihoods approach represents an important shift away from the focus on project
inputs and outputs and the assumed mechanical links between them. The livelihoods
approach compels development practitioners to look for multiple entry points and to move
beyond a homogenous ‘community’ view and a narrow sectoral perspective
• The livelihoods approach stresses the importance of understanding institutions by
mapping the institutional framework and linking the micro to the macro and the formal to
the informal
• The livelihoods approach calls for a new style of policy appraisal that moves from
4
However, choices of these elements of design are made within a Context: The External
Context and an Internal Context.
Context of Livelihood
Intervention Design
External Context
Institutional
conditions
Objective of the
Intervention
Intervening Agency
Mission
Capacity
Funding Assets
Demand Factor Awareness
condition People’s Livelihood condition Ability
Portfolio Access
Capacity
Strategy
Industry
condition
Understanding the internal context of intervention

There are two elements of the internal context that livelihood promoters need to keep in mind
while designing a livelihood intervention. These are:
• People, whose livelihoods are to be promoted
• Organization, which is going to promote/ support livelihoods.
These two elements are further explained in details

Internal context: the people
Livelihood promotion/ support efforts are always around a set of people. It is a set of people
whose livelihoods livelihood promoters are trying to promote. Therefore, it is essential to get
to know the people and their livelihood patterns before livelihood promoters design any
intervention.
Though there may be inadequacies in their livelihood options, they are not bereft of any
livelihood activities. Therefore, whatever new activities are proposed will have to be
incremental to their present livelihoods. It is therefore, important for livelihood promoters to
know: their livelihood portfolio and their livelihood strategy.
5
As have been mentioned earlier, poor households are involved in a set of activities to
maintain their livelihoods. This constitutes their diversified livelihood portfolio.
Therefore it is important for us to understand:

• What is the livelihood pattern of the people,
• Existing mix of activities in which different members of a household are engaged in,
• At different parts of the year.
However, the livelihood portfolio of a household depends on their livelihood capacity.

Livelihood capacity of a household is determined not only by the number of people in the
family, but also on the skills and knowledge set of the people, their attitudes towards new
activities, their asset base, and their opportunities, as well as cultural and social conditions of
the area. Therefore it is important to know:
• What are various sets of skills and knowledge that the people have
• Shortfalls in a household’s income and buffers from
Livelihood Livelihood
which these are met. Capacity Strategy
• Opportunities that are accessible to them as a family
in the area, including barriers posed by the social
and cultural conditions.
• Finance, including credit available throughout the
year, to make investments as well as to even out
cash-flows at different seasons
But even to use these capacities, different households Livelihood

use different livelihood strategies. Some work in Portfolio
other people’s land, while some others chose to
migrate. If there is some additional income some Livelihood Profile of a Household
chose to expand the existing activity, while some
others chose to diversify. Different people use different strategies for coping with the risks
and shocks.
Thus it may also be useful to understand:

• The preferences of the families in choice of different livelihood strategies
• The risks and shocks they face
• Their ability and coping mechanism to Risks are patterns of uncertainties in income/ cash
flow from an activity. For example, if once in five
meet these risks and shocks
years there is a drought, it can be said to have a
• Entrepreneurial ability of the people: risk of 20%. Shocks are unpredictable shortfalls in
both in terms of their ability to take income/ cash flow due to event such as ill-health,
risks and their attitudes towards taking cost of marriages, death of earning member,
new initiatives. accidents.
These features of the livelihood patterns of people that we need to look at have been
discussed in the following chapter on identification of livelihood opportunities.
Internal context: the intervening agency

The other important element of the internal context is provided by the organization making
the intervention. Livelihood promoters should look at what are the various aspects of an
organization they need to pay some attention to.
6
Mission:
While intending to get involved in livelihood promotion, one need to understand what the
mission of an organization is. How does the intervention fit with the organizational mission?
How core is livelihood promotion to the mission of an organization? Is it one of the many
things an organization does? What competences do an organization have for such an
intervention? Where will the funding come?
Context analysis
Context analysis seeks to analyze the context within which we operate. The context shapes and
gives meaning to many things, and can explain dynamics of poverty that a specific to a given
context – or different from another context. The context can be taken to be very local, regional,
national or global.
External Context
The external context that affects the organization provides the forces to which we must react. It
will include Historical, Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental factors.
Each of these may lead to the need for change, for example declining economic conditions or
new legislation.
Internal O Context
As well as the external context, there are many contextual factors within organizations that can
lead to the need to change or decide upon our programs and strategies to address poverty. These
might include our strengths, weaknesses, competencies, identity (our credibility and legitimacy in
a given context).
Broad Scale Impact
The program must define what "broad scale" means, but, in general, we mean at least at
national scale or for a whole marginalized population group. Impact should occur across three
areas of unifying framework (human conditions, social position, enabling environment) and
impact should be seen and evaluated over an extended period of time.
Enabling Environment
Enabling Environment can be defined as the structural environment that recognizes and
reinforces mutual rights and obligations. It is made up of interrelated conditions necessary for
fostering just societies. Some of the interrelated conditions include: (a) good governance --
elected national and local governments which are responsive to constituents and are empowered
to serve them; (b) sound legal, regulatory, political and institutional frameworks; (c) pro-poor
policies; (d) institutionalized mechanisms for transparency and accountability; (e) conducive
private sector social accountability mechanisms; (f) strong civil society participation (freedom of
expression, association and negotiation); (g) freedom from conflict, etc.
Unifying Framework
The Unifying Framework for Poverty Eradication & Social Justice is developed around three
upper-level outcome categories that provide a holistic Unifying Framework that focuses on
improving people’s social position and social equity; on improving the people’s conditions and
well-being; and on creating an enabling environment that promotes equity and livelihood
security for all. Together, these three outcome categories ensure that we analyze and address
underlying causes from both needs- and rights-based perspectives.
7
Competencies:
Livelihood promoters need to remember that livelihood promotion is a difficult task and it is
better to understand what they are getting into, before jumping in. It is important to be aware
of an organization’s core competency, as it is likely to have serious implications on what
intervention one would take up.
For example: Aga Khan Rural Support Program -India (AKRSP -I) addressed the problem of
migration in parts of Gujarat through a watershed intervention, as the core competency of
AKRSP(I) was in making techno-managerial interventions, which is necessary for effective
management of watersheds. SEWA chose to organize the beedi-rollers of Gujarat to assert
their rights as their core strength was in their trade union activities, which is necessary for
asserting the rights.
Often livelihood intervention necessitates getting involved in commercial business activities

