Revisiting Sustainable Livelihoods: Insights from Implementation Studies in India

Abstract

Amongst public policies for poverty reduction there has been a renewed thrust on enhancing rural livelihoods in recent times. This article situates current mission based livelihood programmes in India within the larger context of livelihoods discourse in the last two decades in development studies. This article revisits the literature on livelihoods and the Sustainable Livelihood Approach (SLA). A critical review of SLA suggests a welcome focus in public policies on perspectives and institutions of the poor. However, operationalizing, implementing and evaluating SLAs present several challenges. A review of implementation of livelihood schemes in India is presented with suggestions for a dialogue between SLA frameworks and implementation studies literature in public policies. India presents an interesting opportunity for academics to shift the discourse from poverty and employment as key themes to an engagement on livelihoods as a frame that hitherto has largely remained a practitioner led discourse.

Assessing the impact of policies in sustaining rural small, medium and micro enterprises during COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa

“…In motivating further research in policy implementation processes, Bhuyan, Jorgensen and Sharma (2010) pointed to three reasons why the policy implementation process matters: it promotes accountability, enhances effectiveness and fosters equity and quality. Patnaik and Shambu (2014) agree with this view while stating:…”

Does multifaceted livelihood intervention improve well‐being: Reflections on a case study from North‐eastern India

“…In India, there are three major regimes that envisaged similar approach. In the 1980s, Integrated Rural Development Program (IRDP) was launched with the institution of ‘acquisition of productive assets and appropriate skills’ for strengthening entrepreneurship (Patnaik & Prasad, 2014). In 1999, the model got restructured as Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) to transit to a broader ambit for covering all aspects of livelihoods (Patnaik & Prasad, 2014).…”

“…In the 1980s, Integrated Rural Development Program (IRDP) was launched with the institution of ‘acquisition of productive assets and appropriate skills’ for strengthening entrepreneurship (Patnaik & Prasad, 2014). In 1999, the model got restructured as Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) to transit to a broader ambit for covering all aspects of livelihoods (Patnaik & Prasad, 2014). However, this regime faced challenges of low participation, poor targeting and selection of non‐viable activities (GoI, 2001).…”

Interventions for sustainable livelihoods: a review of evidence and knowledge gaps

“…Livelihoods goes beyond looking rural people as farmers or fisherfolks; and incorporate a broad understanding of rural activities functional in several domains. Various kinds of interventions such as food security (Clay, 1986), social security (Devereux, 2016), facilitating credit markets (Patnaik and Prasad, 2014), local institutional support (Joshi and Rao, 2017), promoting participatory forest activities (Islam and Sato, 2012) and strategizing for sustainable tourism (Tao and Wall, 2009) are utilised to address issues of sustainable livelihoods. A wide range of mechanisms are adapted to increase livelihood choices.…”