SLA conference

Terry Cannon, IDS

Livelihoods approaches and climate change

Relevance of livelihoods to understanding CC• Climate change will directly affect livelihoods of very high

proportion of people in developing countries• Increased poverty arising from damaged livelihoods will also

make many more vulnerable to climate-related hazards• Using a livelihoods approach helps to identify climate

impacts on livelihoods and through hazards – a key approach

• The next slide is a preliminary attempt to track impacts of climate change on primary and secondary livelihoods. It is simplified in that it covers only climate change “trends” in temperature and precipitation, along with “shocks” (using the SLA terminology). It does not include slow-onset issues (sea-level rise, salinisation, ENSO, glacier melt and disruption of water flows and supplies)

Climate Trends

& Shocks Primary livelihood impacts Secondary Impacts

Precipitation regimesVariabilityExtentIntensity

Crop yields, income & subsistenceCrop range – shifts in agro-economic zones;Land use changes;Land cover changes;Forest changesIrrigation impacts – changes in amount, extent, seasonality, quality… Food crops and nutritionFood and cash crops and food supply & cash incomeImpacts on traded crops, livestock, fodder, grazingHuman needsDrinking waterConflicts

Changes in crop, pasture, income etc have impacts on security, crime, MigrationChanges in government revenue and foreign exchange leads to changes in welfare spending, foreign trade, food importsEffects on debt repaymentsTourism-related livelihoodsNational parks and game reservesCoast and island holiday destinationsEmployment impacts of changes in HEP outputRevenue and balance of payments impacts of HEP output

FloodsDroughts

Temperature regimesVariabilityExtentExtremes of hot and coldHumidity and human rangeDesiccationWildfires & set fires

StormsFrequency;Precipitation;Wind speed extremes;Extend Tropical Cyclone range

Crop yields, income & subsistence;Loss of employment;Loss of home, tools, livestock

Landslides etc.GLOBs (Glacial Lake Outbursts)

Crop yields, income & subsistence;Loss of employment, home, tools, livestock

Sea Level rise:Floods; Saline intrusion

Crop yields income & subsistence;Loss of employment;

Diseases & pestsExtent & range of vectors & infectious agents;Seasonal variability;Intensity;

Human diseases: infectious, parasitic;Crop and post-harvest – pests; infectious viral and bacterial, fungal;Livestock diseases: infectious, parasitic;Forest diseases & pests;

Possible impacts on new diseases;Different sources of food for survival

What’s wrong with the SLA approach?

• It uses the word sustainable…• There is no such thing as “Natural capital” etc –

problems with the conceptualisation of the other capitals too...

• One person’s good social capital is another persons negative capital…

• Increasing assets for some people may reduce assets of others

• Donors can focus on some assets and ignore others that are less able to influence but are more important

• Not enough stress or acknowledgement of power relations – power affects the availability of assets and the movement of assets between groups

• Not adequately included by many when using SLA

• Allocation of production assets (used for livelihoods)– Land; access to water; gender;

• Distribution of income• Welfare provision• Social protection – including for disasters

Power determines access to assets and income

What does development mean?• The “space” in which we can engage in people-centred

development is constrained by power• Trying to improve human welfare that is not being achieved

through the workings of “normality”• It is working against the operation of market forces, many

governments and private power• Development is trying to do something where existing

structures of power:– Don’t have the capacity (where aid may help?)– Don’t know how to do it (SLA approaches may help?)– Not interested (little respect for rights of poor)– Against their interests (will lose out if there is change)

• Next slide: agencies that are really interested in people-centred development are not powerful in the global arena

Hierarchies of influence…

2006 US$ millions

GNP of USA 13,000,000

Foreign Direct Investment 1,200,000

Official Development Assistance 104,421

EU Common Agricultural Policy farm subsidies

53,000

USA spending on pets 34,000

Oxfam International 640

Banking and credit crises.. ?????

US costs of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, “on terror”, per annum

80,000

What can a revised (S)LA approach be use for?

• Disaster risk reduction– Disasters are fundamental factor in destroying assets

AND transferring assets from poor to rich

• Adaptation to climate change– Adaptation needs to happen for

• Trends in temperature, precipitation– Associated health risks to people, crops, livestock

• Shocks – in existing and new locations, increased frequency and/ or intensity

• Slow-onset and lasting changes – SLR, glaciers and water supply, ENSO

• Uncertainty, dealing with the unexpected

• All these require strengthened and diversified livelihoods

At Risk “Access model”See Chapter 3 in

At Risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and

disasters

Chapters 1-3 free to download at:http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7235.pdf

Basically, a household political ecology model. Next slide:Before (left side) and After (right side) hazard impact

Based on the interaction of the hazard environment with the vulnerability of people and livelihood. This can be adapted for a climate change analysis of livelihoods

“Access” model – household political ecology

From Ch.3 of At Risk, 2nd edition, Wisner et al, 2004