Toward a theory of resilience for international development applications: With some reflections on practical implications

Christopher B. Barrett Cornell University

Presentation at the International Livestock Research Institute

July 4, 2014

Toward A Theory of Resilience for International Development

Applications: With Some Reflections on Practical

Implications

Motivation

“Resilience” has rapidly become a ubiquitous buzzword, but ill-defined concept within the

development and humanitarian communities

Why development and humanitarian communities’ current fascination with “resilience”? 1) Risk perceived increasing in both frequency and intensity 2) Recurring crises lay bare the longstanding difficulty of

reconciling humanitarian response to disasters with longer-term development efforts.

3) Increasingly recognize interdependence of biophysical and socioeconomic systems. Tap ecological work on resilience.

But we lack a theory-measurement-and-evidence-based understanding of what resilience is with respect to poverty and hunger, how to measure it, and how to effectively promote

it so as to sustainably reduce chronic poverty/food insecurity.

Motivation

At the same time, much ambivalence (even cynicism) about the ‘rise of resilience’ 1) Seen as too imprecise and malleable a concept/term 2) Not pro-poor as commonly formulated 3) Often ignores issues of agency/power/rights Barrett & Constas (in review) advances a simple theory of resilience with the objective of sharpening thinking, facilitating theory-based, precise measurement and evaluation, and anchoring resilience in broader efforts to reduce poverty and food insecurity.

Motivation

Close parallels to multiple other literatures : • System-focused • About the capacity to absorb, and adapt to, disturbances/

shocks w/o changing state

But must adapt concept to be useful for development: • We care about individual well-being — the system has

instrumental rather than intrinsic importance • Must be pro-poor, and hence explicitly normative • Stability not always good; may instead seek productive

disruption Need to adapt ecological resilience lit using existing tools of development studies/economics concerning the stochastic dynamics of individual and collective human well-being.

Resilience: Need to Adapt

Resilience of whom to what? Subject of interest: quality of life, ~ Sen’s ‘capabilities’. Focus further on minimizing the human experience of chronic poverty. This implies: • focus on individuals’ (and groups’) well-being within a

system, not the state of a system itself. • consider the stochastic dynamics of well-being • do not focus on specific sources of risk b/c problem is

uninsured exposure to many stressors (ex ante risk) and shocks (ex post, adverse realizations) to which resilience implies adaptability while staying/becoming non-poor.

Toward a Theory

Concept of Resilience for Development Development resilience is the capacity over time of a person, household or other aggregate unit to avoid poverty in the face of various stressors and in the wake of myriad shocks. If and only if that capacity is and remains high, then the unit is resilient. Key Elements: focus on stochastic dynamics of (aggregable) individual standards of living Normative implication: prioritize avoidance of and escape from chronic poverty and minimize within the population and over time the experience of low standards of living.

Toward a Theory

Stochastic Well-Being Dynamics Consider the moment function for conditional well-being:

mk(Wt+s | Wt, εt) where mk represents the kth moment (e.g., mean (k=1), variance (k =2) or skewness (k =3) Wt is well-being at time t εt is an exogenous disturbance (scalar or vector) at time t These moment functions describe quite generally, albeit in reduced form, the stochastic conditional dynamics of well-being.

Toward a Theory

Noncontroversially: NPZ >> CPZ >> HEZ Those ∈{CPZ,HEZ} are chronically poor in expectation(m1(W|Wt, εt)<p) The CEF reflects indiv/collective behaviors (agency/power) w/n system

Toward a Theory

Ex: Nonlinear expected well-being dynamics with multiple stable states (m1(Wt+s | Wt, εt) )

T2 T1

Death

Death

Non-poor zone Chronic

poverty zone

p

p

Current Well-being, Wt

Exp

ect

ed F

utu

re W

ell-

bei

ng,

m1

( Wt+

s)

Hu

ma

nit

ari

an

em

erg

ency

zo

ne

For the current non-poor, seek resilience/resistance against shocks in the ecological sense: no shift to either of the lower, less desirable zones. But for the current poor, those in HEZ/CPZ, the objective is productive disruption, to shift states to the NPZ. Asymmetry is therefore a fundamental property of resilience against chronic poverty. Thus stability ≠ resilience.

