quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Elaborate. What else is needed besides money to help people regain their livelihoods? Keep in mind that money rebuilds houses, pays for support staff and anything else you can think of.
|
Of course money buys those things. But it doesn't necessarily help people to build and strengthen their capacity, and therefore contribute to sustainable solutions relevant to their way of life.
Throwing money at people who didn't have the wherewithall to know how, or even be able, to use it in the first place can be a futile endeavor. You have to think about the people most adversely affected by disasters - who are often the poor, the elderly, women, children, the landless, the titleless...those with unequal access to resources and power.
Here is a definition of sustainable livelihoods:
"Livelihood is defined as adequate stocks and flows of food and cash to meet basic needs. Security refers to secure ownership of, or access to, resources and income-earning activities, including reserves and assets to offset risk, ease shocks and meet contingencies. Sustainable refers to the maintenance or enhancement of resource productivity on a long-term basis. A household may be enable to gain sustainable livelihood security in many ways - through ownership of land, livestock or trees; rights to grazing, fishing, hunting or gathering; through stable employment with adequate remuneration; or through varied repertoires of activities."
Considering the influence of political ideologies and economic systems on vulnerable people even before a disaster, do you really believe that there is fair and equitable distribution of money and resources after a disaster?
Often times, money that is dispersed to people in need after disasters comes in the form of loans, which they usually can't pay back, and therefore puts them further into debt and despair. It's all well and good that charitable organizations are going in there with money and resources to help clean up, and provide food and water and other basic necessities in the immediate time, but what happens after that? Is someone sticking around to help the poor coastal farmer or fisherman acquire ownership of land - that he most likely didn't have in the first place - and rights to employment, etc.? Money alone does not solve those problems. Unless you were already "rich" or "powerful" to begin with.
Last edited by Silky Johnson on Mar-20-2011 at 14:26
|