Document Actions
Case study: Assessing the impact on livelihoods of a rural development programme, Tigray, Ethiopia
In this inquiry, HEA was also used to offer strategic direction to the program, indicating the potential profit for poorer people from project outcomes other than food production, particularly through livestock and timber activities.
In 2001, an HEA assessment was carried out on behalf of Oxfam-Canada and REST in the Ruba Lomine project area of Tigray, Ethiopia. One of the aims of the assessment was to develop tools for monitoring the change in household income and food access as a result of the program. Project impact had usually been reported in terms of the distribution of inputs such as vegetable seeds and tools. The missing element was the impact of these inputs on household food security.
| Assessing the impact on Livelihoods of vegetable gardens |
| How much was produced in a good and bad year? |
| How much was eaten and how much sold? |
| What were the labor requirements? |
| What other activities suffer because of the garden work? |
| How much was earned on the average per week? |
| how much is this relative to the family’s normal annual income? |
| Are there limits to the demand in the markets where vegetables are sold? |
The HEA study focused on how the impact of three project outputs could be monitored: vegetable gardens, tree sales and fodder development. A ‘toolbox’ of monitoring tools was compiled for each. Some of the questions that could be asked to monitor the impact on livelihoods of vegetable gardens, for example, are shown in the box.
A key factor enabling this monitoring was a baseline household economy survey conducted in 1999. This provided the baseline data against which changes in income, expenditure and labor requirements could be measured. The analysis enabled change to be interpreted in the context of the household economy as a whole, based on a typical annual income or typical seasonal expenditure. For example, an increase in income of 40 birr represented a 2% increase for labor-rich households, but a 10% increase for a labor-poor, female-headed household. It was less significant if converted into food equivalents, as it represented only about two to three weeks’ food for the whole family. The impact on food security was small. The analysis showed that, nevertheless, 40 birr/year would have important social impacts if used to send an additional child to school.
