Putting people back at the center of livelihood vulnerability analysis

SN Social Sciences - Tập 3 - Trang 1-17 - 2023
Danny Philipp Nef1, Susanne Nef2, Pius Kruetli1
1Department of Environmental Systems Science, Institute for Environmental Decisions, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
2School of Social Work, Institute of Diversity and Social Integration, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Zürich, Switzerland

Tóm tắt

The sustainable livelihoods framework is an analytical tool that allows livelihoods to be conceptualized in a holistic manner. This understanding is an important prerequisite to addressing potential vulnerabilities in people’s livelihoods. However, the framework places relatively little emphasis on people and their agency, although this aspect is central to vulnerability analysis. For example, factors hindering or enabling people’s capabilities to convert potentially available assets into desired livelihood outcomes are not explicitly disclosed in the framework. Instead, they are seen as part of the assets themselves or of site-specific processes and institutions. Accordingly, the framework is of limited use to analyze to what extent a person or group is capable of accessing a particular resource or converting them into a livelihood strategy and determining how power and power relations, as well as locally institutionalized practices and relationships, influence vulnerability. Yet, such analytical why-questions are central to the alignment of interventions that address vulnerability with people’s needs and local realities. Otherwise, there is a risk of remaining at a purely descriptive level. We propose an extension and partial redesign of the framework to better account for such dynamics and to better reflect the complex realities of peoples’ livelihoods. In particular, we propose the “personal realization capability” as a complementary component for analyzing the capability of individuals or households to convert assets into livelihood outcomes. The new component allows for a more person-centered analysis that focuses on people, their social living conditions, and the social structure surrounding them.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Adato M, Meinzen-Dick R (2002) Assessing the impact of agricultural research on poverty using the sustainable livelihoods framework. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper No. 89. Retrieved from: https://www.ifpri.org/publication/assessing-impact-agricultural-research-poverty-using-sustainable-livelihoods-framework. Accessed: 04 April 2021 Alsop R, Heinsohn N (2005) Measuring empowerment in practice: Structuring analysis and framing indicators. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3510. Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/8856. Accessed: 04 April 2022 Banaszak LA, Ondercin HL (2016) Public opinion as a movement outcome: the case of the US women’s movement. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 21(3):361–378. https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-21-3-361 Bebbington A (1999) Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Dev 27(12):2021–2044. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750x(99)00104-7 Bebbington A, Perreault T (1999) Social capital, development, and access to resources in highland Ecuador. Econ Geogr 75(4):395–418 Bernard HR (2006) Research Methods in Anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches, 5th edn. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, USA Böhm A (2012) Theoretisches Codieren: Textanalyse in der grounded theory. In: Flick U, von Kardorff E, Steinke I (eds) Qualitative Forschung: Ein Handbuch, 9th edn. Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag, Reinbek bei Hamburg, Germany, pp 475–485 Chambers R, Conway G (1991) Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (IDS) Discussion paper No. 296. Retrieved from: https://www.ids.ac.uk/download.php?file=files/Dp296.pdf. Accessed: 10 April 2022 Cleaver F (2002) Reinventing institutions: Bricolage and the social embeddedness of natural resource management. Eur J Dev Res 14(2):11–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/714000425 Combahee River Collective (2015) A Black Feminist Statement. In: Anzaldúa G, Moraga C (eds) The Bridge called my back: writings by Radical Women of Color, 4th edn. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, USA, pp 210–218 Crenshaw K (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine. Univ Chic Legal Forum 1989:39–167 Crenshaw K (2022) On intersectionality: essential writings. The New Press, New York, NY, USA Department for International Development (DFID) (1999) Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheet. Retrieved from: http://www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/document/0901/section2.pdf. Accessed: 03 April 2022 Eickelpasch R, Rademacher C (2013) Identität. Einsichten: Themen der Soziologie, 4th edn. transcript Verlag, Bielefeld, Germany Friis C (2019) Telecoupling: A New Framework for Researching Land-Use Change in a Globalised World. In: C. Friis, and J.