by default. Therefore, it is important to access our strength in that area too.
Source of Capital:
Livelihood interventions need substantial capital investment that may come from different
sources. The source could be a donor, or a government program, or investment made directly
in the activity. The more one engage in livelihood promotion, the more funding one will
need. Grants may be great to get started, but the total fund available is likely to be limited. A
large volume of capital can be mobilized from capital markets if, and only if, adequate
returns on investments can be generated.
Different funding sources may also influence the objectives and the implementation strategy.
Whether one receive funding from donors or from government, the missions of those
agencies are likely to play a major role in design of the intervention.
Legal Form of Organization:

Livelihood activities are commercial in nature. While promoting livelihood activities, one
needs to remember that all organizational forms are not permitted to undertake all types of
commercial activities. Certain part of the intervention may be charitable in nature, like giving
training, skill building or building people’s organizations; but these often are only a part of
the intervention.
Some commercial activities can be taken up in small scale without really violating the law
(like any NGO can take up micro-finance activities in a small way, many NGOs do marketing
of handicrafts and handloom items). But once the activity scales up and volumes are large,
legal complications related to taxation, capital mobilization, licenses might arise. Therefore,
it is advisable to look at one’s own organization form, as this would also help us in taking
decisions on our strategy for scaling up. (See the table)
8
Comparative Analysis of the Legal Provisions for Various Organization

Forms in India
Type of Not for profit Section 25 Mutual Benefit, MACS, Producers’
Organization registered as Company Self-help Groups, Company
Societies/ Trust Coop Bank
Applicable Registration of Companies Act State Co-op acts, Banking Regulation
Laws Societies Act 1860, 1956 Mutually Aided Co-op Act 1949,NBFC
Indian Trust Act 1882 Societies Act Guidelines 1987
Purpose Service to others: Service to others: Mutual help: Enhancing
other than promoters other than benefit to users of service
promoters (self)
Ownership No owners; Elected board of Members are Owned by only
control and controlled and directors (sec 25 shareholders and owners; primary producers
management managed by the company) managed by the elected
board of trustees board of directors
Area of No restriction No restriction Area of operation is No restriction.
operation restricted to within the Deposit taking
state unless regd. under restricted to state of
the multi-state co- regd. office (if net
operatives act. worth is below Rs. 50
crores)
Licensing No licensing provided No licensing RBI licenses under RBI act 1934, NBFC
regulation provided banking regulation act, rules
for banking 1949 and cooperative
activity societies rules for UCB
Deposits Deposit taking not Deposits may be Coops can accept May accept public
allowed accepted only after deposits from members term deposits -
obtaining UCB can accept deposits minimum investment
permission from from general public with grade, subject to
the RBI .The the permission and under permission from RBI
companies supervision of RBI
(acceptance of
deposits) rules
would apply.
Equity No Yes Yes Yes, min. Rs. 2
Crores
Borrowing Yes Yes Yes Yes
Indian Yes Yes Yes No
Grants and
donation
Foreign No Yes No external equity Yes, proposal routed
direct through FIPB; RBI
Investment and SEBI approval
reqd.
External No No On a case-to-case basis. No permission reqd.
Commercial up to 50 million US
Borrowings Dollars; Beyond need
ECB clearance
Foreign Subject to FCRA Subject to FCRA Subject to FCRA Subject to FCRA
Grants/ registration registration registration registration
Donations
9
The External Context

There are four elements of the external environment: namely, the Factor Conditions, the
Demand Conditions, the Industry Conditions and the Institutional Condition, which influence
the livelihood choices.
Elements of the
External Context External Context
Institutional
conditions
Assets
condition condition Ability
Access
Industry
condition
10
Let us look at each of these conditions:

Factor Conditions
Livelihood activities utilize various accessible resources. These resources that go into
production of goods and services constitute the Factor Conditions. For example, land, water,
agro-climatic conditions, availability of skilled people, the prevailing political economy,
conditions of roads, availability of electricity, general development indicators of the place
define what activities can support large number of livelihoods in that area. These are the
Factor Conditions we need to understand.
Presence of different Factor Conditions lead to adoption of different livelihood intervention

strategies. For example, the organization PRADAN, made intervention in promoting Lift
Irrigation in the Ranchi-Lohardaga area, while worked on Leather Sub-sector in Barabanki-
Uttar Pradesh, because of different favorable factor conditions (many of the resources) in
these two locations.
Department for International Development (DFID) of the UK Government has developed a

