The Effect of Livelihood Diversity on Recovery and Shock Impact in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "The Effect of Livelihood Diversity on Recovery and Shock Impact in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda"

Piers Carter
5 years ago
Views:

and Uganda by S Nelson, T Frankenberger, M Langworthy, T Finan and T Bower.

Prepared for the Technical Consortium for Building Resilience in the Horn of

1 The Effect of Livelihood Diversity on Recovery and Shock Impact in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda Tim Frankenberger September 8-9, 2016 Addis, Ababa Based on the paper The Effect of Livelihood Diversity on Recovery and Shock Impact in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda by S Nelson, T Frankenberger, M Langworthy, T Finan and T Bower. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) Technical Series No. 2. Prepared for the Technical Consortium for Building Resilience in the Horn of Africa, a project of CGIAR.

Empirical Evidence This study provides empirical evidence on the influence of livelihoods diversification on resilience of households from the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) in the Horn

2 Empirical Evidence This study provides empirical evidence on the influence of livelihoods diversification on resilience of households from the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) in the Horn of Africa. Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement and Market Expansion (PRIME) program in Ethiopia Build the Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Extremes and Disasters Program (BRACED)

Meta Analysis Hypotheses: H1: HHs with greater livelihoods diversity achieve greater levels of resilience than HHs with less diverse livelihoods, all else equal.

3 Meta Analysis Hypotheses: H1: HHs with greater livelihoods diversity achieve greater levels of resilience than HHs with less diverse livelihoods, all else equal. H2: Wealthier HHs are able to diversify their livelihoods more than poorer HHs, all else equal. H3: Poorer HHs are pushed into livelihoods with lower returns, and are less able to access livelihoods with greater and less risky returns, all else equal.

PRIME Study Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion USAID Ethiopia Feed the Future Project goals: increase household incomes enhance resilience Improve climate change

4 PRIME Study Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion USAID Ethiopia Feed the Future Project goals: increase household incomes enhance resilience Improve climate change adaptive capacity Program beneficiaries pastoralists, non-pastoralists, and other Geographic location 2 areas in Ethiopia (Borena and Jijiga) Data Baseline (2013) Interim monitoring data ( , 6 months)

service delivery Program beneficiaries vulnerable groups, esp.

5 BRACED Study Build the Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Extremes and Disasters Program Mercy Corps Goals: enhance resilience improve climate change adaptive capacity public sector engagement & service delivery Program beneficiaries vulnerable groups, esp. women and girls Geographic location Karamoja, Uganda Wajir county, Kenya Data Baseline (quantitative) Karamoja, Uganda Wajir county, Kenya

Methodology Measuring livelihoods diversification The

in by all household members The number of different

livelihood strategies fall Climate-sensitive

6 Methodology Measuring livelihoods diversification The count of all different types of livelihoods engaged in by all household members The number of different categories of risk profiles into which household livelihood strategies fall Climate-sensitive (on-farm) Market-sensitive (off-farm) Multivariate regression analysis

7 Results from PRIME The majority of HHs in the PRIME project area engage in climate-sensitive livelihoods (crops and livestock). Jijiga has fewer non-climate sensitive livelihood options than Borena. More wealthy HHs engage in climate-sensitive livelihoods and distress sales than poor HHs. Poor HHs tend to engage in wage labor, selling bush products, and relying on remittances and assistance than do wealthy HHs.

8 Results from PRIME Livelihoods diversification (mean number of livelihoods) is positively associated with recovery in Borena, not in Jijiga. HHs in Borena that are engaged only in climate-sensitive activities (crops and livestock) were less likely to recover than those HHs that were more diversified (e.g., on-farm and off-farm). HHs in Borena that engage in casual wage labor, salaried work, or are self-employed recover better from drought.

9 Results from BRACED The majority of HHs in Wajir are engaged in livestock. More HHs in the lowest wealth tercile engage in livestock than wealthier HHs. More wealthy HHs than poor HHs are engaged in salaried work, are self-employed, or engage in distress sales.

10 Results from BRACED In Wajir, HHs that are engaged in more livelihood activities are better able to withstand the impact of drought on HH food consumption. In Karamoja, neither the number of livelihoods nor livelihoods with different risk profiles affected the impact of drought on HH food consumption. HHs pushed into low-return livelihood activities that are not sufficient to reduce impact of shocks (e.g., sale of bush products such as charcoal).

11 Results from BRACED In Wajir, HHs that engage only in climate-sensitive livelihoods (i.e., on-farm) are more impacted by drought than HHs that diversified into livelihoods with different risk profiles (i.e., both on-farm and offfarm).

Conclusions Livelihood diversification as a mechanism to better cope with shocks and stresses needs to be better understood in the local context in which programs are being implemented:

12 Conclusions Livelihood diversification as a mechanism to better cope with shocks and stresses needs to be better understood in the local context in which programs are being implemented: Diversification can work where opportunities exist to engage in: high-return activities non-climate-sensitive activities with high returns Livelihood diversification in areas where such opportunities do not exist will not necessarily lead to better adaptation. In terms of programming, investment in expanding economic opportunities that diversify livelihood risk profiles is a lynchpin for making vulnerable HH and communities more resilient.

Building Resilience in the Horn of Africa: A DG ECHO Perspective

Building Resilience in the Horn of Africa: A DG ECHO Perspective Think Space: Resilience in the Horn of Africa, Nairobi, 23 th January 2013 Presentation Outline Definition and conceptual framework Resilience