 Rapid generation of information on impacts on specific groups  Complement to quantitative exercises that were underway  Initially conceived as one-off exercises (then changed)  Originally intended to provide info ahead of G-20 (now responding to demand from regions)

 Diversity in timing, frequency, scope, scale and cost($5,000- $40,000 per round) ‏  Diversity in internal and external partners  Diversity in funding arrangements  Diversity in audience

 Focus group discussions & in-depth interviews  Participatory techniques  Local research partners  Emphasis on rapid results, not polished product  Returning to same/similar groups  Findings illustrative & indicative, not representative  As such, most useful when supplemented with other data

Paid workUnpaid work Who is doing more (and what)? Who is doing less (and what)?

EVIDENCE OF RESILIENCE  Return to education/training  Living off savings  Adapting business strategies  Expansion of income generating activities  Constrain consumption of luxuries  Extending working hours EVIDENCE OF VULNERABILITY  Cutting back basic consumption  Sale of assets  Accumulation of unserviceable debt  School dropouts and child labour  Forgoing health care  Some shifts into high-risk income generating activities  Forgoing health expenditures

FIRST ROUND IMPACTSSECOND ROUND IMPACTS

Some have been so severely affected that participation in recovery will be difficult Livelihoods are undermined and asset bases diminished by: Sales of land, livestock and housing Accumulation of unsustainable debt Foregone investments in human capital (nutritional intake and health seeking behaviour) Sell all cashmere at low price Diminished purchasing power of income from cashmere and meat Non-crisis shocks – seasonal price change, school fees More animals sold, asset base reduced

BOTH FALLING PRICES…… AND RISING PRICES

 often the only provider of assistance in the face of severe deprivation  many, many examples: loans, gifts, funeral groups, faith-based groups, phone-pooling, taxi-pooling, communal cooking, security, job search etc etc  Very little evidence of outreach of formal social assistance

 Crime and violence: high levels of brutality in some places  Stress and tension in the household  Tension between groups  Drugs and alcohol  Delinquency and gang activity, frustration among the youth

 Tailoring to country contexts vs standardised methodology  Findings date quickly – repeated rounds analytically easier with certain techniques  Hands-on management generally needed for quality control  Benefits of working alongside quantitative data collection  Focus on crisis may miss the point in some countries – purposive sampling may overstate impacts