Resilience in Practice - Practical Action

RESILIENCE IN PRACTICESUSAN UPTONMAGGIE IBRAHIMFront Cover: Don Zenon with his improved potatoes, Ancash, Peru (Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred Approaches toDisaster Risk Reduction; DFID, Conflict and Humanitarian Fund) 2010. Practical Action Peru2

Repairing flood defences, Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred Disaster Risk Reduction Project, Practical Action,Nepal.4

TABLE OF CONTENTSAcknowledgements 3Table of Contents 5Executive Summary 6Introduction: The V2R in Practice 8The Development Challenge 9What is Resilience? 10How Practical Action Operationalizes Resilience 12Case Study One: Mainstreaming Livelihood-Centred Disaster Risk Reduction in Peru 13Case Study Two: Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred Disaster Risk Reduction in Nepal 19Case Study Three: The Drought Mitigation Initiative, Kenya 25Case Study Four: Greening Darfur, Sudan 31Case Study Five: From Vulnerability to Resilience: Household Preparedness in Bangladesh 37Case Study Six: Practical Solutions for Indigenous and Migrant Communities in Peru 43Lessons Learnt 48Recommendations from Evidence 53Recommendations for Policy and Programmes 53Recommendations for Further Research 54Conclusion: Reflecting on Achievements 55Bibliography 56Appendix One: Table of how each project covers aspects of the V2R Framework 575

on the diversity of resources, skills andtechnologies they are able to access.People with poor livelihood options are morelikely to be forced into living or working inareas more exposed to hazards and stresses.They also have less alternative strategies tofall back on when shocks and hazards dooccur. Building livelihood resilience meansimproving the diversity and security ofpeople’s livelihoods so that people have moreoptions available to them. This includesstrengthening community organisations andforging links with service providers to buildcapacity and voice, and support access toassets, skills, technologies and markets forenhanced production, income and security(Ensor, 2011). It also involves supportingaccess to and management of naturalresources and ensuring secure livingconditions.Hazards and StressesHazards and stresses come in many forms;they can be natural or manmade and areusually a complex mix of both. Hazards aresudden and unexpected events such asearthquakes, flash floods or cyclones. Theycan also be slower onset events such asdroughts. Stresses refer to smaller, lowimpact events and seasonal factors,including seasonal unemployment, pricefluctuations, local conflicts and gradualchanges in climate, which can underminelivelihoods. People with few resources aredisproportionally affected by hazards andstresses. A livelihoods approach looks indetail at hazards and stresses but takes careto understand how and why people and theirlivelihood are exposed to and affected bysuch events. The resource poor are oftenmore exposed to hazards and stresses, due toa lack of knowledge about prevention andlittle choice over where they live. They areusually worst affected by hazards becausethey do not have the capacities or resourcesto cope and recover quickly. Buildingresilience to hazards and stresses involvesbuilding capacity to analyse hazards andstresses; improving hazard prevention andprotection; increasing early warning andawareness; establishing contingency andemergency planning and building backbetter.GovernanceGovernance embraces a whole range ofpublic and private, formal and informalinstitutions, policies and processes,operating at local, district, national andinternational levels. It is vital in buildingresilience because it determines: how peoplecan access resources, skills, technologiesand markets to strengthen and diversify theirlivelihoods; how they protect themselves fromhazards; and how they access support to helpthem recover when they are affected.Addressing governance issues at variouslevels is necessary to create an enablingenvironment in which people are able toaccess and influence decision makingprocesses, services and resources. Work toeffectively address the governance contextand the responsiveness of institutions andpolicy includes: advocating for decentralisedand participatory decision making;strengthening links between local, districtand national levels; promoting integratedapproaches to livelihoods, disasters andclimate change; and addressing underlyingsystemic issues causing vulnerability(Pasteur, 2011, p55).Future UncertaintyLong term trends can have unpredictableeffects on the natural, physical, social,technological and economic environment.This in turn contributes to uncertainty aboutthe future viability of livelihoods under newconditions, and around the probability ofchanging risks. Dealing with increasinguncertainty, including that which climatechange brings, has led Practical Action toprioritise adaptive capacity. Adaptivecapacity refers to the combination of skills,assets, networks and institutions and policiesthat enable communities to continuallyassess their own situations against thecurrent and emerging context and makeappropriate changes to their lives andlivelihoods (also see Levine et al 2011).Learning and experimenting with newtechnologies and methodologies in localcontexts is necessary for communities toadapt to change and to be able to makeactive choices for their livelihoods strategies.Communities will need to expand theirknowledge and access to information if theyare to understand the challenges of anuncertain future and develop responses tothe emerging impacts of climate (and othertrends such as urbanisation, increased foodprices, fluctuating financial markets) (Ensor.p43, 2011). To build resilience over timeinvolves: raising awareness and recognition oftrends and their local impacts; access torelevant and timely information relating toimpacts and how to adapt to them;confidence and flexibility to learn andexperiment in order to adapt (Pasteur, 2011,p.45).11

How Practical Actionoperationalizes resilienceWorking across the four different elements ofthe V2R (Hazards and Stresses, Livelihoods,Governance and Future Uncertainty) PracticalAction has aimed to promote integration andinterconnection between the elements toachieve resilient outcomes. The next sectionanalyses six case studies and assesses howPractical Action is working towards theintegration of all four dimensions of the V2R.This is an exercise to better understand theusefulness of the V2R framework and how itcan benefit projects and programmes. Fromthis we can then draw out useful lessons.The first two case studies are from the‘Mainstreaming Livelihoods Centred DisasterRisk Reduction’ projects in Nepal and Peru.Both illustrate the usefulness of integratingdisaster risk reduction (DRR) and Livelihoodssectors and linking these up with localdistrict and national level government. Othercase studies include: the ‘Drought MitigationInitiative’ in Kenya; ‘Greening Darfur’ inSudan; the ‘Vulnerability to Resilience’project in Bangladesh and the ‘PracticalSolutions for Indigenous and migrantCommunities’ in Peru.Women play an important role in establishing community seedling nurseries in North Darfur. Greening Darfur Project,Practical Action Sudan.12

CASE STUDYONE:MainstreamingLivelihood CentredDisaster RiskReduction in Peru13

Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred Disaster RiskReduction in PeruOverviewThe Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred DRR (LCDRR) was a 5 year project funded bythe Conflict and Humanitarian Fund through the UK Department for InternationalDevelopment (DFID). It was implemented by Practical Action’s country offices in Peru,Bangladesh, Kenya, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Zimbabwe. The Livelihood Centredapproach to disaster risk reduction programme has gained widespread acceptance bylocal, district and provincial governments in the areas in which we have worked. Theprogramme’s main purpose was to help achieve secure and sustainable livelihoods,decrease exposure to disaster risks, contribute to poverty reduction and increase acommunity’s ability to adapt to the impacts of climate change.Practical Action’s work in Peru illustrates well this interconnection between disasters,livelihoods and climate change.The Development ChallengeThe Mainstreaming Livelihood CentredDisaster Risk Reduction project in Peru wasbased in three areas: Ancash, Ica andHuancavelica. Ancash is exposed to climaticevents from melting glaciers and frosts todroughts, landslides, floods and strong rains.Ica was the centre of the 2007 earthquake inPeru where over 600 people died; andHuancavelica suffers from frost, drought,landslides, and earthquakes and is thepoorest region of the country. Communities inPeru are therefore exposed to landslides,periodic droughts and are increasinglysuffering from unpredictable meteorologicalevents – the impacts of climate change.Unseasonal frosts, extended periods ofdrought, extreme rainfall and the occurrenceof new pests and diseases are all increasingvulnerability.Disaster risk management in Peru wascharacterized by state-funded infrastructuredevelopment (prevention activities such asthe construction of flood defences) andemergency response. These focused on largescaledisasters. There were, however, regularsmaller events, which often passedunreported, but which had a major impact onvulnerable communities and which are one ofthe main causes of increasing poverty. Suchevents disrupt the means of production; thelivelihoods of poor rural people. Majorlivelihood strategies such as potatocultivation, alpaca herding and guinea pigbreeding were all under stress fromincreasing levels of frost combined with alack of knowledge of disease prevention andanimal health care. A lack of securelivelihoods had meant that thesecommunities were more vulnerable to shocksand hazards when they occurred as they hadfew resources to fall back on in times ofneed.In addition to these hazards, farmers in theseareas were cut off from agricultural extensionservices in Peru and had little access toinformation, services or decision making.There was a lack of voice and influence overdisaster risk reduction at both local andnational level due to the communities limitedknowledge and skills to influence thedecision making process.Photo: Training children in an emergency simulation drillin a school in Ancash, Peru. Practical Action, Peru.14

Hazards and StressesLocal level, participatory vulnerability andcapacity assessments (VCAs) were used toidentify hazards by local communities theproject worked with. Training was given tocommunity leaders to conduct assessment ofthreats, vulnerabilities and capacities. As aresult of this, communities developeddetailed development plans which includeddisaster risk reduction strategies. Thisallowed communities to create action plansand understand their options based onchanging hazards. The disaster preparednessand emergency response plans that wereprepared in each community were led byCommunity Civil Defence Committees. Threehundred members of these committees weretrained in disaster preparedness andemergency response. Disaster preparednessactivities included designating risk areas,safe areas and evacuation routes in eachcommunity. They also carried out simulationdrills for earthquakes and avalanches eachyear.Safe living conditions are very important tohuman health and ability to work effectively,and therefore earthquake resistant housingwas part of a strategy to ‘build back better’used by Practical Action. In total, the projecttrained 400 families in Ica in theconstruction of earthquake resistant housing.This training involved demonstrations ofmaking traditional ‘quincha’ buildings betterso that villagers could gain the necessaryskills to build their own homes. The modernquincha buildings were more flexible instructure so that they would be resistant tofuture earthquakes which are a major disasterin this area of Peru.Beyond the community level, the provincialcivil defence committees of Yungay (Ancash)and Chincha (Ica) were strengthened. Theproject also supported the Civil DefenceInstitute of the Ancash Region in disasterpreparedness.LivelihoodsThe communities Practical Action workedwith are mostly marginalised small farminghouseholds who faced a range of hazardswith little access to agricultural extensionservices or other inputs. Their livelihoodshave been strengthened by improving thediversity and security of resources, skills andtechnologies that are available to householdsand communities.Photo: Group discussing the impacts of climate change,To do this, the project initiated a ‘ResilientFarmer Leaders School’. This schoolsuccessfully trained 31 farmer leaders from 4project communities in 10 modules ofagricultural and livestock production with afocus on risk reduction and climate changeadaptation. Once lead farmers were trainedthey went back to their communities to teachothers. This has resulted in increasedcapacity, productivity and ability to adapt bymore than 800 families. This was the maininitiative to strengthen livelihoods throughteaching and developing technical skills andknowledge and has been successful inbuilding confidence and flexibility to learnand experiment with crops and technologies.For example, communities are nowexperimenting using a combination ofindigenous and new varieties of vegetableand conducting field trials to breed strains ofpotatoes, maize and alfalfa that have beensuccessful in nearby areas.As a result of the resilient farmer leadersschool, farmer leaders who graduated havesince found jobs in public and privateinstitutions as farming technicians, furtheringthe impact of the project.15

In addition, the school installed technicalirrigation demonstration plots to encouragefarmers to build their own as well as encouragepublic-private institutions to allocate funds tothese activities. Better irrigation has meant thatfarmers are now less dependent on rain-fedagriculture. The reward has been an increase incrop productivity. Many families’ incomes haverisen over 100% compared to the traditionalrain fed system they were using before theproject. As a result of learning andexperimenting with technology, a group offamilies have now installed drip irrigationsystems in avocado crops with the financialsupport of municipalities in Yungay province (inAncash) on their own initiative.In order to expand the knowledge from theresilient farmer leaders school in Ancash, fourrevolving fund committees were set up to allowother farmers to invest in the sametechnologies. In 2009-2010 over 400 familiesparticipated in these revolving funds. Therevolving funds have distributed guinea pigs tocommunity members and have introduced newelements in the management of guinea pigsincluding crossbreeding with local breeds,incorporation of local and external knowledgeon animal sanitation, feeding techniques, andinstallation of protective infrastructure. As aresult, guinea-pig offspring are now moreresistant to a colder climate and the health ofguinea pigs have improved due to bettermaintenance. These better quality guinea pigscan therefore be sold in the market for a higherprice. Households now own between 60-100guinea pigs each. As a result of these activities,there was an increase of more than 100% infamily income for guinea pig breeders.As well as better guinea pig varieties, therevolving funds have expanded and diversifiedthe stock of seeds and have helped to recovernative varieties of potato, maize, forage, barleyand wheat, which are more resistant to plagues,drought and freezing weather. Native varietiesare favoured by farmers for their taste overforeign varieties. This is complemented withinputs for the production of organic fertilizersand equipment for their application. TheRevolving Fund Committees have been officiallyrecognized and negotiate projects withmunicipal governments and the regionalgovernment. The Revolving Fund Committeescan access central government or private sectorgrant funds. As a result of their success, thismodel has been replicated by otherdevelopment organizations as it is an exemplaryway of ensuring farmer’s own innovation andtechnologies are strengthened and linked toservice providers.Photo: Rosa Maque (pictured above) has beentrained in better guinea pig breeding, feeding andcleaning.GovernanceCommunity-based training and capacitybuilding has been conducted to better linkcommunities with district officials. Peru hasundergone a process of decentralisation and acomponent of this is the participatory budgetprocess whereby organisations compete forfunding from municipal authorities. In the pastrural communities have been effectivelyexcluded from the process both by their lack ofcapacity to submit proposals in the requiredformat and by the inability of municipalities toprocess these proposals. The project facilitatedcommunities to develop funding proposals andin 2011 four communities participated in theformulation of participatory budgets in localgovernments of Huaraz, Yungay, Shupluy andMatacoto. This reduced their exposure todisaster risks, while increasing their livelihoodoptions. At the same time it developed thecapacity of municipal authorities to processrural community proposals. Eight communityprojects which reduce disaster risks whileincreasing livelihood options have beenapproved for funding in the last three financialyears and community plans have been16

