dear jennifer

it will be useful for you to touch base with a dfid supported project on
Mainstreaming Urban Disaster Mitigation, which is being implemented in
mumbai by care through a local ngo, yuva.  The project is using the
Livelhood Security Model as a basis for community action planning.

you can contact david sanderson of care uk at [log in to unmask], smriti
acharya of care mumbai at [log in to unmask] or shikha shukla of yuva at
[log in to unmask]

the project is also aiming at developing a code of conduct for those working
on urban risk mitigation.  towards this purpose, we would very much like to
know the outcome of your study, and to receive any inputs you may have.

good luck!

anshu sharma
seeds, india.
[log in to unmask]



----- Original Message -----
From: Rowell Miss JA <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 12:52 AM
Subject: livelihood strategies and disaster risk reduction in Mumbai


> Hello all -
>
> I'm about to set off to Mumbai to do some research on the integration of
> risk reduction into urban livelihood strategies, and, frankly, I'd like to
> ask your advice.  Specifically, I'd like to know whether any of you could
> refer me to previous papers or projects which you think I should consult
on
> this or a supporting issue, as so far I have had only limited success
> finding similar studies conducted (which I guess as a researcher I should
> selfishly consider a good thing!).  Here's a brief run-down on my research
> topic:
>
> The primary assumption of the study is that regardless of how aware
> individuals or communities are of the risks to disaster they face, for
most
> households beneath the poverty line the need to reduce their risk is far
> less a priority than the need to generate income and improve access to
> secure shelter and basic services such as water and sanitation, health and
> education.  As such, asking them to make voluntary changes to reduce their
> risk at home or at work is asking them to invest money, time, labour or
> materials into someone else's goal: precious resources which most
households
> would prefer to invest in the realisation of their higher priorities.
> Despite the short-term gain which might result from their effort, reducing
> risk in this way has two possible negative effects: 1) a certain input
into
> (or profit from) the household's livelihood strategy is lost, which might
> have longer-term consequences; and 2) the likelihood is very small that
the
> efforts made by those households would be sustained when the external
> pressure to do so is removed, as the more urgent necessity to tend to
> greater needs takes priority once again.
>
> But just as an externally imposed change or activity is unlikely to be
> sustainable if it takes away from peoples' livelihoods, so we can argue
that
> changes or activities are more likely to be sustainable if they CONTRIBUTE
> to peoples' livelihoods.   An activity or project of any kind that
requires
> the active and continual participation of the 'recipient' communities is
> most effective and sustainable when it is given an economic and social
value
> by that community to the extent that people actively include it in their
> livelihood strategies.  In short, people will want to do it when their
> priorities can be advanced by it.
>
> The question now is: might the same be true with respect to risk
reduction?
> What if risk reduction were to find an economic and social value in the
> community, to the extent that people both offered and sought out risk
> reducing products or services in the local economy?
>
> So here we come to the point.
>
> The purpose of the research is to investigate, assess, and inform on the
> ways in which external interventions (such as those undertaken by
> municipalities, NGOs, or other actors)can encourage household or
> community-based risk mitigation through the support and enhancement of
local
> livelihood strategies.
>
> In particular, the research shall investigate the barriers and
opportunities
> that currently hinder or encourage people from turning risk mitigation
into
> a contributing element of their livelihood strategies. (To cite examples
> solely for the purpose of illustration, barriers might include the limited
> availability of, or access to, safer building materials for use by the
> building community, or the real or perceived threat of eviction; whereas
> opportunities might include a strong social safety net, or the existence
of
> traditional knowledge of low-cost risk mitigation techniques).
>
> Once these details are revealed, the research will consider the ways in
> which external interventions undertaken by the municipality and other
actors
> can help to dismantle those barriers and/or support those opportunities in
a
> pro-active and appropriate manner, so that the natural risk
> mitigation-livelihood integration process can develop in its own way,
> creating its own momentum and stimulating its own growth.  (Again,
strictly
> for the purposes of illustration, examples might include offering
financial
> incentives to producers who generate safer building materials and benefits
> to builders who use them, or granting progressive tenure to squatter
> communities who improve the safety of their shelters; it might mean
> capitalising on the strong social safety net by providing group loans or
> credit for projects which include risk reduction elements, or hiring local
> specialists to train others in the usage of traditional mitigation
> techniques.)
>
> By stimulating the growth of risk reduction products and techniques as a
> natural element of the local livelihood culture (as opposed to forcing
them
> from above), it is feasible that external interventions could, with a
> reduced expenditure, increase both the effectiveness and sustainability of
> risk mitigation processes in low-income communities; while low-income
> communities would benefit from a safer living and working environment, and
> advance the fulfilment of their own priorities at the same time.
>
> That's pretty much it, really.
>
> So I ask you: have similar studies been done before that you think I
should
> be consulting?  Are you acquainted with actual projects which have looked
at
> this kind of pro-active 'risk mitigation-livelihood strategy' relationship
> in the past?  Beyond that, and just as importantly, do any of you have any
> comments, concerns or suggestions on what I've briefly outlined above?
Any
> words of caution or advice?  And, as this list-serve is all about
> information sharing, would any of you like to receive details of the
outcome
> of this study?
>
> Many thanks in advance for your help,
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Jennifer Rowell
> Student
> Msc. in Disaster Management
> Cranfield University
> United Kingdom
>
>