framework, which helps us look at the factor conditions for sustainable livelihoods
systematically.
Factor Conditions:
Five Types of Resources that Define the Boundaries of Livelihood Choices
A. Natural resources
Land: terrain, quantum, quality, distribution and uses
Water: annual rainfall, groundwater levels, sources of irrigation
Humidity
Forests: quantum, tree species and usage
Livestock Mineral wealth Energy sources
Are there any environmental threats to these natural resources?
B. Physical resources
Irrigation infrastructure: Tanks, Canals, Bore wells
Shandies, Haats, Market yards
Warehouses Electricity Roads, Railway lines Transport facilities Post Office, Banks Health
facilities
C. Human resources
Population
No. of households and family size No. of earning members per family
Labor availability and skill levels – manual, craft, service and knowledge base
Entrepreneurial ability of various communities in the population
Education profile of population Health profile of population Gender division of all the above
D. Social resources
Relationships of trust and reciprocity within and between communities
Gender relations Caste relations Agrarian relationships
E. Financial resources
Available sources of credit – formal and informal
Interest rates and collateral requirements on different credit sources
Credit requirements of different income/occupational groups of people
Savings mechanisms Other financial services
However, while looking at the factor conditions, livelihood promoters must remember that
just presence of the factor conditions in the area is often inadequate to make them useful. For
a factor condition to actually enable livelihood opportunities, it must have the 4-A’s:
Asset: The asset, physical or otherwise must exist.
Awareness: People must be aware that such an asset exists.
Ability: People must have the ability to use that asset.
Access: People must have access to the asset.
11
Unless these are also present with the resources, they are not useful for any livelihood
intervention effort.
What are other resources limit one’s livelihood choices? One may like to look at some of
these resources described in the box. Which of these are available in the area? Which of these
can act as constraints for livelihood promotion?
Context of livelihood
External Context Intervention design
Institutional
conditions
Objective of the
Intervention
Intervening Agency
Mission
Capacity
Funding Assets
Portfolio Access
Capacity
Strategy
Internal Context
Industry
condition
Demand conditions
Whatever be the chosen livelihood activity, there is some output of goods / services. These
goods / services are bought by some people that constitute the demand for them. Try to find:
who is demanding them? Is the demand local? Is it increasing, decreasing or stagnant?
Such things determine the Demand Conditions, which in turn determines the number of
livelihoods that can be supported, the kind of income that can be generated from the activity.
Demand Conditions play a significant role in determining livelihood intervention strategy.

For example, MEADOW could be promoted by MYRADA because there was a scope of
promoting ancillary units in that area. Similarly with the introduction of lift irrigation by
PRADAN, people started growing vegetables for which there was a growing demand.
12
Industry conditions
The third element of this external context is the nature and status of the industry, of which,
the livelihoods activity is a part. Here we use the word ‘industry’ in a broader sense, to
include all economic activities. For example, production of paddy is a part of cereal food
industry. (for detailed discussion see tools and techniques for designing livelihoods promotion)
Thus, it is important to assess what is the status of the industry, in which we are going to
promote livelihoods. Is it growing and vibrant? Is it stagnant and dying? Are there other
related and supporting industries that extend services?
These related and support industries often play a critical role in the chosen livelihood activity.
Their presence or absence creates conditions for making one livelihood intervention more
effective than the other.
Institutional conditions
All livelihood activities, for that matter, all economic activities are bound by some
institutional context. Apart from state policies, tax laws that govern the activity there are local
norms, social arrangements that also infringe upon the livelihood choices. Presence of
various institutions such as promotional, research and training institutions, producer
associations, also has significant influence on the choice of livelihoods.
These together define the Institutional Condition of the livelihood choice. Therefore,
Institutional Conditions form the fourth element of the external context, which influence the
choices in a livelihood intervention.
Therefore, livelihood interventions are made in a context, which has an internal and external
facet:
Making livelihood intervention design choices

Having taken a close look at the context within which the livelihoods intervention is going to
be made, let us now focus on the three elements of the design of our intervention:

Objective of the
Intervention

13
Framing objectives for livelihood promotion

Livelihoods can be enhanced in many ways. (See Box)
Although achieving one objective sometimes leads to fulfilling the other objectives, this is
not always so. Thus, unless one is clear about which is the prime objective of one’s
intervention, it may become difficult to
Types of Livelihood enhancement make the right choice. Livelihood
• Enhancing income intervention strategy will vary
• Creating assets or wealth depending on what one want to achieve.
• Increasing food security
• Reducing risk Creating Assets
• Reducing variances in income In most contexts, creating assets (like
• Reducing rural to urban migration savings, or supply of credit as seen in
• Organizing producers to have greater control cases of most micro-finance
over their livelihoods institutions) may be more important
• Enhancing the money that circulates within than enhancing incomes. For, income
the local economy from wages may fluctuate from year to
year, but assets generate a steady stream
of income over more than a year. They can also act as a buffer against future risk, fall in
income and shocks to the household.
Food Security
Increasing food security in regions where families do not have sufficient food to eat may be
another livelihood objective. Emphasis on food security also protects producers from the
vagaries of the market (where demand and prices fluctuate), as their own families will
eventually consume whatever they produce.
Reducing risk
Reducing risk is an important livelihood-enhancing objective. Many poor households may
prefer to engage in livelihoods which generate lower incomes but which involve less risk, as
a sudden drop in income might throw them even deeper into debt. For example, livelihood
support may actually aim to reduce risk in existing livelihoods; for instance, providing access
to irrigation, which will protect the monsoon crop in years when rainfall is scarce.
Creating assets
A household’s most important livelihood assets are the labor and skill of family members. They are
of course important because they provide people with a means of earning income in the first place.
The home, which can double up as a business premises, is often another very important asset. In
contrast, poultry sheds or lift-irrigation infrastructures are examples of enterprise assets outside
the home.
The common fund of savings and credit groups is another example of an asset created through a
livelihood intervention. Pooling savings within a group, and then lending it to members of the
group, is also a means of circulating resources within the community.
If creating assets is our objective, we need to consider:
• Who will own the assets?
• What rights and responsibilities will individuals have, if the community owns the asset?
• What rights will users have if an individual entrepreneur owns an asset?
14
Reducing variations in income