incorporated into the development plans ofthree Municipalities.Building the capacity of district and regionalofficials was part of the project strategy toeffectively promote the integration oflivelihoods based disaster risk reduction intodistrict and regional development plans. Intotal, three hundred municipal and regionalofficials in the three locations were trained indisaster risk management and protection oflivelihoods. Six hundred civil society leaderswere trained in disaster risk management,climate change adaptation and protection oflivelihoods.Local level experiences have also beenincorporated into several sub-national planssuch as the Ancash Food Security Strategy,the Environmental Education Plan and theClimate Change Strategy. Following the Icaearthquake, the project has been active withthe Network for the promotion of disaster riskmanagement and climate change adaptation(GRIDES) in influencing the civil defencenetwork for the improvement of response andreconstruction at regional and local levels.Joint lobbying has resulted in the Ministry ofEconomy including a budget for disastermanagement and emergency response in theMinistries of Agriculture, Education, Health,Housing and Transport.The Ministry of Education has endorsed thequalification given by the ’Resilient FarmerLeaders School’ and recognised the potentialof the school as a model for adult educationin a number of subjects and is seeking toreplicate the model. During the project, 31leaders of 4 communities in the Ancashregion were trained as highland agriculturetechnicians with official certificates issuedby the Ministry of Education. Therefore theproject achieved impact on governance andstrengthened links between communities,district and national level officials.In addition two of the graduates of the schoolhave gone on to become authorities in theircommunities: one of them was appointedMayor and the other was appointed presidentof the campesino community group ‘UnidosVenceremos’ (Together we shall win) which isa group of more than 600 farmers fromYungay.Future UncertaintyClimate change is having a significant effecton the local environment in Peru. There aremore frequent and severe frosts which havehappened out of season and have killed offpotato crops. This is particularly devastatingfor potato farmers as it not only destroys astaple harvest but also ruins the seed for thenext harvest. Heavy rains have also increasedin intensity, causing landslides anddestroying crops. Farming communities havefound that weather patterns were changingand that traditional indicators of weatherpatterns (such as bird migrations, plantflowering etc.) were no longer accurate.Recognising that farmers must be able toadapt their farming practices over time tocope with these changes, the project sort toensure knowledge and information wereaccessible for farmers. The projectfacilitated access to climate information atthe local level in collaboration with a localuniversity. Rainfall and temperature are alsomonitored by a number of households atdifferent elevations in the community areas.This information is shared with the universityand then fed back to the communities.In order to build confidence and flexibility tolearn and experiment, a revolving system oflearning was set up through the ‘ResilientFarmer Leaders School’. This involved eachlead farmer returning and sharing their newlygained knowledge with their own community.This has resulted in increased capacity tomanage agricultural calendars according tolocal climate conditions, an increase inproductivity and the ability to adapt tochanging climates by more than 800families.In addition, 200 families have adapted theirproduction systems to the new local climateconditions by investing in new animalbreeds, new varieties of seeds, hydroponicsduring the dry season, production ofhomemade fertilizers, storing seeds and therecovery of good agricultural practices (croprotation, soil conservation, and optimizationof water use). The project also initiated therecovery and distribution of 10 potatovarieties and 6 maize varieties, and aselection of seeds, barley and wheat that aremore resistant to adverse climatic conditionsand diseases. These technologies ensurefarmers are now more confident in dealingwith the effects of future climate change anduncertainty.17

Photo: Graduates of the Resilient Farmer Leaders School.ConclusionWhilst disaster risk reduction hasconventionally focused on mitigatingimmediate disaster risks, the LCDRR projectby Practical Action integrates this approachwith a more holistic focus on developmentactivities that build the livelihoods andresilience of communities.DRR has had great success as an approachin systematically assessing the chances of adisastrous event happening, and identifyingmeans for reducing the risks of harmfulimpact. The LCDRR Project in Peru hastherefore included disaster preparedness toreduce exposure to hazards, early warningsystems and emergency plans to respond to ahazard during and after its onset, andreconstruction and recovery of housing andanimal shelters.However, with the insight that strong,sustainable and diversified livelihoods canhelp households and individuals to copebetter with hazards, LCDRR combines theabove disaster management activities, withinitiatives to understand and strengthenbroader livelihood strategies. The LCDRRproject in Peru therefore also addressed theunderlying causes of vulnerability, namelypoverty, lack of access to information andresources, and underdevelopment through aparticipatory approach. Investing instrengthening and diversifying the livelihoodoptions of people at risk from disasters andthereby increasing their resilience is aneffective strategy for both long-termsustainable disaster risk and povertyreduction.In this case study agriculture and risk havebeen addressed together. The LCDRR projectin Peru has been successful in linkingcommunities and local weather informationwhich then allows them to access weatherinformation and plan their agriculturalactivities accordingly.Other wider elements, including governanceand the enabling environment play importantroles in building resilience. The LCDRRProject in Peru therefore strengthened linksbetween local, district and national levels ofgovernment as well as build the capacities ofcommunities to analyse hazards and planaccordingly.The V2R Framework was developed andrefined as part of the internationalMainstreaming Livelihood Centred DisasterRisk Reduction Project. Through anintegrated approach of DRR, Livelihoods,Future Uncertainty and Governance, theproject has been able to benefit from thecomplimentary linkages between these areas.Disaster risk has been lessened due tolivelihood strengthening and in turn,strengthened links between communities andlocal and national government and serviceproviders has strengthened livelihoods. Theseinterventions have in turn ensured thatcommunities are better prepared and able tocope with future uncertainty.18

CASE STUDYTWO:MainstreamingLivelihood CentredDisaster RiskReduction in Nepal19

Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred DisasterRisk Reduction in NepalOverviewThe Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred DRR (LCDRR) was a 5 year projectfunded by the Conflict and Humanitarian Fund through the UK Department forInternational Development (DFID). It was implemented by Practical Action’scountry offices in Peru, Bangladesh, Kenya, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Zimbabwe.The objectives of the project in Nepal were to (1) improve the socio-economicstatus of vulnerable communities to disasters, and (2) to enhance the capacityof stakeholders at different levels to adopt a livelihood centred approach todisaster risk reduction.The project was implemented in partnership with local NGOs SAHAMATI inNawalparasi and Multidimensional Agriculture and Development (MADE Nepal)in Chitwan District from 2007 until 2010.The Development ChallengePeople in Nepal are being exposed to morefrequent and severe hazards. There is a highrisk of floods in the plains and landslides inthe hills. While hazards are increasing infrequency and severity, their impacts areexacerbated by a series of dynamicprocesses including population growth,increasing poverty and marginalisation,environmental degradation, poor planningand preparedness, and the impacts ofclimate change. Low awareness levels interms of disaster preparedness andmanagement, lack of efficient mechanismsand capacity to deal with these naturaldisasters has had severe impacts on thelives of the people, property and economy atlarge.Communities in Districts of Chitwan andNawalparasi that Practical Action haveworked with to reduce disaster risk facemultiple hazards –specifically landslides,droughts and floods. Communities borderingthe National Park also face wildlife intrusionfrom antelope, rhinos and other animals.Hazards such as floods destroy crops,homes and livelihood assets, underminehealth and food security. Different hazardsimpact at different time of the year. Flashfloods occur during the monsoon seasonbetween June and October and dry spellsusually occur between November and May.Periods of drought have become morefrequent, longer and severe in the pastdecade. Wildlife can intrude at any time ofyear, but between November and May, whenforage is scarce in the National Park, cropsare more prone to invasion. There is also aninvasion of inedible invasive weeds, whichdrives animals to alternative sources of foodsuch as the communities’ crops.Landslides and floods are particularlydetrimental as they both erode land as wellas destroy crops. In Chitwan, severe floodinundation results in crop damage every 8to 10 years. The villages Practical Actionworked with in Chitwan are all downstreamat the large watersheds of Narayani andRapti Rivers where flooding is a result ofvarious factors happening upstream. Factorsinclude deforestation, slash and burnagriculture and erratic patterns of rainfall.Many of these factors are uncontrollable tothe communities downstream.Unseasonably severe weather conditions inNepal are increasing the vulnerability ofpoor communities. Lately winter crops suchas potato have been prone to virus due togradual changes in weather patterns.The communities are not well representedin decision making structures and aremarginalised. Weak government institutions,especially District Disaster ManagementCommittees, is a problem.20

Whilst national and international policiesrecognised the need for decentralisedmeasures to prevent, prepare for, respond toand recover from disasters, this was yet to bereflected in practice due to a lack of skillsand resources. There was a gap betweennational policy, local authorities responsiblefor DRR and the project communities. TheDistrict Disaster Management Committees(DDMC) and the local Village DevelopmentCommittees and municipalities weremandated to manage local disasters, but theylacked the institutional set up and plans thatcould link vulnerable communities to higherauthorities. DDMCs and VDCs lacked thesystematic categorisation of risks and weretherefore unable to set priorities to takesystematic action to minimise disaster risks.Due to the multiple hazards, vulnerablelivelihoods and weak governance structuresand the need to address these at local,district and national levels meant that anintegrated systems approach was used totackle vulnerability.Hazards and StressesThrough vulnerability and capacityassessments communities highlight, rank anddecide on action plans with the villagedevelopment committee to reduce risks. InNepal, community-level assessmentsidentified droughts as a common recurringhazard for farmers. It was a particularlysevere hazard for small scale farmers withless than one third of a hectare of land, asthey cannot afford irrigation. Thereforefarmers were helped to improve tube well andirrigation facilities which have improved theirwater supply. This has reduced the impact ofdrought, reduced crop losses and hasincreased productivity. Irrigationhas also meant that additionalcrops such as maize and vegetablescan now be cultivated in the winterand spring when rainfall is scarce.These initiatives have helpedcommunities to cope with smallscale but frequent stresses ofdrought. They have, in turn,improved food security, reduceddrudgery and increased the incomeavailable for households. Due to theextra crops that can now becultivated, many are now foodsecure all year round, while someare generating a surplus to sell forextra income.Participatory vulnerability andcapacity assessment also identified21wildlife as a high-frequency hazard forcommunities living near the Chitwan NationalPark. Wild animals were intruding into thecommunity to feed and presented a hazard bydestroying crops, attacking livestock andcausing occasional injury to humans.Traditional methods of prevention, whichinvolved farmers keeping watch over theirfarms for 24 hours throughout the crop cycle,were time consuming and discouragedfarmers from investing in new crops. In orderto stop wildlife intrusion, the project installedlow voltage electric fencing to discouragewildlife from trying to penetrate the barrier.This electric fencing has reduced crop lossesby more than 90%. Prior to the fencing,annual crop losses due to wildlife intrusionwere 40% to 50% for farmers close to thepark border (Willenbockel, 2011). Thisincreased security has encouraged farmers todiversify their crops and this has resulted inincreased yields and income. It has alsochanged local attitudes towards wildlife, fromconflict between humans and wildlife,towards conservation. This has resulted inopportunities for the promotion of naturebased eco-tourism.Flood risks were also highlighted as a serioushazard and there have been various strategiesto prepare for and prevent flood damage. Theconstruction of gabions, embankments, newplantations and watershed conservationinitiatives (including less shifting cultivation)have reduced exposure and decreased theloss of assets due to flooding. Preparednessfor floods has also been promoted through upand downstream linkages in communicationfor early warning systems. These earlywarning systems, preparedness andcontingency plans have all contributed to areduced loss of assets and have saved lives.Photo: Building a gabion in Nawalparasi District, Nepalafter traditional irrigation channels were flooded.

LivelihoodsLivelihoods in both Chitwan and Nawalparasidepend on small scale agriculture andlivestock farming. Low levels of awareness,limited skills and thus options for livelihoodsare major constraints for these communities.Practical Action therefore worked to ensurelivelihoods were strengthened and diversifiedin order to recover quickly from shocks and toprepare for future uncertainty. Strengtheninglivelihoods was achieved mainly through:increased incomes; increased food security;increased asset bases - both physical andintellectual; access to alternative incomeearning opportunities; reduced losses of livesand property/assets; savings; improvednutrition and health; improved communitycohesion; greater confidence and ability toaccess support; and better access toknowledge and services.The project provided training in the form ofworkshops, field based orientations anddemonstrations to improve farming skills andknowledge with an emphasis on theintroduction of new crop varieties to diversifyexisting cropping patterns. Improvedagricultural skills, the adoption of improvedpractices together with improved seedvarieties has reduced crop losses. The projectimproved crop varieties as well as practiceson land preparation for existing crops (rice,maize, ginger, wheat, potato and mustard),planting and harvesting practice andintroducing new crops through field basedorientations and demonstrations. Thereforethe project has been successful in enhancingskills and capacities of farmers. In turn thishas increased production for over 266households and has been replicated by theirneighbours and relatives.In addition, off-seasonal vegetables are nowgrown by many farmers and they are able tosell them in local markets for a good price.The ability to grow off-seasonal vegetableshas increased household food security andhas supplemented their incomesconsiderably. Over 450 households haveinitiated vegetable growing on their farms.After the second year of the project, somefarmers used their own initiative to expandtheir vegetable production for commercialpurposes and their businesses are expanding.In Nawalparasi District alone, a total of 140farmers attended ‘farmer field schools’ in 3locations. During these courses, farmerslearnt about vegetable farming whilstpracticing in groups and on their ownpersonal farms. As a result, farmers havescaled up their farming area as well as theirvariety of crops and now more than 70% offamilies are food secure for the whole yearand nutrition has improved.Livelihoods have also been strengthened bythe project through the promotion of livestockkeeping. The project facilitated improvedhusbandry techniques, particularly for goatsand pigs, through livestock health camps.Shed improvements in combination withother measures have also made a significantimprovement in the health and growth oflivestock. Farmers have reported that the liveweight gains of pigs and goats have increasedby up to 50% (Willenbockel, 2011). Thesebenefits have in turn increased farmers’incomes significantly, and with this, theability to cope with existing and futurehazards, shocks and stresses.Bee-keeping has been a successful strategyfor agricultural diversification. Traditionallybee-keeping was treated as another form ofhunting. When honey was removed from thehives, they were severely damaged. Theproject therefore raised awareness on beehives and the importance of proper beekeeping skills. The introduction of betterhives has reduced losses of bee colonies andincreased productivity. Bee-keeping is now areliable source of income. Bee-keepingbusinesses have been particularly successfuland have been scaled up by farmers usingtheir own funds and resources. Bee-keepinghas also had other benefits, such as reducingland degradation. This is becausesurrounding environmental conservation isimportant if bees are to be productive.Therefore bee-keepers are particularlyconcerned with forest conservation andincreasing local bio-diversity.Livelihood diversification has been promotedbecause it is a proven strategy for reducingexposure to disaster risks while increasingresilience. Off farm activities were exploredand selected based on available opportunitiesand the interests of community members.Candidates were selected through aconsultation process with the communities.Off farm skills based enterprises are generallyless sensitive to existing hazards, particularlyweather related hazards. Off-farm activitiesinitiated by the project included training incandle making, light engineering, toolmaking, thatching, animal health work andcarpentry.22

