This report identifies FAO's activities concerning access to natural resources (ANR), and identifies other organizations that use explicitly or implicitly a sustainable livelihoods approach in relation to ANR. The report constitutes Output 2.1 of the work plan of the FAO LSP Sub-programme 3.1 ("Building Stakeholder capacity to improve access to natural resources for the rural poor").
Access to natural resources
In this report, activities relating to access to natural resources (ANR) are defined broadly to include different NR (land, water, fisheries, forests, wildlife, genetic resources) and two different types of activities:
Programmes and projects strengthening existing ANR, e.g. through greater tenure security and improved management (co-management arrangements, etc).
Programmes and projects expanding the NR base, e.g. through the granting of new land titles.
In reality, the border line between the two types of activities may be blurred, and both types may be present in the same programme or project.
Sustainable livelihoods approaches
A conceptual definition of SL approaches (and of their relationship with ANR) is provided in Output 1.1 of Sub-Programme 3.1 (Baumann, 2002). In this report, reference is made to "sustainable livelihood approaches" (SLA), rather than to a single SL approach. This is because although the theoretical foundations of SLA have a common root, their operationalization results in a bundle of similar but different approaches (e.g., with different SL frameworks, with emphasis on different elements of SLA, etc.).
Pure SLA projects (i.e., projects explicitly designed, implemented and evaluated on the basis of SL analysis, taking into account the vulnerability context, addressing access to the five capitals of the asset pentagon, exploring macro-micro links, etc.) are extremely rare. On the other hand, a large number of projects has adopted, explicitly or implicitly, to a differing degree, SL analysis, concepts and tools. Moreover, as SLA build on and systematize pre-existing concepts and practices, numerous organizations and activities make use of similar approaches without referring to SLA. This report includes not only organizations and activities explicitly employing SLA, but also those that have "implicitly" used SLA principles and tools. Moreover, it includes activities where SLA have been used at any stage of the project cycle (diagnostic analysis, project design, project implementation/reorientation, monitoring and evaluation, etc.).
In this regard, conceptual difficulties arose while writing this report, particularly in relation to:
The relationship between SLA and ANR. While SLA entails a holistic, multi-sectoral approach, this report is to focus on ANR activities (i.e., activities relating to one of the five capital assets). This tension is partly eased by the fact that recent SLA literature accepts that SLA projects may have a "sectoral anchor" (e.g., Ashley and Carney, 1999).
The extent to which an SLA may be said to be "implicitly" employed by an organization. If a narrow interpretation is followed, the inventory would be limited to actors and activities adopting a DfID-type SL framework (i.e. mainly to the Anglophone world), thereby unduly restricting the scope of any actions that Sub-programme 3.1 may decide to take on the basis of this inventory. On the other hand, if too broad an interpretation is adopted, most ANR projects may be considered as implicitly SLA, as they usually involve also training (human capital), credit provision (financial capital), institutional support (social capital), etc.
In order to address these conceptual problems, some key characteristics of SLA need to be identified, so as to determine the scope of this report. Namely, this inventory includes organizations and activities characterized by the following elements (even if no SL framework is adopted and no reference is made to SLA):
People-centred approach, focusing on what matters to people and on existing livelihood strategies (thus building on strengths and opportunities rather than satisfying needs);
Participatory and holistic analysis of livelihood strategies (including e.g. access to capital assets, and considered in their dynamic nature), of the vulnerability context (defined as encompassing shocks, trends and seasonality), and of priority areas (which may result in "sectoral anchors" such as ANR);
Multi-level approach, considering the links between micro, meso and macro levels (considering how micro-level activities may feed into macro-level policies, institutions and processes, and how macro-level policies, institutions and processes affect livelihood strategies at local level);
Emphasizing partnership between different actors;
Recognition of the importance of sustainability, defined in the four dimensions of economic, institutional, social and environmental sustainability.
This report is based on research work undertaken in Rome (FAO Headquarters) and in London. The information included in this report was obtained from the Internet, from interviews and e-mail exchanges with key actors within FAO and other organizations (a complete list is included in Appendix 2), and from papers and project documents. Unfortunately, due to time constraints (one-month assignment) and to the period of the year in which the work was undertaken (when many persons were on leave), many important stakeholders could not be reached. The research did not involve any field work on evaluation of the projects and programmes described.
The author wishes to acknowledge and express gratitude for the excellent cooperation and support received from FAO staff and from many external stakeholders contacted.
The report is organized in two parts and in a conclusion. Part 1 "identifies FAO's current and future activities related to ANR and its relevant actors". Due to the breadth of the subject, the report contains a brief overview of FAO's ANR activities by department, with particular regard to those that are most relevant for SLA, and focuses on some case studies.
Part 2 "identifies other relevant organizations and their current and future activities where a SLA approach to ANR has been explicitly or implicitly used, and their relevant actors". This part is organized in the form of an inventory of relevant organizations, briefly describing the nature of the organization, its relationship with SL approaches, examples of ANR activities, its links with other organizations, and providing contact details.
A conclusion "identifies the strengths that Sub-programme 3.1 can build on and the gaps to be filled", and "makes recommendations for the development of strategic partnerships within FAO and between FAO and external stakeholders". An analysis of the roles and responsibilities of, and linkages between, identified stakeholders is dealt with in parts 1 and 2, in relation to each stakeholder.