Reducing variations in income due to seasonality or shocks is important to reduce the
vulnerability of poor families. One way of doing this may be by encouraging people to save
or to invest in assets, which may be sold during lean periods.
Reduce Rural to Urban Migration

Another objective of livelihood promotion may be to reduce rural to urban migration
(such as BAIF- DHRUVA, case 1). Migration frequently involves tremendous stress and
displacement for rural people. It also results in undue pressure on urban areas, which are
unable to cope with the growing influx of livelihood refugees. Reducing migration would
involve creating livelihood opportunities, which are located in rural areas.
Organizing Producers
Organizing producers, in unions (such as SEWA), cooperatives or societies (such as
SIFFS), helps them secure better prices and enhance their power in the market. This enables
them to invest collectively in their business; secure their rights against outside competitors or
under law; create some buffers against market fluctuations and ensure that the market does
not exploit individual producers.
Enhancing the money that circulates

Enhancing the money that circulates within the local economy may benefit all producers in
that economy. As seen in the case of DHRUVA, the expenditure that a cashew producer
makes on either purchase of vermin-compost or on post-harvest treatment of the nuts become
an income of another in the village. This in turn enhances the total income within the local
economy. See the section on Developing Local Economy in the Introductory Module.
Meeting poor people’s basic needs more reliably and at lower cost
Meeting poor people’s basic needs more reliably and at lower cost to them could also be a
livelihood intervention. After all, why do poor people require more income if not to meet
their basic needs? Since all funds are fungible, reducing outflows from a household allows a
household to reallocate its resources to meet other needs, including, for example, investing in
activity to earn more income, or in education to enhance the household’s long-term
productivity.
Phases in a Livelihood Intervention:
We find that most livelihood interventions go
Though enhancing income is one of the
through three distinct phases.
The pilot phase: when we are still testing out a mechanisms of supporting livelihoods, in
new idea to see if it works on a small scale. the absence of appropriate opportunities,
The development phase: the pilot phase has helping people increase their effective
proved successful and we are now developing a purchasing power by reducing their costs
model, with the expectation of scaling it up or can also support livelihood. Some
replicating it. initiatives primarily focusing on reducing
The scaling up or replication phase: we now
expenditure are emerging in many places.
have a model, which works and we go to scale by
expanding or replicating the business. In these initiatives, the members of
Interventions may also change over time, as the various thrift and credit federations are
intervention agency learns from experience, or pooling in their capital to buy essential
shifts from one phase of the project to another. consumption commodities in bulk from
This should be a planned rather than a haphazard the wholesale market. These are further
process. packaged and sold, in small packs, as
15
required by the members. Bulk purchase gets the members quality commodities at a cheaper
rate than what they would have got from the local shops. These initiatives, apart from
reducing consumption expenditure, make good quality food and other essential items
available to poor households and generate wage employment.
The primary objective of most livelihood interventions in India today is enhancing incomes
and food security. Asset creation is usually seen as a means to enhance incomes. While
organizing producers, again to achieve better returns, is also common, however, strategies to
reduce risk are less common and very few interventions explicitly focus on enhancing the
money that circulates within the local economy. Reducing migration is often an outcome of
other livelihood strategies, but is very rarely a stated objective. However, in the recent years,
with the opening up of the insurance sector, many new initiatives in this direction have been
started. ICICI-Lombard, ICICI-Prudential, AVIVA, among others, has developed different
products to reduce the risk of various livelihoods supporting activities.
Why do we think some livelihood objectives are more commonly pursued than others?
Nature of the intervention
The nature of livelihood intervention can vary along three dimensions:
The sector in which we intervene:
What livelihood activity one want to intervene in? Do one want to improve on an existing
livelihood activity or promote a new one?
The point of intervention:
Which part of the value-addition chain will one focus on? Will one provide the missing input,
such as technology development or credit, integrate the delivery of inputs, or intervene at
multiple points providing several services?
The instrument of intervention:
What is the tool of intervention? Do one want to train the people to make the necessary
changes? Does one want to change some policy to bring about changes that help people?
Sector in which we intervene:

The sector in which one intervenes is often a choice based upon the demand and factor
conditions. One intervenes in a sector, which is large or is growing and the factor conditions
are favorable for it being taken up by large number of people.
However, there are choices:

§ We could choose to improve upon an existing livelihood activity. For example, SIFFS
introduced motorized boats among small fishermen in Kerala
§ We could work on a livelihood activity new to the area. For example, MYRADA
introduced assembling watchstraps in collaboration with Titan Watches into a
predominantly agrarian area
The point of intervention