Photo: Learning about new crop production, Farmer Field School, NepalGovernancePractical Action has scaled up livelihoodscentred DRR approaches in Nepal so thatsmall, location specific interventions areintegrated into wider district and nationalinitiatives to create an enabling environmentand achieve greater impact. To achieve thiskind of change an integrated approach todisasters, livelihoods and development wastaken. Practical Action has worked toenhance the capacity of stakeholders atdifferent levels to adopt livelihood centredapproaches to risk reduction. This was mainlyachieved though building the capacity oflocal institutions such as Village DevelopmentCommittees (VDCs). VDCs are now able toanalyse and manage risks more effectively. Inaddition, these local institutions are nowlinked with District DevelopmentManagement Committees and Nationaldisaster reduction processes and institutions,such as the Ministry of Home Affairs andMinistry of Local Development to promotebetter integration and access for localcommunities.In total, 28 VDCs in Nawalparasi and 31VDCs in Chitwan have incorporatedcommunity based disaster management intotheir development plans. In Nawalparasi all28 VCDs have formed Disaster ManagementCommittees (DMCs) to implement their planswhile in Chitwan 16 VDCs have formedDMCs. There has also been improvedintegration of these village level institutionsinto District and National level plans. VDCplans have been included into the DistrictDevelopment Plans of both Chitwan andNawalparasi.At the National level, the Ministry of LocalDevelopment has recognised the role of localcommunities, and is developing nationalguidelines on VDC planning based on projectexperiences. It is also producing guidelinesfor Village Development Committee disastermanagement planning based on projectapproaches. The Ministry of Home Affairs,has also recognised the benefits ofincorporating livelihood approaches in DRR,and has incorporated Practical Action’s VDCplanning guidelines into the HyogoFramework for Action 1 mid-term report forNepal.At the international level, throughinvolvement with the project, officials fromChitwan district government went onto enterthe UNISDR ‘Resilient Cities’ campaign. Theywere the first rural based authority to getinvolved with the campaign and have used anintegrated livelihoods approach in their DRRstrategy. There have also been exchangesbetween Nepal and Bangladesh District levelofficials through country field visits.1The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) is a 10 year plan to make the world safer from natural hazards. Adopted at theWorld Disaster Reduction Conference in 2005 by 168 member states of the United Nations.23

Future UncertaintyThe Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred DRRProject in Nepal has built adaptive capacityof community, VDCs and DDC membersthrough improving local understanding oftrends and their impacts. Hazard analysistook into account current risks and changinghazards so that communities can preparethemselves in the short term. Seasonalcalendars, hazard timelines and otherparticipatory tools helped communitymembers to uncover changing hazards andweather patterns. However, communityperception of the changing weather patternsand hazards was not cross-checked withmeteorological information. Practical Actionis working towards including meteorologicaldata in programmes to help decision makingthrough forward-looking scenario building.Livelihoods have also been strengthened andbuilt on to increase farmers’ confidence tolearn and experiment. New technologies havealso been introduced to strengthencommunities’ capacity to adapt to change.This has mainly been in the form of new anddiversified crop varieties which can be grownoff season and in different weatherconditions. To do this, farmer field schoolshave been used to build capacity, confidenceand flexibility to learn and experiment.Learning about different techniques andinputs has also increased the adaptivecapacities of farmers. An example of thesuccess in this has been farmers using theirown initiatives to start extending theirbusinesses such as bee-keeping and offseasonal vegetable production beyond thescope of the project.ConclusionLivelihood diversification, disasterpreparedness, gathering communityperceptions of changing hazards and risksand strengthening community organisationhave all been used in an integrated andholistic way. Each strategy works to reinforceone another, and has resulted in outcomes ofincreased food security, and better access togovernance systems, decision making andresources.Relevant institutions, including governmentdepartments, need to understand theintegrated nature of vulnerability and worktogether to strengthen resilience and adaptivecapacity. An important lesson of this projectis that, if included in project design anddelivery, these small scale communityinterventions can have an impact upondistrict and national level developmentpolicies and processes. For example, beforethe project the focus of government, districtand village development committee levelinstitutions, was on rescue and reliefoperations in regards to large scale disasterevents, such as earthquakes. A major impacthas been that these institutions now realisethe havoc of small scale stresses and shocksto people’s livelihoods. These are corrosiveand gradually erode people’s ability to copeand recover. They are also exacerbated bydeforestation of hillsides leading to flashfloods, erosion, and landslides. The projecttherefore increased knowledge and access toinformation on the causes of many of thesesmaller stresses, mostly resulting from malpracticessuch as deforestation and lack ofnatural resource management. People arenow more aware and have access toappropriate knowledge and skills.In addition, government authorities havewidened their perceptions of disasters. Arange of discussions, training and workshopshas helped to establish a commonunderstanding of hazards and theirconsequences. Not all hazards are naturaland most can be prevented or at leastprepared for. In addition, a new hazard suchas wildlife intrusion, which was never on theDRR agenda before, has now been included.Adaptive capacity has also been built throughpower-sharing in decision making. VillageDevelopment Committees (VDCs) which arethe lowest level of government in Nepal arenow able to influence District level plans toembed DRR. This has helped policies andpractices tackling disaster risk to be moreflexible and integrated across sectors andscale and have feedback loops betweendifferent levels of government andcommunities.24

CASE STUDYTHREE:DroughtMitigationInitiative, Kenya25

Drought Mitigation Initiative (DMI) KenyaOverviewThe Drought Mitigation Initiative consisted of two inter-related components: awater component and a livestock component. The water component sought tostrengthen resilience to drought by improving access to reliable water andthereby mitigating the impacts of water stress in targeted locations. Thelivestock component sought to reduce vulnerability to drought and mitigatethe impacts of climatic shocks in livestock based livelihoods, thus ensuringthat pastoralism remains a viable livelihood in the face of growing challengesbrought about through increased pressure on land, conflict and climatechange. A coordinated, multi-sectoral and long term approach was adoptedthroughout the project.The DMI was funded by the EC. Practical Action’s partners in the twoprojects were Oxfam, VSF (Belgium and Germany) and Acted (Agency fortechnical cooperation and development). The project was implemented inTurkana and Pokot districts in Northern Kenya from 2008 until 2010.The Development ChallengeTurkana is the poorest district in Kenya, with94.9 % of the total population below theabsolute poverty line 2 . The Turkana - NorthPokot area lies within the ASALS (arid andsemi-arid lands) and is exposed to low rainfalland periods of extreme drought withoccasional heavy rain causing flash floods.The area also has poor soils that are beingeroded from floods and droughts. Thepredominant livelihood in the area is nomadicpastoralism which, whilst considered themost appropriate and sustainable livelihoodfor the area, remains highly vulnerable toshocks and hazards. There is increasinglivestock deaths due to drought and diseaseand a loss of other assets which have onlyfurthered the vulnerability of livelihoods.Conflict in the area is increasing betweenfarmers and pastoralists due to limited landand access to water. Conflict is alsohappening between pastoralist communitiesas they have been forced to move more widelywith their herds looking for pastures.Combined with increasing human populationand decreasing availability of accessiblegrazing and water, this has led to increasedconflict with neighbouring communities whoare competing for the same resources. It hasalso caused the breakdown of traditionalpeace agreements between the Turkana andPokot. Poor coordination among developmentagencies has led to conflicting approachesand low impact of interventions. Over-relianceon short-term emergency projects havetended to undermine the sustainability oflong-term development initiatives.2 Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2007)26Communities have been unable to cope withthese shocks and hazards and this hasresulted in many people dropping out ofpastoralism and being reliant on food aid.Since 2003 the area has been repeatedlyclassified as a humanitarian emergency andthis has increased the level of emergency aidin the area.This project therefore focused on supportinggreater community participation in order toinform a coordinated district level emergencyresponse and the harmonization of long terminitiatives to mitigate drought.Hazards and StressesThe two main hazards and stresses in theTurkana-Pokot area are drought and conflict.To prevent and mitigate conflict,communities along the Turkana-Pokot borderswere facilitated to map their current landuses and plan their resources moreeffectively. These maps were then used atboth the community and intercommunitylevel to construct reciprocal grazingagreements and other resource-sharingarrangements. At the community level theywere used to ensure sustained access oflivestock to the dry season water and pasture.At the inter community level they were usedto inform the planning of reciprocal grazingagreements and decrease resource basedconflicts.A monitoring system has been designed incollaboration with ALRMP (Arid LandsResource Management Programme) to ensurethat lessons from each area feed into bothproject planning and district coordination.

Photo: Water Harvesting through a reservoir (in thebackground) Turkana, Northern KenyaUnder the water component of this project,this information has fed into district wideconsultation on water infrastructure needs forgrazing and used to identify priority sites forcontingency water points. Droughtpreparedness plans have also been drawn upwith communities which will build on thereciprocal grazing agreements.To prepare for and mitigate drought, earlywarning systems (EWS) in the area have beenimproved so that communities are able toreceive and respond to warning messages inadequate time. This has been achievedthrough linking early warning systems todistrict government agencies and regionalbodies such as CEWARN (Conflict and EarlyWarning arm of IGAD 3 ). Grassroots monitors,who are local community members thatreceive a small salary from CEWARN for theirservices, provide early warning informationevery week to district and regional bodies.They monitor drought, disease, conflict andarms stockpiling, weather patterns and waterlevels. Information on response measures arethen fed back to the communities by thegovernment through the grass-roots monitors.This has resulted in quicker responses fromgovernment authorities and has improved theearly warning system in the area.Project activities in the water component ofthe project also considered future changes inwater levels by analysing past and predictedwater levels and periods of drought. Moreboreholes have been dug in preparation forfuture use and more pumps have also beeninstalled. A number of contingency boreholeshave also been sealed to preserve water andcan be opened up in times of future drought.LivelihoodsLivelihoods in the Turkana-Pokot areas arehighly dependent on livestock keeping andanimal production. Reducing vulnerability todrought and ensuring pastoralism remains aviable livelihood in the face of growingchallenges brought about through increasedpressure on land, conflict and climate changerequires a coordinated, multi-sectoral andlong term approach.Livelihoods were strengthened throughincreasing animal production. This wasachieved through firstly, the provision ofextension services that improved livestockcapacity, and secondly, increased provision ofsafe and adequate water for livestock. Thescarcity of water and pasture in the targetedareas were the main reasons behind conflictbetween communities. The water componentof the drought mitigation initiative focused onthe use of ground water for production as wellas rainwater harvesting techniques. Theproject worked with communities to improvewater pumps, catchments and shallow wells.Boreholes were also strategically locatedalong livestock routes for animals to use intimes of drought.Availability of water for householdconsumption was also improved. Wastedisposal has been improved and this hasresulted in better hygiene and sanitation intargeted communities. Women and childrenin particular have been trained on waterpurification and storage. Expanding theavailability of safe water coupled withenvironmental sanitation and hygienepromotion activities has improved the healthof people in the targeted communities.3 The Inter-governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) brings together Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Sudan, Ethiopia,Somalia, Djibouti and Eritrea. IGAD also works closely with the African Union (AU)27

The livestock component of the droughtmitigation initiative focused on improvingextension services. Community based AnimalHealth Workers (CBAHWs or Para-vets) whoare local people that have been trained inanimal health to provide local advisoryservices have been strengthened. Droughtand disease were causing livestock losses andit took up to a week to travel to the nearesttown to seek veterinary help. By which timedisease would have spread and livestock losswould have occurred. Through expanding andstrengthening community based animalhealth workers, they are able to work in thevillages ensuring villagers can accessinformation and help quickly and easily. Inaddition, animal health workers have beenlinked to vets and veterinary organisationsand private suppliers of drugs and have beenhelped to start community drug stores. Thishas ensured that vaccines are stored locallyin case of disease outbreaks (epidemics). Theproject has also linked animal health workersto credit facilities in order to strengthen theirbusinesses by buying medicines on credit.These animal health workers are then able tocharge a small fee for their services and canafford to dispense drugs such as antibioticsand non-prescription drugs. Through accessto information and services, animal healthworkers are able to expand their businessesand ensure sustainability of an efficientcommunity based animal health servicedelivery.The traditional role of CBAHWs has beenexpanded and the project has trained them incommunity based savings schemes. Throughthis approach CBAHWs and other communitymembers have been empowered to bettermanage their assets and increase theirincomes through diversification. Savingschemes included training on livestock andlivestock marketing in order to strengthenlivelihoods and encourage pastoralists to usethe CBAHWs services.Two Pastoral Field Schools (PFS) with 60participants were also conducted. The twoPFS groups have been instrumental ineducating their members on animal health,human sanitation and hygiene, environmentalconservation, climate change and naturalresource management. The members nowunderstand the importance of environmentalprotection and have actively engaged inplanting of dry land trees as well ascommercial cultivation of aloe which theyharvest and process into shampoos and soapas an income generating activity. The PFSgroups have initiated further incomegenerating activities especially in livestocktrade and making hides and skin products tosell. The PFS also conducted camelproduction training (facilitated by the UNFood and Agriculture Organisation, FAO, for10 days) including breeding indigenousbreeds and maximizing gains from camelhusbandry. This has stimulated camelhusbandry among the PFS members who arenow more aware of the benefits andprofitability from camels and their ability towithstand drought conditions. Morepastoralists have been able to experiment andadopt these new practices.Photo: Camels in Turkana, Northern Kenya. Unlikecattle or goats, camels can survive long periods withoutwater. Their milk is also nutritious and therefore crucialin times of drought when goats and cattle produce verylittle.GovernanceNatural resource user committees (such aswater user associations) have beenstrengthened throughout the project and thishas resulted in reduced conflict betweenTurkana and Pokot communities.28

