Document Library

Sustainable Livelihoods, Rights and the New Architecture of Aid

Author: J Farrington
Date: 2001
Size: 4 pages (34 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

A number of new aid vehicles have recently been introduced by Washington-based institutions. Are the principles and practices of other sustainable development approaches, namely sustainable livelihoods (SL) and rights based (RB) approaches consistent with this new architecture of aid? This paper from the Overseas Development Institute examines whether and how complementarities between the approaches might be exploited. While SL approaches, incorporating elements of RB approaches, are qualitatively different to current country-level development strategies, they offer useful complementary principles and analytical tools.

The new architecture of aid includes Comprehensive Development frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and National Strategies for Sustainable Development. Their principal aim is to strengthen country level development strategies in line with the World Bank's principles of opportunity, empowerment and security.

Sustainable Livelihood approaches generally include the following principles: (i) people-centred, (ii) class and gender differentiated, (iii) multilevel, (iv) focusing on public/private partnerships and (v) sustainability. These provide an analytical framework to identify how poor people's options and constraints can best be understood. The objective of SL approaches is to enhance the overall level and sustainability of livelihoods.

Rights based (RB) approaches extract basic principles from human rights thinking such as social inclusion, participation and the fulfilment of obligations and apply them to institutional development. RB approaches are focus on the ability to claim entitlements arising from rights.

While RB and SL approaches do contain conceptual and implementation difficulties, they are a useful addition to the new architecture of aid.

• SL and RB approaches both emphasise the importance of influencing policies, institutions and processes in ways that enable people to achieve better access to entitlements and resources.
• SL approaches are less concerned with what people's entitlements are or should be than what impact the presence or absence of certain entitlements has on people's livelihoods.
• However the situation of the poor is more complex than that captured by these frameworks. It needs to be supplemented by, for example, political science or public management perspectives. Considerations of politics and power need to be considered more explicitly.

SL approaches and analysis offer a number of principles and tools that could reinforce current country-level development strategies.

• SL and the new aid architecture share a desire to identify the various causes of and solutions to poverty, and promote the sustainability of people's capacity to manage their livelihoods. They promote national ownership, working across sectors, public/private partnerships, participation by the poor and close monitoring and adjustment of the process of change.
• SL analysis can help in strategy design by qualitatively identifying groups of poor people according to their main livelihood sources, and identifying the assets and vulnerability associated with these livelihoods.
• It can also help implement strategies by emphasising the heterogeneity of the causes of and solutions to poverty. They also identify entry points and sequences for development interventions and provide a check on the increasingly macro focus of aid.
• SL analysis can help monitor and review strategies by identifying their qualitative and quantitative impact on livelihoods. It focuses on the views of the poor, identifying robust, appropriate interventions in the face of chronic implementation constraints. This is rarely discussed in the new aid architecture.

Access full text: available online

Source: Farrington, J., 2001, ‘Sustainable Livelihoods, Rights and the New Architecture of Aid’, Overseas Development Institute, London
Author: Overseas Development Institute (ODI), http://www.odi.org.uk/