After choosing the sector in which to intervene, it is important to identify in what to intervene
in. For example, if one have chosen to intervene in the dairy sub-sector, it is necessary to
identify whether
• to improve fodder production, or
• to help process the milk, or
• to build linkages with the market,
• to get the best benefit to the producers.
16
A specific activity is part of a larger value chain, from pre-production through production to
marketing and finally reaching the consumer. One will need to determine at which stage of
the value-addition chain the key constraints are and what can be done to overcome these
bottlenecks. If one can manage to work on one or many of these critical bottlenecks, one’s
livelihood intervention is likely to impact the livelihoods of many.
For example:
• Inputs like raw materials or credit can be provided to rural producers to help them
increase their production. For example, KribhCo focuses on making fertilizer available
to farmers. Many agencies involved in minimalist credit like SHARE or Cashpor provide
only credit to rural producers.
• Intervention can be to improve the production process itself as in the case of
PRADAN, which developed a small-scale technology for rearing poultry and is helping
tribals to take up such production. Seri-2000 with the support from SDC helps silk
farmers improve their rearing processes (see case in CD-Rom)
• Producers can be helped to get a better market price for their produce. Example,
SIFFS facilitates marketing of the fish caught by its members. NDDDB 9 case in
additional resources has set up processing plants and is the marketing channels for the
milk produced by farmers.
The case of NDDB is a good example to illustrate how the lives of more than 15 million dairy
farmers were influenced by providing a multiple set of services. An intervention of this kind
at many points in the value-chain is called sub-sector intervention. We will explore how this
can be achieved in Module 4 Stage IV.
One should remember that these stages do not represent exclusive choices. We could work
with the production stage while simultaneously extending support for pre- or post-production
activities. For example, the poultry project of PRADAN has not only intervened at the
NGOs and Marketing: Which of this apply to us?

• NGO workers have an ideological bias against the commercialized activity of marketing; the
market doesn’t follow emotions.
• The market demands good quality, assured supply and lowest price. NGOs lack the business
acumen to ensure this.
• Their motivation makes NGO professionals want to work close to the poor rather than spend
time exploring distant markets.
• The chicken and egg problem - markets need volume, but production at volume is not possible
in small, scattered, rural settlements.
• To develop a market we have to invest as an entrepreneur (by taking risk), but NGOs are not
structured to do this. NGOs seek to reduce risks poor people face, and do not have the capital
to take risks themselves. To be a player in the market, we need deep pockets.
production stage, but also Organisations that work with a single focus intervention strategy
supports post-production often develop core competencies in their respective specialisation
marketing of the birds that and may achieve scale.
are reared. The International Development Enterprise (IDE), pedal pumps
involve the marketing of a niche technology (foot operated
treadle pumps) to small and marginal farmers. The intervention
The intervention strategy has reached 200,000 farmers in the country, with an estimated
The issue of where to total rise in income of Rs 220 crores in the span of nine years. It
intervene in the value- has developed staff, internal systems, marketing channels for
irrigation related products and services.
17
addition chain and the choice of approaches on how to intervene are closely linked. We can
either intervene by providing a single missing input, integrating several inputs or taking a
systemic approach.
Which of these inputs do we want to focus on?

1. Technology:
Some interventions in livelihoods have evolved around technological intervention. SIFFS has
introduced motorized boats using a simple technology to help the fishermen compete in the
changing environment of fishing in the advent of mechanized trawlers.
2.Training:
Training inputs have been an integral part of most interventions in livelihoods. MYRADA
had given significant skill building to rural girls to take up the contract for watchstrap
manufacturing of Titan, while promoting MEADOW.
LAL (Learning about Livelihood) Framework
3. Marketing:
The Association of Crafts Producers (ACP) provides marketing assistance to a wide range of
producers in Nepal. Other interventions like Janarth, NDDB, extended market support
services to the producers. MYRADA chose to deal with marketing by linking up with Titan
Watches, who undertake the marketing function with MEADOW.
4. Asserting Rights:
The National Alliance of Street Vendors lobbied for the rights of street vendors worked with
national, state and local governments. Similarly, SEWA focused on ensuring that the biddi
roller got what law entitled them to.
18
LAL (Learning about Livelihood) Framework
5.Policy Advocacy:
Livelihood choices are often enabled or restricted by the policy environment. SEWA
made significant dent in the policy environment, which earlier never recognized
unorganized workforce as labor.
6.Building Local Interdependent Economy:
Interventions designed to strengthen an interdependent local economy, where a large
proportion of the inputs required for an activity are procured locally, and value addition is
done to the produces also at the local level, have been tried by some agencies, as in the
case of Dhruva-BAIF.
7.Credit:
BASIX, a rural livelihoods promotion institution working in many states in India, extends
micro-credit services for a variety of rural activities including farming, animal husbandry,
cottage industries, trade and services.
8.Infrastructure:
Some interventions also provide infrastructure, such as developing milk-chilling centers,
various food processing units etc. Infrastructure such as creating milk chilling centers or
building a road is often beyond the capacity of NGOs. However, there are several
examples of NGO interventions in creating small or micro infrastructures like grading and
sorting platform or creating a common work place for community. We may refer to the
case on DHRUVA, which has created community owned processing unit.
19
9.Institution building:
In some cases the organization promoting or supporting livelihoods has focused only on
building producer organizations. The Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (I) in Gujarat
has been involved in organizing
The Challenges of integration communities into various
Organizations taking up multi-pronged interventions will peoples’ institutions such as
need to invest in acquiring new skills and competencies.
Water Users’ Association,
This may have implications for the scale of their
intervention and its costs. Mahila Vikas Mandal while
In its watershed program the Aga Khan Rural Support developing watershed in this
Program (AKRSP) realized that soil and water conservation area. These institutions have
measures do not necessarily mean more production leading emerged as strong peoples’
to more income and to better quality of life. To ensure organizations, where the
more production, one needs to introduce better quality livelihood choices are made by
inputs. Once production increases, lucrative markets need
these organizations and not by
to be found in order to obtain competitive prices for
increasing income to farmers. Once incomes rise, there the intervention agency.
need to be opportunities created for investment. AKRSP
initiated various actions to address these issues. What It is not essential that we should
started as a land and water treatment project culminated choose only one instrument of
in a program for agricultural extension, training, marketingintervention; it is also possible
and institution building? to use more than one. For
One of the serious difficulties of integration is at the level
example providing livelihoods
of action. Though strategically an organization may chose
to intervene in multiple areas, the man who actually support services of many kind
like provision of good quality
delivers the services may find it difficult to prioritize and
integrate the variety of services that are required. input, timely credit and output
marketing (as AKRSP, does) or
technology along with community organization (as PRADAN does when it organizes people
into water user associations to manage lift-irrigation schemes). This can also span to extent of
an intervention along a complete sub-sector as was done by NDDB
However, this choice needs to be made, keeping in view the mission and competence of the
organization, as discussed in the section on Internal Context earlier.
Design of the livelihood activity