In Northern Kenya, village elders aretraditionally responsible for decision-makingover politics, water and rangeland use.Therefore Practical Action has built uponthese traditional governance systems andstrengthened their capacity to plan theirnatural resources effectively to reduceconflict. The community elders map theirresources through Village Land Use PlanningCommittees (VLUPCs): this involves drawingon a map which resources are used, whereand by whom at what time of year. Waterpoints, livestock routes, communal grazingareas and maize growing areas arehighlighted.Community elders then make agreementsover the use of land and were facilitated tosign a social contract through PeaceCommittees. These committees consist ofelders who are respected by communities andare therefore socially rooted in the areas andcan carry on after the project intervention hasfinished. These agreements assured each sidethat in times of need, each community coulduse each other’s resources in a reciprocalmanner. Penal codes for conflict or theft ofeach other’s animals were highlighted and areupheld by village elders. This has resulted inthe neighbouring communities being able toshare resources in times of need. Incidents oflivestock theft have also gone down. Thismodel has been scaled up to other areas,including across the border in neighbouringUganda, where Practical Action has giventraining in land use planning to village eldersand other organisations.The project has also had direct impact onstrengthening both National and Districtstructures which are responsible forcoordinating emergency planning andresponse as well as dissemination ofinformation. Communities have been linkedto district authorities on early warning, andthese are also linked to National and regionalstructures of drought and conflict earlywarning such as CEWARN. The peacecommittees also act as volunteer grassrootsmonitors in addition to those funded byCEWARN.Future UncertaintyThe Drought Mitigation Initiative (DMI) didnot prioritise adaptive capacity in theirproposals. However, there are elements of theprojects that will help farmers andpastoralists to adapt to an uncertain future,particularly drought. Potential to adapt hasbeen supported through the strengthening oforganisation, voice and institutions, whichwill ensure that the communities have thecorrect tools and the necessary environmentto allow them to adapt over the long term.One of the main ways the projects havesupported the enabling environment isthrough the establishment of peacecommittees. These committees have beenprepared to further enforce water sharingarrangements through the signing of a socialcontract recognised by communities inTurkana and Pokot Districts as well as thegovernment. This is a long term instrumentthat has improved understanding of thereason for conflict and prevention of futureconflict.In addition, the VLUPCs have ensured thatcommunities are better able to adapt tochange. Livestock routes have been agreedupon so that farmers and pastoralists nolonger clash. There is much debate aboutwhether supporting pastoralism is prolongingpeople in unviable livelihoods, or whethersupporting the sedentarising of pastoralistsinto crop farmers will prove to be maladaptiveand cause future conflicts over land rights.The VLUPCs are therefore a platform fromwhich pastoralists and farmers can makeinformed decisions about their futurelivelihoods, but in order to do this effectively,they need more access to information.Livestock have also been catered for in thefuture as boreholes have been prepared andcan be used when needed. Rangeland hasalso been regenerated for future use so thatpastoralists do not have to keep travellingfurther and further in search of new pastures.Pastoralist field schools have trainedpastoralists in camel rearing which increasespastoralists’ resilience to climate change ascamels are more resistant to extreme climaticconditions than other livestock. In additionthe skills and knowledge gained from thepastoralist field school can help them accessinformation and build their confidence toexperiment and innovate so that they are ableto make informed decisions about theirfuture livelihoods and the choices availableto them.Early warning systems have also increasedadaptive capacity of communities as theynow have better access to relevant and timelyinformation concerning drought and conflictas well as other hazard that affect thecommunities livelihoods such as diseaseoutbreaks. The use of local grassrootsmonitors has meant that information isrelayed to local communities and is helpfuland can be acted upon quickly.29

ConclusionCommunity resilience has been strengthenedthrough the DMI projects by building theadaptive capacity of pastoralists. In this case,adaptive capacity has been built through:natural resource management (in the form ofvillage land use planning committees andpeace committees); livelihood strengthening(through training community based animalhealth workers and pastoralist field schools);improving drought early warning systems andbuilding capacity to act and respond tohazards by both communities and widerorganisations such as the government.Due to peace committees, pastoralists cannow move their livestock to neighbouringareas without the threat of conflict. Thesecommittees have encouraged flexibility andwill therefore lessen future risks of conflict ascommunity institutions have beenstrengthened.Pastoralist’s livelihoods have also been mademore secure through the provision ofwaterholes en route when they travel for theirlivestock to drink from. This allows them tostay in agreed areas and be less vulnerable intimes of drought. In addition, pathways forlivestock through farmland are also marked sothat crop losses are lessened. This hasresulted in decreased conflict betweenfarmers and pastoralists. In addition thelivelihoods of pastoralists have beenstrengthened and their ability to manage riskshas greatly improved through pastoralist fieldschools whereby they access knowledge andinformation to diversify their livelihoods intocamel rearing and other income generatingactivities. Risk is also mitigated throughincreased knowledge of rangeland use,climate change and livestock health.Communities now also have the ability tosecure clean and sufficient water forthemselves and their livestock. Water pumpshave enabled local women to secure accessto water without having to spend hourswalking to collect it from the nearest waterpoint. They have access to water near theirhomes for more than nine months of the yearand this has enabled them to spend theirtime on other activities.The DMI worked cross-scalar and crosssectorally.It has involved water andsanitation, animal health and marketsspecialists which have added to the holisticand integrated nature of the projects. Theseinitiatives have also been linked tocommunities, local district official andnational and regional bodies. Working acrossthese sectors and scales have ensured thatcommunities are involved in decision makingand feedback loops between communitiesand the government are effective in order toensure resilience to future drought andconflict.The DMI projects concentrate on thelivelihoods, hazards and governancecomponents of the V2R Framework. Thinkingahead, there are still areas for PracticalAction to improve upon and it would beuseful to look at the future uncertaintiescomponent more. Long term climate datacould prove useful for decision making.Planning currently is largely reactive tocurrent hazards and stresses and there needsto be more forward-looking planning andanalysis.A community based animal health worker shows the stockof veterinary medicines he has access to.Practical Action, Kenya.30

CASE STUDYFOUR:Greening Darfur, Sudan31

Greening DarfurOverviewFrom the late 1990s to 2006 Practical Action worked with communities inNorth Darfur to increase food security. A major component of this work wassupporting the establishment of Community Based Organisations such asVillage Development Committees and Women’s Development Associations.These have flourished into three large networks; the Village DevelopmentCommittee Network (VDC-net), Women’s Development Associations Network(WDA-net) and the Market Network (M-net). These networks have beenimportant in Practical Action’s work in Sudan, including the Greening Darfurproject.Greening Darfur was funded by Christian Aid and implemented from January2008 to February 2011. The purpose of the project was to rehabilitate anddevelop natural resources and natural resource based livelihoods in Darfur(where conflict and drought has led to serious degradation of the naturalenvironment). The on-going conflict in North Darfur meant that a widerapproach was needed beyond natural resource management or sustainablelivelihoods. This case study illustrates the approach that Practical Action usedand the importance of strengthening existing and established networks.Photo: Collecting Water, North Darfur. Women have to travel long distances to collect water in Northern Darfur. Accessto portable water and methods to carry water such as donkeys is an important part of the Greening Darfur Project.32

The Development ChallengeNorth Darfur is one of the most droughtprone areas of Sudan. 80% of its populationof 1.75 million live in rural areas, where theirlivelihoods are based on natural resources forfarming, herding and agricultural trade. Lowand unpredictable rainfall have placedresources and livelihoods under intensepressure. Pressure on the natural asset basehas fed into conflict dynamics in the region.In turn, conflict has had a devastatingimpact on livelihoods, further eroded theenvironment, and severely weakenedestablished systems of resource governance.Livelihoods in El Fashir are mainly based onsmall scale farming complemented bylivestock and forestry products. Low rainfalllinked with poor water use efficiency had ledto a decline in crop production anddegradation of forest and rangelands. Thecollapse of rural economies due to conflictand drought has caused increased migrationand displacement.The Greening Darfur project covered 43communities around the El Fashir area ofNorth Darfur, covering 70,296 people. Basedon the understanding that improvedlivelihoods are fundamentally dependentupon natural resources, related income andaccess to adequate food and water, theproject took a multi-sector integratedapproach to provide target communities withaccess to a wide array of interventions thatsuited their priorities and needs which hadbeen assessed by participants themselvesthrough participatory assessments. Anintegrated approach was taken throughempowering community based institutions tocreate an enabling environment for betternatural resource management.Hazards and StressesThe main hazards and stresses in El Fashirare drought and conflict. The activitiesundertaken during Greening Darfur did havea positive effect on local disasterpreparedness and prevention. To lessenconflict farmers were encouraged to useshorter duration crops, so that they could beharvested before dry periods. This lessenedconflict between farmers and pastoralists, asclashes often arose from pastoralists’livestock eating crops before they wereharvested in dry periods.In an attempt to address the stresses anddisasters caused by successive droughtcycles, water conservation was the mainfocus. The soil terracing on the wadi soilswere improved in order to conserve water andtherefore secure crop yields at near averagelevels even in drought years. Other activitiesincluded: training communities andextension agents on construction of terraces,layout, levelling and controlled drainagetechniques for the terrace designs;constructing 900 crescent-shaped terraces;subsidising the poorest households andvillages with tools and revolving subsidies;and supporting 63 Village Extension Agentsto support terrace construction within thecommunities.In addition, 14 mini dams were constructed.Rehabilitation and/or construction also tookplace for 2 hand-dug wells, 6 shallow wells,2 hafirs and 6 hand pumps. It is estimatedthat these benefited approximately 7,000people and animals across 15 villages. Tosupport the transportation of water, 50donkey-drawn carts were also bought anddistributed. As well as coping with hazardssuch as drought, these activities furthersupport food production, food security andlocal food generation and therefore alsopositively affected the livelihoods of projectcommunities.To address conflict in the area, the projectprovided training on conflict resolution andconsensus building in project communities.By using Practical Action’s ParticipatoryAction Plan Development (PAPD, see:Lewins, Coupe and Murray, 20074),communities were supported to identify andresolve problems related to natural resourceuse. Participatory Action Plan Development(PAPD) is a consensus building tool thatseeks to identify and then solveenvironmental or livelihoods problems withcommunity support and input. PAPD drawsfrom several participatory techniques andprinciples and consists of six key stages. Itskey features are firstly, recognising the widerange of stakeholders and their diverseinterests in natural resource managementand secondly, engaging these stakeholdersfully. In the case of North Darfur, thisinvolved establishing joint resource access,management plans and agreeing ondevelopment priorities.33

LivelihoodsThe livelihoods of communities PracticalAction works with in El Fashir, North Darfurare small scale farming and pastoralism.Therefore a key component of the project wasthe regeneration of natural resourcemanagement systems for sustainablehuman and livestock use. By buildingsocial capital through the three civil societynetworks and a natural resourcemanagement approach, communities wereable to improve environmental conservationand management. Activities included:terrace construction, community forests,shelter belts, rangeland and vegetationregeneration. Within this Practical Actionhosted 10 environmental awarenesssessions and trained 63 communitymembers on tree seeding production andtransplantation. Three community seedstores were established and the threenetworks organised seed fairs forcommunities to exchange and buy newseeds. Community nurseries wereestablished, and approximately 210,000tree seedlings of various different types weretransplanted and 11 community forests wereestablished. In addition, pasturesmanagement training was undertaken with150 community members to raise awarenessof rangeland rehabilitation and theimportance of reserve areas.Project communities have increased accessto water for agriculture, livestock and humanconsumption, leading to increases in foodproduction and reducing pressures onrangelands. For example, range production ofstaple crops has improved from about 1.7ton/ha to 2.5 ton/ha reporting an increase of40% as a result of rehabilitation, irrigationand the construction of crescent shapedterraces. It has also been noted that morethan 20,000 households reduced the timetaken to collect water by 50% due to therehabilitation of 2 hand-dug wells, 2 hafirs(reservoirs) and 2 shallow wells.Community based agricultural extension hasalso been used to strengthen livelihoods. Twotraining courses were held on forestprotection and horticulture, land use and soilconservation, attended by 58 VillageExtension Agents from 33 villages. This wassupported by refresher courses for 33 of theexisting extension agents. Advanced trainingon crop production was also conducted for 31agents. A total number of 75 extensionagents are working within the villages underthe umbrella of the three networks. Theextension agents were involved in seeddistribution and assisting farmers in applyingsome of the improved cultural practicesincluding seeding dates and rates especiallyfor the improved seeds distributed. Inaddition, 22 para-vets (community basedanimal health workers) have also beentrained.Photo: Distributing tools, El Fashir, North DarfurGovernancePractical Action’s previous experience inNorth Darfur has shown that civil society iswell placed to take on opportunities to shapeand implement rehabilitation anddevelopment strategies. This is why theGreening Darfur project prioritised thestrengthening of existing civil societynetworks. The project built the capacity ofthe three Networks, VDC-net, WDA-net and M-net (incorporating 11 Village DevelopmentCommittees) in: identifying their developmentpriorities through participatory capacitybuilding assessments; planning andimplementing different programme activities;accessing alternative funding sources tofinance their priorities; book keeping andproject planning. As a result of capacitybuilding, these networks were able to providetechnical support and to equip theircommunities with the necessary skills thatwould assist them to achieve more securelivelihoods.Good governance was part of the multi sectorapproach used by the project. It concentratedon strengthening links between the 3networks with other service providersincluding government bodies such as theRange and Pasture Administration (RPA),4 To download the facilitators guide see: http://practicalaction.org/page/196634

