CARE uses the Chambers and Conway definition of livelihoods given above. From this it identifies three fundamental attributes of livelihoods:

· the possession of human capabilities (such as education, skills, health, psychological orientation);

· access to tangible and intangible assets; and

· the existence of economic activities.

The interaction between these attributes defines what livelihood strategy a household will pursue. CARE's emphasis is on household livelihood security linked to basic needs. Its view is that a livelihoods approach can effectively incorporate a basic needs and a rights-based approach. The emphasis on rights provides an additional analytical lens, as do stakeholder and policy analysis, for example. When holistic analysis is conducted, needs and rights can thus both be incorporated as subjects for analysis. This focus on the household does not mean that the household is the only unit of analysis, nor does it mean that all CARE's interventions must take place at the household level. The various perspectives brought to livelihoods analysis contribute to the generation of a range of strategic choices that are reviewed more fully during detailed project design.

Types of activity

CARE has used its livelihoods approach in both rural and urban contexts. It identifies three, not mutually exclusive, categories of livelihood activity appropriate to different points in the relief-development spectrum. These are:

· Livelihood promotion (improving the resilience of households, for example through programmes which focus on: savings and credit, crop diversification and marketing, reproductive health, institutional development, personal empowerment or community involvement in service delivery activities). Most livelihood promotion activities are longer-term development projects that increasingly involve participatory methodologies and an empowerment philosophy.

· Livelihood protection (helping prevent a decline in household livelihood security, for example programmes which focus on: early warning systems, cash or food for work, seeds and tools, health education, flood prevention)

· Livelihood provisioning (direct provision of food, water, shelter and other essential needs, most often in emergency situations)
These activity categories are non-exclusive. This means that a good livelihood promotion strategy would also have a 'protection' element, which deals with existing areas of vulnerability and helps to ensure that any improvements in livelihood security are protected from re-erosion. Likewise, the aim is that elements of 'protection' and 'promotion' are built in as early as possible to 'traditional relief' (provisioning) activities. For instance, institutions established to help with relief activities are set up in a very participatory way. Over time, capacity-building training is provided, so that the same structures can be used to plan and initiate livelihood promotion activities. Cross-cutting with these categories of livelihood support activity are CARE's three focus areas of activity:

· Personal empowerment: interventions focused on expanding human capacity, and hence the overall resource (asset) and income base of the poor.

· Social empowerment: interventions such as education, community mobilisation, political advocacy.

· Service delivery: expanding access to basic services for the poor.

As with DFID's SL model CARE's framework is people-centred. They seek to understand the needs of vulnerable people and how those needs are met in order to improve livelihoods. The main difference between this model and the SL framework is that it focuses more at the household level. CARE's model centres around a household's livelihood strategy: the asset box, as depicted in the diagram includes the capabilities of household members, the assets and resources to which they have access, as well as their access to information or to influence others and their ability to claim from relatives, the state or others actors. In doing so, there is a realisation that production and income activities are only a means to improving livelihoods and not an end in themselves. To evaluate what changes are taking place in the livelihood security status of households requires a monitoring focus on the consumption status and asset levels of household members.

The need for holistic analysis as the basis for a livelihoods approach often engenders nervousness in programme staff who fear that it implies a lengthy, in-depth and complex process. However, A frequent misconception concerning the livelihoods approach is that holistic analysis must necessarily lead to holistic or multi-disciplinary projects. Although projects with a strong livelihoods approach may often work across a number of technical disciplines, applying a livelihoods approach does not preclude projects being largely sectoral in nature. What is important is that a broad ("holistic") perspective is used in the design to ensure that cross-sectoral linkages are taken into account, and that the needs addressed in project activities are really those which deal with the priority concerns of households and build upon the experience and traditional coping mechanisms they have evolved.

Next>>