Finally, the livelihood activity can be structured on different aspects in different ways. How
livelihood promoters are going to organize the producers? Will they be self-employed or
wage earners? Who will own the activity or network of activities? Who will manage it?
And where will it source its funds? Apart from these choices, the type of employment an
activity provides, its ownership, management and size are closely interlinked issues.
The prime actor

The first choice with whom the livelihood promoters are we going to work with:
• individual self-employed entrepreneurs;
• entrepreneurs who generate wage employment for others or
• community owned livelihood activities, which generate profits in addition to wage
employment?
Livelihood opportunities often come in the form of micro-enterprises generating self-

employment. But, let us not forget that they also come in the form of wage employment.
20
Often livelihood interventions are designed with an assumption that, given the necessary
training, capital and access to market, the poor producer will be able to establish and manage
his/her own enterprise.
An assumption is fine, but one should also first find out if s/he wants to be an entrepreneur?
Why not ask ourselves: Do I want to run my own enterprise or am I more contended with a
job? Does the poor producer want to run an enterprise or is s/he looking for regular wage
employment?
Second, if reducing risk is more critical than enhancing income, what is more risky?
Running our own business or having regular wage employment?
Finally, poor people out of necessity are highly entrepreneurial when it comes to coping in
difficult economic circumstances. But not all poor people are good business entrepreneurs.
We may need to ponder these issues and choose whether we would like to promote micro-
enterprises that generate self-employment, or do we want to promote activities that generate
wage employment? The latter may of course be more difficult, and in most cases, poor
producers have no other option than to be self-employed. It may still be possible to organize
micro-enterprises into a network of activites, which supply and buy from each other.
DHRUVA’s (Case study 1) mango and cashew orchard development programme has
supported a range of activities, comprising both the landed and the landless. For example, the
landless are involved in manufacturing mango pickles, decorticated cashew, which are
marketed and producing vermi-compost, which is used by all the farmers developing
orchards.
An alternative to both, self-employment and wage employment for a private enterprise, is to

organize producers in a collective, such as a cooperative, a savings and credit group, a water
users’ association. This leads us into issues of ownership and management of the livelihood
activity. This often creates opportunities for employment-by-the-collective.
Ownership of the livelihood activity

Ownership is another related area of choice for designing the livelihood activity. Questions
like, who will own the activity? Do they have the capacities to discharge the roles of the
owner? What interest do they represent? Is there some party whose say in management of the
activity has to be considered? Are we willing to give the power to the chosen group of
owners? need to be addressed while designing the ownership.
Ownership also has significant legal implications, it is useful to consult someone who has
good understanding of the legal issues related to organizations.
Livelihood Activities Owned by Individual Producers

Examples of such livelihood activities include the tassar grainages promoted by PRADAN
and the pedal pump promoted by IDE for irrigated agriculture.
Livelihood Activities Owned by a Collective of Producers

Examples of collectively owned livelihood activities include MEADOW, milk co-operatives
promoted by NDDB and marketing of fish by SIFFS.
21
Livelihood activities Owned by the Livelihood Promotion Organization

Livelihood activities owned by the livelihood promotion organization include several
marketing organizations such as Dastkar, which markets handicrafts of a variety of producer
groups. the Tassar products produced by the weavers.
Livelihood Activities with mixed ownership

Often the livelihood activities are organized in multiple tiers, with different tiers performing
different functions in the value addition chain. These cases also open up opportunities of
different tiers being owned and structured differently. For example in Tamil Nadu, SHGs at
the village level have promoted a for-profit trust at the block level. These trusts in turn have
invested in a Non Banking Finance Company, Sarvodaya Nano Finance Limited.
What do we think are the advantages and disadvantages of each of these ownership
structures?
Who’s in Charge?
Managing the interface with rapidly changing markets is a highly skilled job. The dilemma is
whether the capabilities of local communities can be built so that they can manage unfamiliar
tasks (such as negotiating with export markets) themselves, or should hired professionals manage
them? What could be the cost? If we had to pay the full professional fees of professionals, would
we remain competitive in the market?
As a marketing agency, the Association of Crafts Producers (see additional case-studies provided
on the diskette) seeks to act as a buffer between producers and the vagaries of the market. Can
we ensure that the producers are able to meet the demands of the market themselves? How will
the losses, if any (that’s what is being a buffer means!) be borne?
Management of the Livelihood Activity

Management of the livelihood activity need not always rest with the owners. Even in large
corporations, owners engage a group of professionals to manage the enterprise. AMUL,
though owned by farmers of Khaira District, is professionally managed. There are various
such choices available.
Producer-Managed Livelihood Activities

Local producers themselves very successfully manage many small livelihood activities,
which deal with local markets. However, there are many functions in larger business
activites, which are difficult for local producers to manage. For example, functions like
estimating sales trends in Bhopal city for broiler chicken, negotiating prices with urban
consumers, surveying urban markets for consumer preferences in handicraft design, etc. may
be some of them.
Livelihood Activities Managed by Hired Professionals

Many producer- owned livelihood activities hire professionals to manage key functions of
their business. Managing business activities with a developmental focus involves special
people. Such special people, however, are in short supply. When hiring professionals to
manage producer-owned organizations, it may be challenging to build the capacities of local
producers to maintain control over the management.
Size of the livelihood activity