Forests National Cooperation (FNC),Agricultural Extension and the Veterinarydepartment. The networks now have linkageswith traditional and local governmentinstitutions. They are gradually increasing inconfidence and self-reliance and this hasresulted in them being able to approachdecision-makers and lobby for resources. Forexample, the North Darfur state forestcorporation has supported the establishmentof two community nurseries in El Fashir andthe Ministry of Animal Resources in NorthDarfur has given official recognition to thework of para-vets due to lobbying from thenetworks.In addition, the Participatory Action PlanDevelopment approach (PAPD) was veryhelpful and was used during a local levelconflict between two of the villages theproject was working with where theconstruction of a dam inhibited thedownstream village from accessing water.Community meetings used the consensusbuilding approach and this resulted inagreements for water access to be reachedthrough traditional ‘Gudeia’ 5 agreements.The PAPD approach was also successfullyused to resolve a number of other disputesduring the project and beyond. The existenceof an appropriate and evolving institutionalenvironment to build consensus and allowsfair access and entitlement to key localresources contributes to the adaptivecapacity of communities to cope with conflictand other future uncertainties.Future UncertaintyThe project was undertaken in an effort tobuild sustainable livelihoods and improvenatural resource management. In order to dothis, a livelihoods approach was used throughstrengthening incomes, resources and thethree networks. The project prioritised needsof participants through participatoryassessments, and this led to the needs ofaccess to water and food security beingprioritised. However, because of the conflictin North Darfur, there was a need tounderstand trends and reasons for conflictand build consensus across communities ifproject interventions were to be sustainable.The consensus building approach thatPractical Action used gave communities theability to plan ahead and make agreementsover natural resource use and access.The project also increased the communities’access to information through training thenetworks and also providing training courseson forest protection and extension which hasincreased skills and confidence which areneeded in an uncertain future. Training andproject management skills have increasedthe capacity of networks and strengthenedtheir social capital and this in turn ensuresthat they are in a better position to accessfunds and resources on their own initiative.In addition, the project increased access towater to protect people’s livelihood assetsthrough the construction of tube wells andcrescent dams which have helpedcommunities to protect themselves againstuncertain future rainfall patterns.Photo: Children plantingseedlings in a community forestnear El Fashir, Northern Darfur.5 Traditional agreements by local elders.35

Photo: A community nursery,North DarfurConclusionThe Greening Darfur project set out toimprove natural resource management inNorth Darfur and strengthen livelihoods andfood security of communities. However in aconflict affected situation the project usedexisting networks and a consensus buildingapproach as primary initiatives to achieve theend goals of improved livelihoods, foodsecurity and natural resource governance.Working with existing institutions, such asthe VDC Networks, achieved impact and buyinfrom a range of actors that would haveotherwise been unreachable. In conflictsituations these networks have beennecessary in order for the project to keepworking within these communities. Workingin long term partnership with these networkshas proved to be extremely beneficial, notonly for achieving project goals, but alsobecause these networks are continuing ontheir own initiative and are thereforeachieving long term sustainable change. Thenetworks have gone onto raise over US$1million from UN agencies to support theirdevelopment initiatives. Strengtheningcommunity structures has empowered peopleto determine their own future by influencingdecisions that affect their lives.Whilst DRR or climate changeadaptation were not specificallyproject goals, the project activitiesh a v e i n c o r p o r a t e d h a z a r dprevention and increased the abilityof communities to be able to adaptto change, through increasedunderstanding of trends such asdrought, land degradation andconflict. Adaptation requires notonly information about the hazarditself, but the community must beable to access information such asnew crop species, weatheri n f o r m a t i o n o r f u n d i n gopportunities into the future. Thenetworks play a vital role in thisaccess to information and providethe communities with neededinformation and services whenthere are no other avenues to gainthis information in a remote andconflict affected area.Something that may have been beneficial isincorporating historical climate data forscenario planning in order to work withuncertainty in the short to medium term.Although the Greening Darfur project was notdesigned with climate change as a keycriterion, the activities of the project havenone the less sort to enhance the adaptivecapacities of communities as well asstrengthen their livelihoods and the enablingenvironment in a conflict setting.The Greening Darfur project has usedinnovative and flexible approaches ofcommunity empowerment through thestrengthening of networks as well as aconsensus building approach to deal with thenature of conflict in North Darfur. Traditionalfood security projects (seed distribution,agricultural training etc.) or livelihoodapproaches by themselves would have beenless successful and may have collapsedduring times of conflict. In addition, ratherthan working in silos, Practical Action workedacross social mobilisation, participation,governance, conflict prevention, livelihoods,hazard prevention and natural resourcemanagement domains in order to work withina complex and challenging environment.36

CASE STUDY FIVE:From Vulnerability toResilience, Bangladesh37

From Vulnerability to Resilience:Household Preparedness in BangladeshOverviewSince 2009, Practical Action has been delivering the five year project ‘FromVulnerability to Resilience: Household Preparedness’ (the V2R project). Fundedby the Zurich Foundation and implemented in partnership with two local NGOs(Sharp and Manab Mukti Sangstha). The project is working directly with 2,000ultra poor people (and an additional 6,000 families, indirectly) in four upazilas(districts) of the Sirajganj District to equip them with the skills, knowledge andappropriate technologies they need to develop more secure lives, cope with therisks they face, and adapt their lives and livelihoods successfully to meet futurechallenges. The Vulnerability to Resilience Project (V2R) builds upon the lessonslearned from several other Practical Action projects in Bangladesh.This case study illustrates the more recent work of Practical Action and the stepstaken to integrate areas of sustainable livelihoods, DRR, governance as well asconsider future uncertainty. Similarly to the LDCRR Project in Nepal, this casestudy highlights the need to address the middle levels of governance in order tofill the gap between policy and practice in areas of disaster risk reduction and riskassessments.The Development ChallengeBangladesh is highly prone to naturaldisasters and these are becoming morefrequent and more severe. The poor, whohave to live near to rivers, are especiallyvulnerable to extreme flooding and riverbankerosion which destroy their crops, homes andlivelihoods. Many families have so fewpossessions that even a small shock isenough to make them destitute. As cropshave been destroyed, income and food are inshort supply for the poorest. The V2R Projectworks with families affected by severeflooding of the river Jamuna, which floodseach year in June. This is one of the mosterosive and damaging rivers in Bangladesh,creating high levels of vulnerability for poorhouseholds who live near its riverbanks. Forpeople who live in areas covered by waterduring the monsoon season, such as in partsof Sirajganj District, it is impossible to growcrops during that season. Their homes aredamaged or destroyed every year; manyfamilies are destitute and have to live intemporary and unsanitary conditions. Most ofthe deaths during times of flood are not dueto drowning, but to disease spread by shallowstagnant water. As livelihoods have beendestroyed, the poor are unable to cope orrecover from these shocks quickly, or preparefor the next flood. Many families often haveto resort to borrowing from moneylenders,migration to other areas and also undergoperiods of food insecurity from June untilNovember each year, the monga season. Theimpacts of food insecurity and flooding haveresulted in high levels of dysentery, diarrhoeaand fevers in the area. Poverty is worsened aspoorer families do not have access toadequate health care and other serviceproviders.The V2R project is working with 2,000 of thepoorest families across 20 villages in thedistrict of Sirajganj enabling them to bettermeet their nutritional needs and cope withthe hazards, such as river flooding, landerosion and flash floods, which threaten theirlivelihoods. The project has focused 60% ofits resources on the extreme poor.38

Hazards and StressesThe V2R project used vulnerability andcapacity assessments in order to determinelocal level shocks, hazards and other stresses.People were then able to assess theirresources and capacities to deal withdisasters and plan ahead accordingly.Community members have been fullyengaged in identifying the risks that they facethrough the formation of community basedorganisations to carry out disasterpreparedness plans and livelihoods actionplans. The main hazard for the people theproject worked with is flooding. Floodingdestroys or damages homes and crops, itblocks roads, and it contaminates waterpumps and destroys assets such as seeds.The vulnerability and capacity assessmentsand the baseline survey at the start of theproject noted that in project communitiesthere was no community disaster planning.Therefore the project invested in disasterpreparedness and response. To help ensurethat the local communities take ownership ofthe plans, volunteer groups have been formedto coordinate disaster preparedness,evacuation and post floodrehabilitation. Two hundredmembers of these groups havebeen provided with training,logistic support and emergencyequipment including mobilephones, life-jackets, torches, radiosand loud hailers to ensure bettercommunication during disasters. Inaddition, evacuation boats havebeen constructed to prepare fordisasters and can be used forincome generation purposes whennot needed for emergencies. Boatambulances have been preparedand are maintained by communitybased organisations. Early warningsystems and equipment have beeninstalled in the project villages toensure the communities havebetter access to weatherinformation.In addition, the disasterpreparedness plans included theprotection of vital assets andservices. These include theconstruction of flood proof housingand two cluster villages. Clustervillages are a group of houses builton raised land. So far 50households have settled into them(25 households in Bhatpiary and25 ultra-poor households in the secondcluster village of Thakurpara). In addition,livelihood assets have been protected throughthe construction of yards, cattle sheds, andseed storage facilities in times of flood. Otherprotective measures have been usedincluding tube wells which gives a cleanwater supply in times of flood. Water jars andflood proof latrines have been invested in tominimise the adverse health and sanitationimpacts of flooding such as contaminationwith sewerage and flood water. Links withlocal hospitals have also been strengthened.Since the project started, the team hasinstalled 43 tube wells, raised the bases of afurther 85, distributed 2,000 water jars, andbuilt 35 flood proof latrines. Thesetechnologies are all operating withoutproblems. On average, each tube well is usedby 5 families (both project beneficiaries andothers). The prevalence of water-bornediseases like skin diseases, dysentery anddiarrhoea has reduced significantly. As ofyear 3 of the project, 80% of beneficiaryhouseholds now have excellent access toclean water and safe sanitation all yearround.Photo: Improved water facilities, Sirajganj, Bangladesh39

LivelihoodsThe livelihoods of the communities theproject worked with are based on small scalefarming and fishing. Effective recovery fromflooding and other hazards has beenfacilitated through strengthening anddiversifying livelihood strategies. Investmentsinclude the distribution of assets such aslivestock, poultry accompanied by agriculturaltraining to use these assets effectively. Cow,goat and sheep rearing have significantlyincreased earnings, and provide alternativesources of income for families to fall back onin times of need. In addition to assettransfers, there has also been considerablecapacity building, such as training in animalhealth and production, in order for assets tobe used effectively and to foster innovationand experimentation.Agricultural training has included innovativeapproaches to agriculture that has been usedelsewhere in Bangladesh successfully such asfloating garden technology that allows poorfarmers to grow seedlings and vegetables onfloating platforms made from water hyacinthwhen floods occur. Improved rice varietieshave been introduced to the area, withfarmers stating they are very satisfied with thehigh yield, fine grain and high market price.Sandbar cropping is another technology thathas been introduced to communities throughthe project. This enables landless families togrow vegetables on sandbars which are nototherwise used for agricultural purposes.Farmers are able to grow pumpkins in pitsfilled with homemade compost on thesandbars and these have been very beneficialfor local families. For example, the averagecost for each pit was Tk.72 (58p). A total of10,790 pumpkins have been harvested, ofwhich the local market price is Tk.772,432(£6318) and the net income is Tk. 521,500(£4265). On average that is Tk. 14,900(£122) income per farmer.For those families with no or very little land,training in homestead vegetable cultivationhas been provided. Known as the ‘Kalikapoormodel’ this vegetable gardening modelrequires less than 1.0 decimal of land tocultivate vegetables that can meet a family’svegetable needs for a whole year. For thosewith no land, this method has been improvedto enable families to cultivate vegetables ontheir house roofs. In addition 13,670 saplingsof coconut, litchi, carambola, guava, lemonand mehgoni have been distributed to 4,320households in the area to plant in theirhomesteads.Community-based fish farming has beenfacilitated to support access to productiveassets. Training has also been given in fishproduction and cage culture. Communitybased fish farming allows poorer members ofthe community access to productive assetsthat they otherwise would not have access tobecause of a lack of social resources. Poorermembers of the community are able to earnextra income whilst also ensuring adequatenutrition for their families.So far, vaccination campaigns have beenorganized in 14 project villages for preventingthe spread of anthrax in cattle. All eventshave been delivered with direct collaborationof the Department of Livestock Service inSirajganj. A total of 1,800 cattle have beenvaccinated against anthrax. De-warmingtablets were also provided for cattle duringthese campaigns. Importantly, skilledlivestock volunteers were heavily involved inthe vaccination campaigns. This enabledthem to gain valuable knowledge on animalhealth and skills to give vaccinations whichwill allow them to prevent diseases into thefuture.Livelihoods have also been strengthenedthrough other activities including agroprocessingand off farm training in skills suchas sewing, embroidery and light engineering.This type of employment is beneficial forfamilies, increasing their incomes, the abilityto meet basic needs and increase theirresilience.Photo: Aysha Begum using her skills in tailoring tomake extra income for her family40

Photo: Sandbar cropping, Sirajganj, BangladeshGovernanceAn important part of the V2R project is scalingup the community based disasterpreparedness plans (CBDPP) and livelihoodsaction plans and linking them with middlelevels of government. This includes involvingunion and upazila (local government) levelsthrough workshops with line departments,members of disaster management committeesand other professionals. Multiple risks andneeds of local communities can inform localgovernment planning and in turn influencenational levels.Including government officials in disasterpreparedness plans also provides them withnew approaches and new ways of thinking.This contributes to building adaptive capacityby facilitating more communication betweencommunities and government officials.In addition, a total of 13 linkage workshopswere organized at the union level, whererepresentatives of local government,community health clinics, high schoolcommittees, relevant field workers, CBOexecutive members, group members andvolunteers were present. A total of 210participants (117 women and 93 men) wereinvolved in those workshops. These workshopshas resulted in households receivingsignificantly improved health services from thehealth department and community clinics.The V2R Project is working with governmentdepartments and personnel as much aspossible, in order to link communities withexisting government schemes and services.This has included developing linkages withhealth service providers, for example hospitalsand clinics, community clinics, the familyplanning department, and education serviceinstitutions through networking workshops. Inaddition, the V2R project has helped develop agood relationship between villages and upazilaand district level line departments such asDistrict administration, District Relief andRehabilitation Office, Civil surgeon office,Sanitary Inspection, Livestock, Agriculture,Fisheries Department, Water board,Department of Public Health Engineering,Union Council bodies to access betterservices.Photo: Community meeting for a disaster preparednessplan, Sirajganj, Bangladesh41

