Sustainable Livelihoods in Conflict Affected Situation Secure - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sustainable Livelihoods in Conflict Affected Situation

Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium – Survey in Sri Lanka

Kulasabanathan Romeshun

Context

• Sri Lanka had a 30 year armed conflict ending

in May 2009

• Economic growth in North and East Provinces

– 2010 came largely from expanding agriculture and fisheries – Subsequent years from construction and growing industry and services sector – Highest economic growth rates amongst the 9 Provinces in 2012

SLRC Survey

• Covering 1377 Households (95% level of

statistical confidence)

• Conducted in September- October 2012
• Districts (3) selected purposively capture

geographic variation in conflict and return, resettlement and recovery

• 66% of the sampled Households were Tamil
• Villages purposively chosen to represent near

shore fishing community

Key Shock - Displacement

1% 13% 1% 5%

98% 84% 85% 89%

1% 3% 14% 6%

Mannar Jaffna Trinco All Still in displacement Displaced and resettled Never displaced

Displacement and Household Income Earners

5% 12% 2% 5% 63% 63% 70% 63% 23% 22% 19% 23% 9.20% 3.00% 8.40% 8.90% Displaced and resettled Still in displacement Never displaced All None One Two Three or more

Measuring Livelihood Outcomes

• Food Insecurity Index - proxy by a measure of

food insecurity based on the food insecurity coping strategies index ( Maxwell, 2003)

• Asset Index- proxy by the assets owned by the

household using the Morris score index (Morris et al., 1999)

Household Food Insecurity

• 61 % of households fell below the mean
• Only 15.7% had to adopt coping strategies four to five

times during the period in question

• 35% of households did not use any coping strategies
• The regression analysis results suggest

– Lower in households with higher number of working age population – Lower in households with higher levels of educational attainment – Lower in households which are asset rich – Displaced and resettled show high food insecurity compared to still displaced and never displaced – Households engaged in fisheries, agriculture and trade high levels of food insecurity vs Households in public sector employment – Higher in households with more women earners

Household Wealth

• The asset index score indicates that majority of

households own fewer assets than the mean.

• The recency of conflict has a bearing on household

wealth

• Never displaced reported higher wealth with still in

displacement reporting lower wealth

• Households in public sector employment higher wealth

as opposed to Households engaged in fisheries, agriculture and trade

• Households with higher educational attainment are asset

rich

• Households with migrated members are asset rich
• Female headed households are asset poor

Debt

Resettled Still displaced Never displaced All In debt 70.1% 64.2% 61.4% 69.3% Have bank savings Acct 73.9% 74.6% 75.9% 74.1% Source of credit (for those who borrowed) Formal lender/bank 53.3% 51.2% 49.0% 53.1% Informal money lender 20.2% 7.0% 15.7% 19.5% Family/friends 31.0% 46.5% 31.4% 31.9% Employer 12.1% 0.0% 0.0% 10.9% Savings group 3.1% 9.3% 11.8% 3.9% Reason for borrowing (for those who borrowed) Productive purpose 59.3% 46.5% 54.9% 58.4% To meet food and clothing exp. 31.5% 44.2% 29.4% 32.0% To meet health expenses 19.8% 20.9% 5.9% 19.0% To meet Education expenses 4.9% 2.3% 2.0% 4.6%

Livelihood Support Services

• Asset rich households are seen to receive

livelihood support services

• Receiving households report positive

perceptions about the support received

• Response to submissions on livelihood related

issues still remain low

Conclusion

• The end of war has created a positive

environment for livelihood activities to develop

• Education is a means to increasing livelihood
• utcomes
• Vulnerable groups exist that are still not able

to make use of opportunities

– Still in displacement – Resettled – Women headed household

Thank you

12 Section Questionnaire

Questionnaire had 12 Sections on

• A. Basic Pre-interview information
• B. Basic Household information
• C. Basic individual information
• D. Assets
• E. Livelihood sources
• F. Food security
• G. Shocks experienced by the Household
• H. Crime and safety
• I. Basic services
• J. Social protection
• K. Livelihood services
• L. Service delivery process

Surveyed Districts

Sample by Ethnic Composition

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% Mannar Jaffna Trincomalee Other Sri Lanka Moor Tamil Sinhala

Primary Occupation

Fisheries 40% Trading 39% Agriculture 9% Public sector jobs 9% Other 3%

Service Delivery Issues and Response

Health Education Water Social protection Livelihood services Overall

Had service delivery issues and knew how to make a complaint 64.6% 61.7% 68.5% 60.5% 55.8% 67.5% Knew how to make a complaint and who actually complained 84.6% 75.6% 87.2% 82.7% 84.7% 88.8% Complained to the local/ central government/elected politician/ defence force 85.3% 81.3% 87.5% 88.4% 94.2% 84.5% Complained to government and received response to complaint 48.4% 48.7% 57.9% 44.7% 31.5%% 51.2%

Educational Attainment

• 98.8% percent of children aged 5-14 year

enrolled in School

– National average 99.4%

• Individuals over 14 years of age,

– Never been to school

• 2.7% compared to national average of 4.2%
• 58% over 45 years of age
• 59% female

– More than 13 years of schooling

• 2.7 percent compared to national average of 14.7%