The size of a livelihood activity should ideally be determined by viability considerations.
Economic viability may suggest the need for a larger activity to achieve economies of scale.
22
But the limited ability of the producers to manage the activity may weigh in favor of a
smaller activity. Collective ownership may be an option for managing a larger activity.
Example, a farmers’ cooperative establishing a paddy-processing unit.
PRADAN in its intervention has worked hard to divide the production processes for poultry
and mushrooms. Those processes that require more capital investment are to be managed as a
large enterprise by a collective group or by a more entrepreneurial member of the
community. Other processes those are viable, as micro-enterprises should be managed by
individual households.
Funding of the Livelihood Activity

Grant-based Funding
Grants are good to start with and to provide a range of services in addition to the primary
activity itself, but may lead to uncompetitive businesses, which close down when grant funds
run out.
External Context
Institutional
conditions
Objective of the
Intervention
Intervening Agency
Mission
Capacity
Funding Assets
Portfolio Access
Capacity
Strategy
Internal Context
Industry
condition
Loan-based Funding
Loans allow for proper investment in the business, but may be difficult to access and difficult
to repay if the business fails.
Equity
Equity is more flexible and less risky than loans, and is in many ways the ideal finance for an
activity, but is often very difficult for a micro or small enterprise to secure. The case of
MYRADA-MEADOW (Case 6 in Module 2) provides an example where workers themselves
23
contributed equity-type funds to allow the business to invest in infrastructure. In many

livelihood interventions, poor households provide sweat-equity in the form of their labor.
Financial Orchestration
We can also choose to have a combination of grants, loans and equity. This kind of financial
orchestration gives us flexibility to do initial work (which is often not commercially feasible)
with grant support and then take loans when the livelihood activity is in a position to scale up.
Thus, we see that there are three design areas: Objective, the Nature of the Intervention and
the Design of the Livelihood Activity, which are critical for designing a livelihood
intervention. These choices are made in an Internal and External Context, both of which have
several elements that one needs to take stock of.
This is schematically represented as:
Exercise
Now that we have seen the different ways of promoting livelihoods, we may already feel like a
development professional. Just imagine how many choices, permutations there can be in an
intervention!
To restore our balance, why not return to the case studies in Module 2 to take a reality check?
• Using the framework, compare the choices made in some of the interventions
• What were the implications of each choice for the producers and for the intervention agency?
• Why did the intervention agency make these choices, and what could they have done
differently?
24
Values Framework
Long Term Change Individuality & Flexibility New Change
Culture Type Clan Culture Type Adhocracy
Orientation Collaborative Orientation Create
Facilitator Innovator
Leader Type Mentor Leader Type Entrepreneur
Team Builder Visionary
Commitment Innovative out puts
Value Drivers Communication Value Drivers Transformation
Development Agility
Theory of Human Development & Theory of Innovativeness, Vision
Effectiveness High commitment Effectiveness & Constant Change
produce effectiveness Produce effectiveness
Internal Maintenance External Positioning

Culture Type Hierarchy Culture Type Market
Orientation Control Orientation Compete
Coordinator Hard Driver
Leader Type Monitor Leader Type Competitor
Organizer Producer
Efficiency Market Share
Timeliness Goal Achievement
Value Drivers Consistency & Value Drivers Profitability
Uniformity
Theory of Control & efficiency with Theory of Aggressively competing &
Effectiveness capable processes Effectiveness Customer focus produce
produce effectiveness effectiveness
Incremental Change Stability Control Fast Change
25
Collection of Sustainable Livelihoods Framework Diagrams
26
Impacts on External Environment

Assets Situation of Rural people
Capital Assets Policy & Institutional
Vulnerability Context
Natural Context
Changes in
Social Human Laws of Government /
Resources &Stocks
NGOs /CBOs /Private
Climate /Population
Sector /Traditional /
Density /Conflict / Physical Financial
Influence Influence Donors
Political Change /
Processes
Technology /Markets
Laws /Policies /
Disease incidents Livelihood outcome desired Incentives/ Services /
More income/Improved well being/ Formal / Informal
Reduced vulnerability/ improved food
Impacts on security / More sustainable use of NR Base
Vulnerability Negotiation on
appropriate
Livelihood strategies chosen Structures &
processes for
Natural Resource Based /On farm /Off
the strategy
Farm /Non NR Based /Migration
(circular, Permanent, International Decide appropriate
roles, self help, advice
etc
Implementation
Impacts on Own Activities without support Impacts on
Livelihoods Activities supported by external Institutions
27
IFAD Framework
28
BASIXS ISLP Livelihood Framework
External Context
Context of livelihood
Intervention design
Institutional
conditions
Objective of the
Intervention
Intervening Agency
Mission
Capacity
Funding Assets
conditions People’s Livelihood conditions Ability
Portfolio Access
Internal
CapacityContext
Strategy
Industry
conditions
29
IMM Livelihood Framework

IMM1: Examples of People’s IMM.2.Livelihood Assets
Key Characteristics
Human
Individual
Religion
Religion
Personal
Gender History Information Personal
Gender History Social
YOU Abilty/
Ethinicity Disability YOU Ability/
Ethinicity Disability
Class/
Age Caste Class/
Age Caste
Beauty Physical Natural

Beauty
IMM 3: People, Service Providers & Controllers
Relationships Financial
Service
Controllers Providers
Relationships Relationships
Human
Individual
IMM 3A.The short &Long routes to Religion

influence service providers
Information Personal
Long Route for influence Gender History Social
YOU Ability/ IMM3B:TheSeparation of Roles