Future UncertaintyThe possibility of increasing floods has beenprepared for through disaster preparednessmeasures. Community skilled volunteers havebeen trained to provide early warning andemergency planning in communities. The V2Rproject has been innovative in the use ofcommunity volunteers as these volunteershave also been trained in livelihood skills sothat they can earn an income at other timesof the year when they are not needed fordisaster work. This flexibility ensures thatskilled volunteers remain able to provide theirassistance during emergencies as they arelocally based and do not have to migrate toother areas for work. This ensures thesustainability of the use of skilled volunteerseven after the project ends allowingcommunities to have lasting access torelevant and timely information from thesevolunteers on hazards.The livelihoods dimension of the V2R projectalso ensures that communities are able todevelop their adaptive capacity as they arenow equipped with new knowledge and skills.This has given them growing confidence inusing these new skills to learn and experimentwith seeds and crops as well as technologiessuch as floating gardens and sandbarcropping. Livelihoods have also beenstrengthened through linking them withgovernment departments (agriculture andhealth)The V2R project is also taking climate changescenarios into consideration and is starting tobuild these into project initiatives. Forexample, the technologies that are beingimplemented all consider future scenarios.The cluster villages, tube wells and plinthraising are raised more than the highestexisting level of floods for anticipated futurerises in water levels. Communities also havegreater access to weather information asmembers of the CBOs are using their mobilephones and radios for information, daily newsand weather bulletins as a part of the earlywarning system. Communities are informed offlooding situations through announcementsusing mega phones. A possible next stepwould be to link these CBOs with met offices,research departments and governmentdepartments to access longer term climateinformation.ConclusionThe V2R project is still a current PracticalAction project and therefore it is difficult tocomment on project outcomes. However, theprocesses involved in this innovative andflexible project can be commented on. Theproject staff have been able to benefit fromthe use of the V2R framework and this hasbeen beneficial for staff training purposes.For example, practical and highly technicalstaff that focus on agricultural extension havehad to think about governance issues andeffects of climate change which theyotherwise would not have thought about.Access to information and knowledge hasbeen bought about through the DRR,livelihood and governance dimensions of theproject. Innovation and technologydevelopment has been bought about throughthe livelihoods dimension of the project,particularly through new agriculturaltechniques. Participation has been promotedthrough the governance aspect of the project.The use of CBOs has ensured a participationof community member in assessing andinforming the project of local needs. Inaddition the V2R project has linked thesecommunities with government departmentswherever possible, especially within disasterrisk reduction.Photo: A livestock producer with her young goats,V2R Project, Practical Action, Bangladesh.42

CASE STUDYSIX:PracticalSolutions forIndigenous andMigrantCommunities inPeru43

Practical Solutions for Indigenous and MigrantCommunities in PeruOverviewThe Practical Solutions for Indigenous and Migrant Communities Project (also knownas the Awajún Project) is an on-going project currently in its third year. Funded by theBig Lottery.The main objective of the project is to increase the capacity of the indigenous Awajúncommunities in the Alto Mayo region of Peru to plan ahead for their future as theirtraditional livelihoods are under threat. There is large scale deforestation in the areawhich has caused environmental degradation and landslides which is undermininglivelihoods and increasing hazards. There is also increasing conflict between theseindigenous communities and migrant settlers to the area. These settlers are oftenfarmers who have little resources themselves and have moved to the area in searchmore land. However, they have brought unsustainable farming practices to the forestand are exacerbating the environmental degradation. Conflicts have erupted betweenthe settlers and the Awajún natives over the use of natural resources and over landrights. The project therefore seeks to improve the livelihoods of both Awajún andmigrant communities by raising their awareness and improving their capacity todevelop mechanisms that will gradually discourage unsustainable land use practices.The Development ChallengeThe San Martin region of Peru, has thehighest rates of population growth anddeforestation in the country. Practical Actionis working within this region in the provincesof Rioja and Moyobamba, together known asAlto Mayo. Alto Mayo has a total surface areaof 770,000Ha, of which 75% is forest orprotected forest. 140,000 Ha of this land ishome to indigenous Awajún communities.Practical Action has been working withfourteen of these Awajún communities andhelping them achieve more sustainablenatural resource governance systems.Nine of the fourteen Awajún communitieshave divided their land between households;the remaining five Awajún communities stillwork the land communally and do notrecognise individuals or households as havinga “right” over a particular area of land. Thishas resulted in these communities being atrisk of land invasion from incoming settlers.Rapid population growth due to increasedmigration into the area is increasing conflictsbetween Awajún communities and migrantsettlers, known as ‘colonos’. Around 5,000migrant settlers have leased land from theAwajún and a further 2,000 migrant settlershave invaded Awajún lands without agreementor paying land rent. The colonos practiceslash and burn agriculture, cutting andburning the forest back before planting maizeand coffee. Maize, an annual crop, quicklydepletes the soil and leaves the land severelydegraded after a few years. Both indigenousand migrant communities are exposed tohigher occurrences of disasters due to naturalthreats and pollution of their water sources.With increasing vulnerability and competitionover resources there are increasing conflictsover land, lease disputes and farm boundarydisputes between the indigenous communityand settlers. Added to these are otherconflicts around illegal extraction of timber,undervaluation of timber, and the commercialexploration and exploitation of naturalresources (oil, gas and, lately, water).Photo: Training in compost production44

LivelihoodsThe livelihoods of Awajún communities arebased on hunting and gathering. Somecommunity members are small scale farmers.The migrant settler’s livelihoods are based onsmall scale farming. The livelihoods of theAwajún communities are seriouslyundermined by the pressures of deforestationand water pollution on their traditional naturalresource governance system. Their traditionaloccupations of hunting and gathering arethreatened as resources are depleted.Livelihood diversification and strengthening istherefore an important element in this projectif sustainable natural resource governance isto occur.Photo: Trained woman vaccinating chickens, PracticalSolutions for Indigenous and Migrant Communities, PeruHazards and StressesThe main sources of hazards and stresses inthe area are conflict from disputes over landleasing and land rights, land degradation andwater pollution from deforestation andunsustainable slash and burn agriculturepracticed by migrant settlers to the area.Deforestation is causing floods and watercontamination which in turn cause healthproblems in Awajún communities.Practical Action is fostering processes ofdialogue between the indigenous Awajún andmigrant groups in conflict. Processes arebased on evidence of Awajún territorial rightsand environmental damage identified throughenvironmental impact assessments with thecommunities involved.The hazard of water contamination is beingaddressed through the use of rainwaterharvesting techniques which have helped sixlocal schools provide clean drinking water to135 school children. Installation of gravityfed water systems and rehabilitation ofexisting water systems are being carried out inboth Awajún and migrant communities. Also,sanitation systems are being installed toimprove the health of communities.Practical Action has been involved in trainingboth Awajún and migrant communities inagricultural techniques. This has includedtraining community extension agents inreforestation and plant nurseries.Communities are now replanting coffee andother local trees to improve soil quality andprevent erosion. Natural cropping andintercropping techniques have also beensupported to prevent the use of agrochemicalsand to prevent pests. This agroecologicalapproach encompasses a range oftechniques to draw on and replenish naturalresources. The focus of the approach is on theentire ecological system to generateenvironments that are productive andnaturally resource conserving, while beingsocially sustainable, culturally sensitive,socially just and economically viable. Throughthis approach both Awajún and settlercommunities have started organic coffeefarming. This has not only lessened the use ofharmful chemicals, but has also increasedfamily incomes.Photo: Harvesting Organic Coffee, Practical Solutions forIndigenous and Migrant Communities Project, Peru.45

Practical Action has also been working toincrease food security and reduce the level ofmalnutrition, mortality and morbidity withinthese communities. Small livestockproduction (chicken and guinea pigs) and fishproduction are being supported by the projectto achieve better livelihood security. Waterand sanitation systems have been installed forthe health and wellbeing of the communitiesaffected by water pollution which have beenidentified as major stresses and hazards tocommunity members. The project also startedfruit orchards in order to increase foodsecurity and nutrition. So far, forty families(approximately 200 people) have eachestablished a new garden with a variety ofplants to enrich their diets: sacha potato,sweet potato, native fruits and bituca withseeds provided from the nursery gardens. Inaddition the project is working withcommunities to preserve native species oftrees and herbs through the collection ofseeds. Women elders have been particularlyknowledgeable about the important nativespecies of medicinal trees that these localcommunities are now trying to preserve andrejuvenate through seed collection.Maintaining agricultural bio-diversity is veryimportant and is essential in supporting thesurrounding eco-system and way of life of theAwajún.GovernanceAn important component of this project hasbeen to develop the capacities of Awajúncommunities to influence government andpolicies through organizational strengthening,renewing legitimate leadership, andfacilitating better communications with otherindigenous movements and networks in thecountry. This approach included education oninternational standards that protectindigenous rights and intercultural educationin schools. This strategy involved both thechiefs of Awajún communities, ‘colonos’ andauthorities from the justice system and thegovernment.Practical Action is working with the FERIAAM(Regional Indigenous Awajún Federation ofAlto Mayo) which is comprised of Awajúnleaders. They have joined together in order toovercome the multiple pressures on theirindigenous livelihoods. These pressuresinclude illegal invasion from settlers, illegallogging cartels, pressure from oil companiesfor access to their land and uncontrollabletenants with unsustainable farming practices.Practical Action is working with these Awajúnleaders to enable them to be able to negotiatewith these actors on their own terms. Both tobenefit from the development process withoutbeing exploited and also to ensure the nativefauna and floras the Awajún depend upon arenot destroyed in the process.Previous government forest protection ordersto promote conservation had not worked andafter the protection orders had ended, Awajúnfarmers went back to renting out their land forneeded income. Through vulnerability andcapacity assessments two strategies weredeveloped to promote forest conservation: thepromotion of diversified livelihoods andagricultural training in agro-ecological forestryand also the strengthening and enforcementof indigenous natural resource governancesystems.Achievements of this process included theproduction of a database of tenants so thatthe Awajún can keep track of who is on theirland. A GPS computerised system of tenantregistration has been developed and thefacilitation of standardised lease agreementsknown as ‘model contracts’ are being usedwhenever leases are renewed or otheropportunities arise. The ‘model contracts’cover the land lease and include rents andregulations over deforestation and landdegradation. The model contracts use theAwajún system of native justice and it isgaining increasing recognition in national law.The registration of tenants is now in full forceand it is estimated that between 40 and 60per cent of tenants have been registered. Sofar, 300 land tenure agreements have beenrevised and rents set to provide incentives forenvironmental protection, 35 per cent of the‘Colono’ have more secure land agreementsand the Awajún landowners have gained moresecure rents from their land.The Project has also successfully facilitatedthe signing of a declaration by all Awajúnleaders on their responsibilities as leaders toensure better agricultural practices, landmanagement and anti-corruption principles.Training has also been given on auditing andfinancial accounting to enable localcommunity organisations to use theirresources more effectively.The FARIAAM has also been successful innegotiating with the regional government ofSan Martin and the local district ofMoyobamba over the issue of land invasion.The meeting, which took place in 2011resulted in local authorities sendinginspectors to Awajún areas in order to ensurethe settlers were not damaging theenvironment. Those settlers that are found46

damaging the environment would then beconverted into tenants of the Awajún withstricter natural resource managementregulations.rights. Consideration of the governancecontext has been crucial in building thecommunities’ resilience in this setting. In thiscase, governance at community level hasbeen strengthened through the FERIAAM andthe creation of new ‘model’ leases. However,addressing governance issues at other levelsis also important if impacts are to besustained and long term change is to beachieved at scale. An enabling environment isnecessary if the Awajún are to ensure theirland agreements are to be enforced. Thismeans working with local and regionalgovernment.Raising awareness has been another core partof capacity building in the Awajúncommunities. Understanding the impact ofslash and burn agriculture and currentdeforestation practices has led to increasedknowledge and experimentation with otheragricultural practices. Community extensionagents were trained in reforestationtechniques to support local bio-diversity. Thisknowledge is then passed onto other membersof the community. Raising awareness aboutindigenous rights and increasing access toinformation through supporting the Awajún’snetworking with other indigenous rightsgroups across Peru has also been important inbuilding adaptive capacity.Photo: A meeting of the FERIAAMFuture UncertaintyThe Awajún indigenous communities arefacing great changes to their way of life.Practical Action has supported Awajúncommunities through strengthening theirvoice and influence over decision making.With greater influence over policies and landuse regulations at both local and districtlevels they are able to engage with thechallenges of natural resource governanceinto the future. The FERIAAM is now workingwith other indigenous rights networks as wellas the regional government of San Martin,something which may not have been possiblewithout the facilitation and capacity buildingmeasures from the project. The project hasalso helped to mediate between differentstakeholders, the Awajún, the settler ‘colono’communities and the government. Mediationand social mobilisation is important ifcommunities are to adapt and claim theirConclusionThe Awajún case study has incorporatedsustainable livelihoods through diversifyingand securing livelihoods. This has included:supporting the sustainable management offorest resources; promoting access totechnologies such as organic coffee growingand water and sanitation systems andimproving access to markets and serviceproviders. The success of these sustainablelivelihood interventions however, is highlyinterdependent on the other dimensions ofthe V2R Framework such as adequategovernance and thought about the future.Governance has been particularly important inthe success of better natural resourcemanagement and the strengthening ofcommunity organisation and voice. Trainingcommunity leaders in leadership skills, andfacilitating their linkages with otherindigenous rights networks and in negotiatingwith regulators has meant communities havegreater voice in decision making and werethen able to influence the government landtenure system.47