The development ambition is to move people into the non-poor zone and keep them there. The humanitarian ambition is to keep people from falling into HEZ … offers foundation of a rights-based approach to resilience.

Toward a Theory

T2 T1

Death

Death

Non-poor zone Chronic

poverty zone

p

p

Current Well-being, Wt

Exp

ect

ed F

utu

re W

ell-

bei

ng,

m1

( Wt+

s)

Hu

ma

nit

ari

an

em

erg

ency

zo

ne

Note: Transitory shocks (- or +) can have persistent effects Risk endogenous to system state CTDs reflect both natural and socioeconomic contexts

Explicitly incorporate risk by integrating broader set of moment functions to move from CEF to CTDs:

Toward a Theory

Non-poor zone Chronic

poverty zone

Hu

man

itari

an

em

ergen

cy z

on

e

T2

T1

T2

Futu

re W

ell-

bei

ng,

Wt+

s

Death

Current Well-being, Wt T1

Objective: minimize the duration, intensity and likelihood of people’s experience of poverty Three options: 1) Shift people’s current state – i.e., increase Wt. Ex: transfers

of cash, education, land or other assets.

2) Alter CTDs directly through risk reduction/transfer (∆s system too) – i.e., truncate εt . Ex: social protection - EGS, insurance, improved policing, drought-resistant varieties.

3) Change the underlying system structure (mk(.) – techs/ institutions – induces ∆ in behaviors and CTDs. Prob: multi-scalar reinforcement – ‘fractal poverty traps’

Must explore the feedback within broader system to identify possible intervention points behind univariate dynamics.

Programming implications

The role of social institutions, power, exclusion and solidarity “A tale of two widows”

And would the widower’s dynamic = the widow’s?

Programming implications

Generalize to admit the role of the natural resource state, Rt: mk(Wt+s | Wt, Rt, εt)

And recognize that parallel dynamics exist for the resource:

rmk(Rt+s | Rt,Wt, εt) Now feedback potentially arises between R and W (e.g., range conditions depend on herd size/stocking rate, disease reproduction depends on household incomes) Or at least correlation due to εt (e.g., climate). Then the resilience of the underlying resource base becomes instrumentally important to resilience against chronic poverty.

Feedback between sub-systems can be crucial

Toward Systems Integration

Coupled human and natural systems dynamics

Problem: Many candidate contemporaneous relationships between Rt and Wt (e.g., EKC vs. soil degradation thresholds) make prediction difficult at best.

Toward Systems Integration

Current Resource State, m1(Rt)

Expected Future

Resource State,

m1(Rt+s)

Expected Future Well-Being, m1(Wt+s)

Current Well-Being,

m1(Wt)

?

If agencies program around resilience goals, then we need to be able to measure it and evaluate program/project performance. Should use theory to guide measurement. Key measurement implications of this theory: 1. Qual. work to better understand root relationships. 2. Estimate mk(·) and rmk(·). 3. Use estimated moments to estimate the probability of

poverty in each of a sequence of time periods. 4. Based on a normative assessment of an appropriate

tolerance level for the likelihood of being poor over time, individuals, households, communities, etc. could be classified as resilient or not.

Then do impact evaluation based on such measures.

Toward Measurement and Evaluation

Resilience is a popular buzzword now. But little precision in its use, theoretically, methodologically or empirically. We aim to help facilitate rigorous, precise use of the concept to help identify how best to avoid and escape chronic poverty. This will require advances in theory, systems integration, measurement and empirical work in many different contexts and over time. Much to do in all areas … a massive research agenda, especially as agencies begin using resilience as a programming principle. But we must start with a firm theoretical foundation.

Summary

Thank you for your time, interest and comments!

Thank you