A flexible approach to livelihoods recovery in the Maldives
The Government of the Republic of the Maldives has collaborated with various United Nations
organisations and Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the World Bank and the Asian Development
Bank on rehabilitation and reconstruction on the islands following the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.
Before the tsunami the Maldives were by no means a poor country and were on the threshold of joining
the group of the world’s middle income countries. However, the economic losses from the tsunami were
severe, damaging or destroying many houses and much of the infrastructure and stopping many livelihood
activities. Although the livelihoods of many people depended on only three types of activity – farming,
fishing, or tourism, other factors such as severe damage to infrastructure and loss of physical assets and
environmental damage (including salination of agricultural land due to inundation by the sea), meant that
rebuilding peoples’ livelihoods would not be easy.
The course the livelihood recovery followed was to use a small cash grant (about US$ 425) together
with replacement of the physical assets that were lost, determined by a thorough needs assessment.
Additionally, cash for work programmes were organised so that people could earn an income until
they could resume their normal livelihood. Additional small grants and seed money was provided and
microfinance projects were organised. Women’s livelihoods were prioritised and additional livelihood
opportunities, for example in waste management were identified. Community-based organisations were
recognised as important actors in supporting peoples’ livelihood activities and training for CBOs was
organised. CBOs arise out of the voluntary and self-help support usually found on the Maldives and these
were encouraged.
This approach is illustrated in the fishing sector where, rather than just donating boats for fishing, CBOs
were trained in their construction. This strengthened the linkages between boat building and fishing, so
that both sources of livelihood could be made more sustainable. Some people were assisted to resume
home-based processing enterprises such as in fish drying. The recovery of the fisheries sector was further
assisted by the repair and reconstruction of infrastructure such as jetties, harbours, breakwaters and sea
walls; as well as navigational aids and rescue services.
For more information see: Government of Maldives and others (2005)
aims to show the transition between these three
approaches, and that more than one type of
intervention might operate at the same time.
Further information on cash payments
This issue has been studied extensively by the
Overseas Development Institute (ODI) and they
have a resource library on ‘Cash and Vouchers
in Emergencies’ (see: http://www.odi.org.uk/
resources/libraries/details.asp?id=2&title=cash-
vouchers-emergencies). Within these, Adams
(2007) provides a useful starting point for further
information and case studies.
Acknowledgements
The Toolkit on PCR has been developed through
institutional collaboration between Practical Action
and the International Federation of Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies. The collaborators
are particularly thankful to Otto Ruskulis, who
produced an early draft of this tool, and to Lucy
Stevens for their contributions and comments.
Resources
1. Adams and Harvey (2006) ‘Analysing Markets’ in
Learning from Cash Responses to the Tsunami,
Issue Paper 1, Overseas Development Institute,
London, UK. http://www.odi.org.uk/HPG/papers/
cashissue1.pdf
2. Adams (2007) Learning from Cash Responses
to the Tsunami: Final Report, Humanitarian
Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute,
London, UK, http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/
download/3768.pdf
3. Albu, M (2010) The Emergency Market Mapping
and Analysis Toolkit, Practical Action Publishing,
Rugby, UK. Also see: http://practicalaction.org/
emma-toolkit and http://emma-toolkit.info/
4. ALNAP / ProVention Consortium (not
dated) Responding to Earthquakes 2008,
Learning from earthquake relief and recovery
operations, http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/
ALNAPLessonsEarthquakes.pdf
5. Benson, C (2007) ‘Guidance Note No. 10,
Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches’, in Benson,
C and Twigg, J, Tools for Mainstreaming Disaster
Risk Reduction: Guidance Notes for Development
Organisations ProVention Consortium, Geneva,
pp. 117-127, http://www.proventionconsortium.
org/themes/default/pdfs/tools_for_mainstreaming_
GN10.pdf
11