L e s s o n sLearntThere were difficulties in accessing data forsome projects that have yet to finish andtherefore evaluations have yet to beconducted. There have also been difficultiesin finding evidence of projects that wereaddressing adaptive capacity and futureuncertainties. Many of the project goalsaddress elements of adaptive capacity orresilience, however, tangible evidence ofthese has been hard to find through currentmid term reports and project evaluations. Thisonly highlights the need for further researchinto better monitoring and evaluation ofresilience.Despite these difficulties there have beenvaluable insights into how Practical Action isoperationalizing resilience. The following arelessons learnt from the case studies:Photo: Harvesting potatoes, Practical Action, Peru.48

1) Understanding context is better through anintegrated approach and this will promoteeffective interventionsUnderstanding the context of any interventionis critical and an integrated approach is ameans to understand the context better.Livelihoods, hazards, governance andchanging trends are all interconnected inreality. Projects with entry points in disasterrisk reduction (such as the Peru and Nepalcase studies above) are also working toincrease adaptive capacity in response toclimate change and other trends and haveworked to strengthen links with local anddistrict governments in order to ensure plansare implemented and are supported.In the cases of Greening Darfur and theAwajún project in Peru, threats to livelihoodsand food security were the entry points.However conflict and natural resourcedegradation were the two main sources ofhazards and these had to be addressed inorder for local people to be able to achievebetter food security. In North Darfur, theproject enabled farmers to use shorterduration crops, so that they could beharvested before dry periods. This lessenedconflict between farmers and pastoralists ascrops were harvested before livestock enteredfarmers’ fields. As conflict often arose frompastoralist’s livestock eating crops before theywere harvested in dry periods. In Peru,following the end of forest protection orderssupported by government and otherorganisations, Awajún farmers were able torent out their land to incoming settlers whoused unsustainable farming practices forneeded income. This meant that forestprotection orders were not working as a meansto protect the forest. Through vulnerabilityand capacity assessments Practical Actionwith community members, identified otherlivelihoods strategies such as small animalproduction and were able to diversify incomesources. As a result this improved naturalresource management and built sustainablelivelihoods strategies in the long term.Therefore a key lesson has been that all fourareas of the V2R are interconnected and theapproach enables development practitionersto understand the linkages between thecomponents better. Livelihood outcomes aredependent on the assets that people haveaccess to, but this access is dependent on theinstitutional environment which governsaccess to resources and how people use theseresources. In turn, the governance context willinfluence how people can respond to futureuncertainty and their decision making abilityand adaptive capacity. Resilience is thereforenot achieved by seeking to address onecomponent of the V2R in isolation, but eachof the four components of the V2R is shapedby each of the other components. Projectprogrammers therefore could benefit by takingall of the four components into account andanalysing the interactions between them.In Peru, previous initiatives by otherorganisations had failed to facilitate betternatural resource management with Awajúnand settler communities because they hadonly used a natural resource managementapproach. Practical Action’s holistic approachtackled drivers of risks as well as builtcapacity for natural resources managementand increased productivity.Furthermore, understanding the governancecontext in which people live (mapping policyprocesses, formal and informal institutions),is essential to build resilience. Working withlocal, district and national governmentofficials can build adaptive capacity and scale-up best practice from the community level.Understanding the blockages, such as lack ofaccess to information and services) can helpto pinpoint which governance institutionsrequire partnership building to promoteresilience.2) Building technical capacities can help tocope with future uncertaintyEnsuring that appropriate technologies areaccessible to all is at the heart of PracticalAction's work. We define technologies asskills and knowledge, physical hardware suchas tools or water points, and the way they areorganised, used and controlled. Buildingtechnical capacities for food security involveshelping farmers to use appropriatetechnologies to overcome the physical andenvironmental constraints of fragile areas,improve productivity and incomes and adaptto climate change.Appropriate technologies are those which arecost effective for small-scale producers,managed by them and are viable for long termsustainable use.By building technical capabilities, PracticalAction enables small scale producers toaccess appropriate technologies by buildingon local knowledge to strengthen existingtechnologies. This also helps farmers toaccess and adapt technologies, as illustratedby the V2R project case study. The training ofcommunity based extension agents are alsointegral to Practical Action’s strategies andthey focus on linkages between governmentagencies, researchers and other relevant49

sources of knowledge to ensure sustainablelong term access to technologies and advice.By training and linking up to sources ofinformation poor producers then have theability to continue to make decisions and haveflexibility to experiment and try out new ideasinto the future based on their own initiatives.For example, in Peru, farmers have beentrained in agricultural production, from seedvarieties, irrigation systems, livestock rearingto harvesting and more. As a result, they haveput their knowledge to use and havecultivated crops such as avocado based ontheir own initiative. In Nepal, farmers haveused the knowledge from farmer field schoolsto expand their businesses in off seasonvegetables on their own initiative,independently of the project. Other farmers inNepal have learnt from bee-keeping trainingand have expanded their bee keepingoperations. Similarly, through capacitybuilding of Networks in North Darfur, Sudan,networks have fundraised for new projectsfrom other international organisations such asthe UN.3) Long term partnerships at different levelscan build adaptive capacityThe Greening Darfur case study illustrates theneed to work in partnership with localorganisations. Practical Action has beenworking with Village Development Associationnetworks over more than fifteen years and hasbuilt up trust and good working relationshipswith members. Only through these long termrelationships were project staff able to interactwith local villagers and projects continuethrough outbreaks of violence.4) Building on past experience is essentialBuilding on past experience is essential forbuilding relationships as well as gainingknowledge. The V2R project in Bangladesh isthe product of lesson learning from variousother projects involving hazard prone areas.Past projects which have mainly dealt withDRR 6 and food security 7 have now beenintegrated with climate change, livelihoodsand governance to a greater extent within theV2R project.In North Darfur, previous projects to build thecapacity of the three community-basednetworks helped the Greening Darfur projectcontinue during times of conflict and hasallowed Practical Action to scale up. Inaddition Practical Action’s projects in Kenya,such as the DMI projects built upon past workwith pastoralists and traditional governancestructures. In Peru projects built on past workin DRR and forestry management. This hascontributed to the development ofprogrammes and organisational learning.5) Consensus-building approaches bringtangible benefits, especially in conflictsituationsLessons have been learnt in conflictprevention through the use of ParticipatoryAction Plan Development (PAPD) and otherconsensus building approaches in NorthDarfur, Kenya, Bangladesh and Peru in orderto work in conflict affected areas. PAPDinvolves participation from a range ofstakeholders which is essential forunderstanding the diverse local realities andpriorities for each group. Consensus buildinghas been crucial in working with both Awajúnand settler populations in Peru. Also platformsthat bring relevant social actors together arekey in mobilising capacity for social learning,negotiation and collective action. In Kenya,consensus building approaches has given aplatform from which both Pokot and Turkanacan negotiate. This has resulted in tangiblebenefits to local communities as access towater has increased. PAPD also emphasiseslocal informal institutions that are oftenoverlooked in the mainstream environment.For example in North Darfur, negotiationsused traditional agreements which have meantthey were trusted and sustainable in the localcontexts and in turn, led to the success of theproject.6) Empowerment and agency are vitalEmpowerment to build people’s capacity todetermine their own future as well as toaccess and influence institutions and decisionmaking process is central to Practical Action’sapproach. Building self-reliance is key. This isachieved through valuing and respectingpeople’s livelihood choices and building onlocal skills, capacity and knowledge tostrengthen those livelihoods. The case studiesillustrate this can be achieved throughstrengthening local institutions, such asVillage Development Committees, Women’sDevelopment Associations and otherCommunity Based Organisations. Theseorganisations vary considerably, some areconnected to the lowest level of government(e.g.in Nepal) and others are integrated withtraditional structures (e.g. in Sudan). Othergroups are more specific and represent theinterests of groups within communities suchas women, fishers or farmers and others arebased on social institutions such as savingsand loan groups or water management groups.6For example the ‘Disappearing Lands: Supporting communities affected by river erosion’ project funded by Big Lottery7 For example the ‘Food Security for Sustainable Livelihoods’ project, funded by the EC.50

Community organisations can provide a forumfor analysing the causes of their situation ofpoverty and envisage and plan for positivesolutions for both communities andindividuals. Community based approachespromote local ownership of processes ofchange, and can ensure better managementof knowledge and resources. This canstrengthen sustainability long after externalsupport phases out.Practical Action has developed guidingprinciples to support the process of workingwith community organisations and helpovercome some of the challenges they face.There can be obstacles to mobilisingcommunity organisations which can includeproblems of dependency, accountability andthe maintenance of existing hierarchieswhere the interests of the group is capturedby elites, therefore not addressing the needsof poorer members. Our guidelines containthree main principles that experience hasshown are important when working withcommunity organisations: facilitatecommunity empowerment and self-reliancethrough a ‘light touch’ that encouragesempowerment and lessens dependency onexternal actors; include and represent allmembers of the community to ensure theirvoices are heard; meet practical needs toensure wellbeing as community organisationscan be most effective and sustainable insituations where they meet people’s specificon-going needs. In order to enact theseprinciples, Practical Action uses a number oftools in different contexts to encouragesuccessful and self-reliant communityorganisations which include facilitation,community based planning and capacitybuilding measures.Strengthening community based organisations; The V2R Project, Bangladesh.51

An emergency simulation drill on an evacuationboat. The V2R Project, Bangladesh.7) Working with local and district officials isneeded to make scaling up possibleThere is often a ‘missing link’ between villagelevel projects and the national level policy andPractical Action has been working to bridgethis gap by linking with local and district andnational government officials and processesthroughout our work. Before the projectshighlighted here, many people had no linkswith government agencies. Now communitymembers are better placed to demandservices and have their voice heard in decisionmaking processes. In Nepal, local governmenthas supported integrated planning bycommunities and scaled up the outcomeswithin district development plans. Similarly,in Nepal Practical Action is working with theMinistry of Local Development and theMinistry of Home Affairs to scale up its DRRwork with different districts and to integrateclimate data into vulnerability assessmentsand programme design and action based onvillage development plans. At the Nationallevel, success can be also seen with workingin partnership with the Ministry of Educationin Peru for agricultural training.Despite these attempts by Practical Action toscale up this approach and link the districtlevel to national and community levels, workis slowed by lack of support from the donorcommunity. Most DRR funding goes directlyto national governments (e.g. through theGlobal Facility for Disaster Reduction andRecovery) or to non-governmentalo r g a n i s a t i o n s ( N G O s ) f o r l o c a limplementation. Little funding is available tohelp bridge the gap between national-levelpolicies and local-level plans throughcollaboration with meso-level governancesystems.The case studies presented here illustrate thework that Practical Action is doing to buildcapacity and foster institutional linkages bydeveloping institutional frameworks forcommunity-based disaster risk management,bringing together ministerial levels and districtgovernments, setting up village, district andnational project coordination committees andoffering training at each level on DRR that iscentred around resilient livelihoods. Bybuilding capacity and working with meso-levelgovernance systems, Practical Action ispromoting a sustainable approach to DRR thathas both short- and long-term impact and thisshould be supported by the international anddonor community.8) Flexibility is needed to work withuncertaintyA flexible, programmatic approach is neededin order to work across all dimensions of theV2R. The Awajún case study illustrates thiswell; the project itself did not start withhazard assessments or climate change data.However, it used knowledge from previousprojects in the same area to complement itswork on natural resource management,governance and livelihoods. In this casebarriers between disciplines were broken downand thinking in ‘silos’ of livelihood,governance, DRR or natural resourcemanagement were avoided and worked acrossin order to achieve more holistic andsuccessful outcomes.Flexibility is also needed to address futureuncertainty and therefore future scenarioplanning should be essential in developmentinterventions. Practical Action is working onbuilding future uncertainty into all of itsprogrammes. The case studies presented hereare initial steps to include and analyse howPractical Action currently considers futureuncertainty. However, there needs to begreater analysis of how adaptive capacity canbe achieved and it can be evaluated andmonitored.52

Recommendations fromEvidenceThe findings from the case studies in thisbriefing paper point to the followingrecommendations for policy and programmes.It also highlights gaps for further research:Recommendations for policy andprogrammes:1) Using a comprehensive framework such asthe V2R can increase programmeeffectivenessProgrammes that are designed to alleviatepoverty may benefit from analysing all fouraspects of the V2R framework and integratingthem into programme design. This includesdisaster risk reduction, sustainablelivelihoods, governance and futureuncertainty.2) Local Needs must be prioritisedInternational and regional-level strategies andpolicy interventions should be appropriate tonational level programming and localconditions. International policy initiativeshave witnessed good progress; however theyhave failed to be implemented at the grassroots level (Oxley, 2011). In order for theseinitiatives to be achieved in practice, localneeds and vulnerabilities must be addressed,adaptive capacity must be taken into accountand voice of vulnerable people needs to bestrengthened. Local people are the drivers ofchange and therefore they should besupported and their voice strengthened.3) Link up and influence meso-levelgovernance systemsMeso-level governance should not bebypassed. Local, district, municipalgovernment and service providers are veryimportant for implementing national initiativesat local levels. Donors and nationalgovernment should not miss out the mesolevel to promote resilience as they are wellplaced to scale up best practice from the locallevel to district level as well as to influencebudgetary processes for integrating DRR andClimate Change into development processes.Disaster management policies are formulatedat a national level in most countries, as aredevelopment policies. These national levelpolicies then guide the practices at thedistrict level. The implementation ofdevelopment, disaster and climate relatedpolicies tend to be separate, under the controlof different Ministries, with the result ofpoorly integrated local level planning andpractice. This can lead to disjointed activitiesat the community level and wasted time andresources (Oxley, 2011). Therefore anotherrecommendation is that budget allocation byinternational donors and Nationalgovernments is needed for DRR at the Districtlevel.4) Programmes to provide useful knowledgeabout climate changeVulnerability to climate change needs to beintegrated into programme design. Facilitatingaccess to climate data and knowledge on howto use the information for decision making isan important intermediary role for nongovernmentalorganisations.There is currently confusion over climatechange and variability data. Manydevelopment problems are currently beingblamed on climate change when there areother underlying causes. Local people needaccurate information and training on climatedata. In addition local government andagricultural departments also could benefitfrom being trained in understanding climatedata.A community vegetable garden, Greening DarfurProject, Northern Darfur, Practical Action Sudan.V2R Project, Bangladesh53