Service Ethinicity Disability
Controller Provider Controller Service
Class/ Provider
Short Age Caste Division of

Route for Roles
influence Physical Natural
Beauty User
User
Financial
30
IMM 4: Other Influences on Livelihoods
Relationships Service
Power Politics Markets

Influences Rights Language
Relationships Culture Relationships
Human
Individual
Religion
YOU Ability/
Class/
Age Caste
Physical Natural
Beauty
Financial
31
IMM.5.The Vulnerability Context
Shocks Changes & Threads
Influences
Power Politics Markets Culture Rights Language
Human
Individual
Religion
YOU Ability/
Class/
Age Caste
Physical Natural
Beauty
Financial
IMM 5 A :Ever-Changing Livelihoods
32
IMM 6: Hopes & Opportunities, Actions & Choices
Shocks Changes & Threads
Influences
Power Politics Markets Culture Rights Language
Human
Individual
Religion
YOU Ability/
Class/
Age Caste
Physical Natural
Beauty
Financial
Hopes Opportunities
Choices
Actions
Livelihood Outcomes
33
34
Tribal peoples living in a remote forest area may have strong ties
of kinship and mutual exchange (social capital), ample access to
rich forest resources (natural capital) and an intimate knowledge
of their local environment (human capital), but practically no
financial or physical capital and limited access to formal
education. The livelihood strategies they adopt will reflect this.
They will use their knowledge to exploit a wide range of different
natural resources in different ways, ensuring a supply of food,
clothing, fuel and shelter through the year. Their ties of kinships
and mutual exchange within their community will ensure that
they are usually able to overcome episodes of vulnerability, such
as sickness or the deaths in the family, without reliance on help
from “outside”. But the physical capital available to them may be
very specialized and appropriate to their local circumstances
only. As a result they may have difficulty in adapting to any
changes, such a those brought about by destruction of their
forest environment or intrusion by outside influences. Similarly,
their complete unfamiliarity with financial capital may leave them
at a disadvantage if they find themselves involved in market
transactions, even if they have products of potentially high
market value.
Poor people in rural areas may have only their labor capacity (human capital) and the financial capital they can
generate through their labor, but very limited direct access to natural capital, low levels of education and
knowledge, and a very low social status that weakens their social capital base. The poorest households may
have extremely reduced “livelihood pentagons” with extremely limited livelihood assets of any kind at their
disposal.
35
36
Nine Square RLS Mandala
37
38
Human Capital Existing Situation

5
Desirable Situation
4
03
1 Social Capital
Physical Capital
Financial Capital Natural Capital
39
40
LAL (Learning about Livelihoods) Framework
41
LAL (Learning about Livelihoods) Framework
42
Capital / Asset Pentagon
N. Natural Asset
P. Physical Asset
N N
100
S. Social Asset 100
H. Human Asset
F. Financial Asset
F F
P P
100 100
100 100
100 N 100 100 N 100

H 100 S H 100 S
F F
P P
100 100
100 100
N N
100 100 100 100 100 100
H S H S
F F
P P
100 100
100 100
100 100 100 100

H S H S
43

Understanding & Analyzing Livelihood Intervention

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Understanding & Analyzing Livelihood Intervention

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IMM

Analyzing Sustainable Livelihood Framework

Financial Capital Natural Capital

Understanding the Livelihood Framework for Analyzing

Elements of Design of Livelihood Intervention

3. the design of the livelihood activity.

Three Elements of Design of a Livelihood

Nature of Design of the

Livelihoods Framework Implications

Understanding the internal context of intervention

These two elements are further explained in details

Therefore it is important for us to understand:

However, the livelihood portfolio of a household depends on their livelihood capacity.

But even to use these capacities, different households Livelihood

Thus it may also be useful to understand:

Internal context: the intervening agency

Often livelihood intervention necessitates getting involved in commercial business activities

Legal Form of Organization:

Comparative Analysis of the Legal Provisions for Various Organization

The External Context

Let us look at each of these conditions:

Presence of different Factor Conditions lead to adoption of different livelihood intervention

Department for International Development (DFID) of the UK Government has developed a

Demand Conditions play a significant role in determining livelihood intervention strategy.

Making livelihood intervention design choices

Three Elements of Design of a Livelihood

Nature of Design of the

Framing objectives for livelihood promotion

Reducing variations in income

Reduce Rural to Urban Migration

Enhancing the money that circulates

Sector in which we intervene:

However, there are choices:

The point of intervention

NGOs and Marketing: Which of this apply to us?

Which of these inputs do we want to focus on?

LAL (Learning about Livelihood) Framework

LAL (Learning about Livelihood) Framework

Design of the livelihood activity

The prime actor

Livelihood opportunities often come in the form of micro-enterprises generating self-

An alternative to both, self-employment and wage employment for a private enterprise, is to

Ownership of the livelihood activity

Livelihood Activities Owned by Individual Producers

Livelihood Activities Owned by a Collective of Producers

Livelihood activities Owned by the Livelihood Promotion Organization

Livelihood Activities with mixed ownership

Management of the Livelihood Activity

Producer-Managed Livelihood Activities

Livelihood Activities Managed by Hired Professionals

Size of the livelihood activity

Funding of the Livelihood Activity

contributed equity-type funds to allow the business to invest in infrastructure. In many

Internal Maintenance External Positioning

Collection of Sustainable Livelihoods Framework Diagrams

Impacts on External Environment

BASIXS ISLP Livelihood Framework

IMM Livelihood Framework

Beauty Physical Natural

IMM 3: People, Service Providers & Controllers

IMM 3A.The short &Long routes to Religion

YOU Ability/ IMM3B:TheSeparation of Roles

Short Age Caste Division of