Introduction and Objectives
Sustainable livelihood is a way of thinking about the objectives, scope and priorities for development, in order to enhance progress in poverty elimination. Sustainable livelihoods approaches rest on core principles that stress people-centred, responsive, and multi-level approaches to development. Although sustainable livelihoods approaches are relatively new within DFID, they have already been applied in a variety of ways.
The sustainable livelihoods framework is based on understanding people's access to assets that typically include natural, human, social, physical and financial capital. Other assets are increasingly being used in such analyses, such as information, cultural/traditional and institutional assets. Access to these assets are then analysed in relation to the context of that livelihood (e.g., migration, demography, history and macro-economic conditions), institutional and social processes (e.g., organisational arrangements and land tenure), and the livelihood strategies that are used (combinations of activities people choose to undertake to achieve their livelihood goals). Interventions to reduce poverty can then be based on an improved understanding of the livelihoods they are designed to protect and enhance, and the interacting factors that influence them. Although all capital assets are substitutable in the sustainable livelihoods framework, proponents of “strong sustainability” approaches argue that for a livelihood to be truly sustainable, it must maintain critical levels of natural capital. However, this tends to be overlooked in the sustainable livelihoods framework, which tends to focus on people's access to capital assets and the resulting flow of services they can benefit from, rather than considering the overall stocks of those assets and associated services
Both new and existing development activities have used sustainable livelihoods approaches to focus more clearly on the priorities of the poor. The approaches have been applied flexibly, in contexts ranging from project and programme preparation, to research and sub-sector reform. Improving the livelihoods of local people has received growing attention during last two decades and is one of the main goals of watershed management. The problems of immigrants issues become more complex as livelihoods change over time due to altering external and internal factors. Key ways in which sustainable livelihoods approaches have been used and found useful can be immigrant households’ livelihood. Thus, to examine livelihood changes and to understand livelihood sustainability in response to vulnerability context, livelihood assessment is executed among immgrants. This research aimed to investigate the effect of migration on the sustainable livelihood of Sistanian immigrant households in the rural area of Golestan province.
The research method is a descriptive survey based on a questionnaire. The statistical population consists of 25000 head of households among the 12 counties of Golestan province, that have immigrants from Sistan and Baluchestan province. Using Cochran's formula 250 head of households were selected as samples. Multi-stage cluster sampling method was used to select samples. Validity of the questionnaire was verified based on expert's view and reliability was confirmed based on the calculation of Cronbach's alpha coefficient.
The results of the one sample t-test showed that the natural and financial capital were less than average (inappropriate). The results of Friedman test showed that, the most important livelihood strategies are farming, livestock, horticulture, stockpiling forestry resources and being worker. The results of Friedman's test for assessing vulnerability trends showed that items such coherence and solidarity of households, income-earning job opportunities, numbers of livestock and poultry, income level and household purchasing power were more important in reducing vulnerability. While items such as inflation and high pollution of air and water were more important in increasing vulnerability. The results of one-sample t-test for assessing the immigration impacts showed that the economic, natural, cultural-social and service-welfare impacts of immigration were more than average. These results indicate that immigration has led to changes and improvements in the household's life, and expected positive effects such as improved welfare and access to services and employment have been achieved. The results of Mann-Whitney test for comparing livelihood capitals based on gender, marital status, and type of immigration showed that human and natural capital is significantly different between men and women, and in both cases, women's livelihoods have been higher. Also, the results indicate that single people rated their access to natural capital more than married ones. The results of the comparisons based on type of migration indicate that the human, physical, natural and financial capital of the people who have been permanent migrants is greater than those who have been seasonal migrants.
One of the advantages of the livelihoods approach is that it allows a bridging of divides, enabling different people to work together, particularly across the natural and social sciences. A livelihoods approach to investigate effects of migrations entails taking on board variables linked to themes that often do not appear on the radar of disciplinary scientists.