Photo: Kibera informal settlement, Nairobi, Kenya, Practical Action, KenyaRecommendations for furtherResearch:1. Indicators of resilience to measure impactThere needs to be more research oncharacteristics of resilience and theirindicators. Whilst there has been progress inconceptualising resilience (Bahadur et al,2010) indicators still need to be tested. Onceindicators are clear, there also needs to bemore research on how to measure theseindicators for effective monitoring andevaluation (Villanueva, 2011). In relation tothe above point, there also needs to be clearevidence of impact. This can only be achievedthrough robust indicators.An important consideration for researchers isproblems with measuring outcomes in thelong term. If levels of resilience are to beconsidered as the level of ‘bounce back’ or‘bounce back better’ (DFID, 2011 & Twigg,2009) then the there are two questions toconsider: Firstly, how do we do it? How do wemeasure this better ‘bounce’? And secondly,how do we overcome the practical problem oftime scale? There are problems withmeasuring outcomes in the long term asfunding mechanisms do not allow for longterm engagement and follow up investigationsare rare. It is very difficult to measureoutcomes in the short term due to a lack ofinformation.These case studies are only the start, andprovide evidence of the benefit of buildingresilience into programmes. Measurement ofresilience is important as this will giveevidence on whether resilience is moreeffective than other approaches, and highlightany trade-offs.2. Resilience in urban areasSo far, most studies of resilience have focusedon rural agricultural areas. However, withincreasing urbanisation, population increasesand growing informal settlements, urban areasare experiencing increasing levels of risks andhazards and more research is required onurban areas. The UNISDR ‘Resilient Cities’campaign 8 is a beginning, but more researchis necessary.3. Climate data clarityDifference between climate change andclimate variability must be understood bydevelopment practitioners. There needs to befurther action on how climate change data canbe used for better programming in order tohelp smallholder farmers to cope with andadapt to weather variability. This is likely to beof great practical assistance bothimmediately, and in the longer term (i.e.extremes already experienced within currentvariation pose major challenges to farmers,and both these extremes and their frequencyare likely to become more common withclimate change). Well trained NGO andagricultural extension staff could facilitatefarmers to be aware of and understand agreater range of coping and adaptationstrategies than they currently use anddetermine which are appropriate to both theirlocal and individual circumstances and how toimplement these (for an example of PracticalAction’s work in this see the project:Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation inZimbabwe’s Extension System 9 ). Trained staffcould also help farmers to view and interpretlocal historical climate data (e.g. how oftenseasonal rainfall is below a certain level) andconsider implications for selecting differentcrop management strategies. Similarly theycould help farmers interpret seasonal climateforecasts which are currently not madeavailable in an easy to use format to, or usedby, the majority of smallholder farmers in thecountries Practical Action works in.Resilience in urban areas is a growing area of interest8 United Nation International Strategy on Disaster Reduction Resilient Cities Campaign: www.unisdr.org/we/campaign/cities9For more information on the project: Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation in Zimbabwe’s Extension System, pleasesee www.practicalaction.org/nuffield-project54

Conclusion: Reflectingon achievementsThe case studies presented in this paperillustrate Practical Action’s work in buildingresilience into its programmes. They providean evidence base for operationalizingresilience and for including processes andresources that are essential for supportingadaptive capacity. All of the case studiespresented here support the idea thatresilience thinking can be useful beyond theDRR sector. They also reinforce the need fororganisations to be proactive in reaching outto build partnerships and alliances withpeople and organisations operating outside oftheir specialist intervention areas. Thismeans they also require an investment andchallenge our traditional way of working.Though we are only beginning to gatherevidence on the cost effectiveness of theFrom Vulnerability to Resilience (V2R)approach, we have already seen increases inpeople’s food security, disaster managementplans at the district level reflecting locallevel risks, safer and diversified livelihoodsand increasing innovation. However there arestill a range of challenges including a lack ofrelevant climate data, appropriate tools andincentives in organisations to supportintegration of sectors, a lack of scenarioplanning methods and clear indicators onwhich to base planning, monitoring andevaluations.Practical Action is beginning to monitor andevaluate resilience as an outcome andprocess through its programming. This is achallenge as resilience needs to be evaluatedover the long term, as well as over the shortterm. The V2R framework is a start and hasproven to be a useful step forwards inimproving our understanding of the complexprocess of adaptation, and ultimately betterPractical Action’s assistance to those most inneed and most vulnerable to the impacts of achanging climate.55

BIBLIOGRAPHYBahadur et al (2010) The ResilienceRenaissance? Unpacking of resilience fortackling climate change and disasters.Strengthening Climate Resilience DiscussionPaper 1. IDS, Sussex.Chambers and Conway (1999) SustainableLivelihoods Guidance Sheets. DFID.DFID (2011) Defining Disaster Resilience: ADFID Approach Paper. UK Department forInternational Development.Ensor, J (2011) Uncertain Futures: Adaptingdevelopment to a changing climate. PracticalAction Publishing; Rugby.Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2007)Basic Report on wellbeing in Kenya. Ministryof Planning and National Development,Government of Kenya.Levine, S. Ludi, E. and Jones, L. (2011)Rethinking Support for Adaptive Capacity toClimate Change: The role of developmentinterventions. ODI/ACCRA Report.Lewins, R. Coupe, S. and Murray, F. (2007)Voices from the Margins: Consensus buildingand planning with the poor in Bangladesh.Practical Action Publishing; Rugby.Oxley, M. (2011) A comprehensive “systems”approach to building resilience in hazardproneareas in a changing climate. Availablefrom Global Network of Civil SocietyOrganisations for Disaster Risk Reduction.Pasteur. K (2011) From Vulnerability toResilience: A framework for analysis andaction to build community resilience.Practical Action Publishing; Rugby.Twigg, J. (2009) Characteristics of a DisasterResilient Community. Guidance Notes to theDFID DRR Interagency Coordination Group.Villanueva, P.S. (2011) Learning to APAPT:Monitoring and evaluation approaches inclimate change adaptation and disaster riskreduction – challenges, gaps, and waysforward. Strengthening Climate ResilienceDiscussion Paper 9.Willenbockel, D (2011) A Cost BenefitAnalysis of Practical Action’s Livelihood-Centred Disaster Risk Reduction Project inNepal’ Practical Action Publishing; Rugby.Cropping on Sandbars, V2R Project, Bangladesh.56

ANNEX ONE:Table: How each project covers aspects of theV2R Framework:SUSTAINABLELIVELIHOODSHAZARDSANDSTRESSESGOVERNANCEFUTUREUNCERTAINTYLCDRRPERUFarmer leaderschool (increasedknowledge,technology andexperimentation)Demonstrationplots for crops andirrigationRevolving fundsNew guinea pigbreeds (increasedincomes)Recovering nativevarieties of cropsAccess to moreoptions forfarming such asanimal breeds(guinea pigs) newvarieties of seeds,hydroponics,fertilizers, betterstorage andirrigation.Vulnerabilityand capacityassessmentsshouldencompasseverythingParticipatorydisaster preparednessand responseplansTrainingcommunitycivil defencecommitteesSimulationdrillsDisasterpreparednessand responseactivitiesEarthquakeresistanthousingCapacitybuilding forproposaldevelopment toget fundingfrom municipalgovernmentCapacitybuilding ofdistrict officialsto process ruralfundingproposalsCapacitybuilding ofdistrict officialsin livelihoodcentred DRRStrengtheninglinks betweenlocal, districtand nationallevelsImprovingunderstanding ofclimate changetrendsEnsuring accessto climate andweatherinformation forfarmersIncrease capacityof farmers tomanageagriculturalcalendars throughresilient farmerfield schoolincreasingconfidence andflexibility to learnand experimentLCDRRNEPALFarmer fieldschoolsDemonstrationplots of newvegetablesImproved cropvarieties(improvedincomes)Livestock keeping/livestock healthcamps (increasingincomes)Livelihooddiversification:bee-keepingOff farm activitypromotionVulnerabilityand capacityassessmentsDisasterpreparednessand responseplansFlood EarlyWarningSystemsDisasterpreparednessand responseactivities(wild animalfence,gabions, embankments)Capacitybuilding ofVDCsCapacitybuilding ofdistrict officialsin livelihoodscentred DRRStrengtheninglinks betweenlocal, districtand nationallevelsImprovingunderstanding ofclimate changetrendsEnsuring accessto climate andweatherinformation forfarmersFlood earlywarning systemsAccess to moretechnologies- newand diversifiedcrops for changingweatherconditions57

DMIKENYAPastoralist fieldschools- increasedknowledge of animalhealth, climatechange, naturalresource managementLivelihood diversificationtraining forpastoralistsExtension servicesanimalhealth workersWater harvesting andrainwater harvestingImproved sanitationCommunity basedsaving schemes/Village communitybanksLand usemapping andplanningDroughtpreparednessplans andactivities –sealedboreholesDrought EarlyWarningSystemsGrassrootsmonitorsmonitoringdrought, diseaseand conflictConsensusbuildingapproach tolessen conflictNatural resourceuser committeesstrengthenedreducedconflictPeacecommitteesResourcemapping anduser agreementsenforced byvillage eldersthishas beenscaled up byother actorsStrengtheningnational anddistrict emergencyplanning andresponseLinking localcommunities withdistrictauthorities andservice providersSaving schemesfor futureuncertaintyPastoralist fieldschool improvedunderstandingof climatechange andfuture trendspromotesuse ofcamels.Access to timelyinformation ondrought,disease andconflictPeacecommitteespowersharingand reducingconflictGREENINGDARFUR(SUDAN)Capacity buildingassessments of civilsociety networksPastures managementtraining given.Capacity buildingnetworks- training infinance, funding.Community forestsestablishedCommunity seedstores and seed fairsorganised.Increased access towater- rehabilitationof wells, hafirs andshallow wells. Donkeydrawn carts to carrywater.Community basedagricultural extensionin forest protection,horticulture, land use,soil cultivation.Paravets/CBAHWstrained.Hazarddefencesterraceconstruction,communityforests, shelterbelts, rangelandand vegetationregeneration.Conflictpreventionmeasuresconsensusbuildingapproach used.Strengtheninglinks betweennetworks andservice providers(government,range andpasturesadministration,agriculturalextensionservices andveterinarydepartments)Regeneration ofnatural resourcemanagementsystemsTraining onconflictresolution andconsensusbuilding given(PAPD).Strengtheningcivil societynetworksEnvironmentalprotectionlessons- treeand seedlingtransplantingtraining,pasturesmanagement,communityforests. Theseall improvedunderstandingof trends andtheir impacts aswell as buildconfidence andflexibility tolearn andexperiment.Conflictresolution andconsensusbuildingtrainingimprovedunderstandingof conflict andways to buildconsensuspowersharing.Improved seeddistribution andimproved agriculturalpractices such asdates seeds areplanted.58

V2RBANGLADESHVolunteer groupsformed and trained tostart formation ofcommunity baseddisaster preparednessplans.Strengthening livelihoodsby distributionof assets- livestock,poultry, seeds.Agri-food processingtraining- chutneymaking etc.Agricultural trainingand extension.Cow, goat and sheeprearing has increasedincomesPromoting increasedaccess to technologies-floating gardens,sandbar cropping.Fishing training- cageculture support, fishproduction training,community based fishfarming.Establishment ofseedling nurseriesVCAs informedcommunitybased disasterpreparednessand livelihoodaction plans.Training inandemergencyequipmentprovided fordisasterslifejackets,boatambulances.Links withhospitalsstrengthenedFlood earlywarningsystems.Measures toprotect vitalassets/ seedstores/ raisedplinths/tubewellsFlood proofhousing,clustervillages.Communitydisasterpreparednessplans linkedto localgovernmentCommunitybasedorganisationstrainedManagementof boatambulancesandevacuationboatsmaintained inparticipatoryway by CBOsSkilled volunteerstrained- in bothdisasterpreparedness andlivelihood optionsCBOs, local NGOstaff and skilledvolunteers trained inunderstanding localtrends, disastermanagement andclimate changeAccess to timelyinformationincreased throughthe use of skilledvolunteersIncreased access totechnologies such asfloating gardens andsandbar croppingincreases adaptivecapacityOff farm trainingsewing,embroideryand light engineeringPRACTICALSOLUTIONSFORINDIGENOUSCOMMUNITIES(AWAJUN)Livelihood diversificationand strengthening-fish farmtraining, smalllivestock production.Training in betteragriculturaltechniquesTraining communityextension agents inreforestationOrganic coffeefarming raisingincomesNatural cropping andintercroppingincreases sustainablemanagement ofproductive assetsseedstorage/orchids/preservation of nativeseeds and herbsDeforestationand waterpollutionlessened.Forestregenerationundertaken.Water andsanitationsystemsinstalledLeadershiptraining forAwajúnleadersStrengtheningtheFERIAAMand linkingthem toregionalgovernmentandindigenousrights networksTraining inindigenousrights andnatural resourcemanagementConsensusbuilding approachusedto reduceconflict betweenAwajúnand settlersConsensus buildingapproach hasresulted in Awajúnincreasing theirdecision makingpower- now havemore control overland leases and landuse. Power sharingbetween Awajún andsettlers.More communicationbetween FERIAAMand San Martingovernment overenvironmentalcontrols.Better understand oftrends ofdeforestation and itsimpact- landslides,water pollution.More confidence andflexibility to learnand experimentthrough training andlinkages to serviceproviders59

PRACTICAL ACTIONThe Schumacher CentreBourton on DunsmoreRugbyWarwickshire, CV23 9QZUKT +44 (0)1926 634400F +44 (0)1926 634401E practicalaction@practicalaction.org.ukW www.practicalaction.orgBack Cover: Growing tomatoes, Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred DRR Project, Practical Action NepalPractical Action is a registered charity and company limited by guarantee.60Patron HRH The Prince of Wales, KG, KT, GCB | Registered Charity No 247257 | Comp Reg No871954, England