Ø. Nielsen (Eds.) Telecoupling: Exploring Land-Use Change in a Globalised World (pp. 49–67). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Studies in Natural Resource Management. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11105-2_3 Ganz K, Hausotter J (2020) Intersektionale Sozialforschung. transcript Verlag, Bielefeld, Germany. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839445143 Goodman LA (1961) Snowball sampling. Ann Math Stat 31(1):148–170 Hammill A, Leclerc L, Myatt-Hirvonen O, Salinas Z (2005) Using the sustainable livelihoods approach to reduce vulnerability to climate change. In: Robledo C, Kanninen M, Pedroni L (eds) Tropical forests and adaptation to climate change, in search of synergies. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor Barat, Indonesia, pp 71–96 Kabeer N (1999) Resources, agency, achievements: reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Dev Change 30(3):435–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00125 Kadetz P, Mock NB (2018) Problematizing vulnerability: unpacking gender, intersectionality, and the normative disaster paradigm. In: Zakour MJ, Kadetz P, Mock NB (eds) Creating Katrina, rebuilding resilience. Elsevier, Oxford, UK, pp 215–230 Madestam A, Shoag D, Veuger S, Yanagizawa-Drott D (2013) Do political Protests Matter? Evidence from the Tea Party Movement. Q J Econ 128(4):1633–1685. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjt021 Mayring P (2002) Qualitative Sozialforschung, 5th edn. Belz Verlag, Weinheim, Germany Mead GH (2015) Mind, self, and Society. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago IL, USA, and London, UK Mensah EJ (2011) The sustainable Livelihood Framework: A Reconstruction. Dev Rev 1(1):7–24 Morse S, McNamara N (2013) Sustainable livelihood approach: a critique of theory and practice. Springer Science and Business Media, Dordrecht, Netherlands Moser C, Norton A (2001) To claim our rights: Livelihood Security, Human Rights, and Sustainable Development. Overseas Development Institute, London, UK Reckwitz A (2012) Subjekt. Einsichten – Soziologische Themen, 3 edn. transcript Verlag, Bielefeld, Germany Ritchie J, Spencer L, O’Connor W (2003) Carrying out qualitative analysis. In: Ritchie J, Lewis J (eds) Qualitative research practice: a guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. SAGE Publications, London UK, pp 219–262 Robeyns I (2017) Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice. The Capability Approach re-examined. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0130 Scherr A (2012) Soziale Bedingungen von Agency: Soziologische Eingrenzungen einer sozialtheoretisch nicht auflösbaren Paradoxie. In: Bethmann S, Helfferich C, Hoffmann H et al (eds) Edition Soziologie. Agency: qualitative rekonstruktionen und gesellschaftstheoretische Bezüge von Handlungsmächtigkeit. Beltz Juventa, Weinheim, Germany, pp 99–121 Schiffer E (2007) The power mapping tool: a method for the empirical research of power relations. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper No. 00703. Retrieved from: https://ebrary.ifpri.org/digital/api/collection/p15738coll2/id/38958/download. Accessed: 04 April 2022 Scoones I (1998) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis, IDS Working Paper 72, Brighton: IDS Sen A (1985) Commodities and capabilities. North-Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands Sen A (1999) Development as freedom. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK Sen A (2009) Capability: Reach and Limit. In: Chiappero-Martinetti E (ed) Debating Global Society: Reach and limits of the Capability Approach. Fondazione Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, Milan, Italy, pp 15–28 Soini E (2008) Can the sustainable Livelihood Framework be quantified? The diverse livelihoods in the Taita Hills of Kenya. In: Castalonge OW (ed) Agricultural systems: Economics, technology and diversity. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., New York, NY, USA, pp 101–125 Traue B (2005) Das Subjekt in der Arbeitsforschung: Subjekttheoretische Arbeitsforschung und Perspektiven ihrer wissenssoziologischen Erweiterung. GendA-Netzwerk feministische Arbeitsforschung Discussion Paper No. 14 Turner BL, Kasperson RE, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L et al (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 100(14), 8074–8079. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231335100 van Dillen S (2003) Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries. J Dev Econ 70(1):248–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(02)00044-5 Viertbauer K, Kögerler R (2014) Das autonome Subjekt? eine Denkform in Bedrängnis. Verlag Friedrich Pustet, Regensburg, Germany Weber M (1978) Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, USA Winkler G, Degele N (2009) Intersektionalität: Zur Analyse sozialer Ungleicheiten. transcript Verlag, Bielefeld, Germany