1. Livelihoods analysis, aquaculture and irrigation in India Cecile Brugere, John Lingard Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Food Marketing University of Newcastle Department for International Development

2. Structure Economics & Livelihoods: hypothesis, Sustainable Livelihoods Framework Vulnerability, assets, access, strategies Poverty-focused aquaculture and potential beneficiaries Aquaculture costs, resource allocation, and comparison with other income generating activities Livelihood benefits Constraints, Policy implications

3. Economics & Livelihoods: hypothesis Varying gradients of water availability  Poverty and livelihood strategies adopted  Potential for aquaculture interventions 2 canals - LBP (120 miles) - Arrakankottai (40 miles) 6 villages Head - Middle - Tail

4. Sustainable livelihoods framework - SHOCKS - TRENDS - SEASONALITY VULNERABILITY CONTEXT POLICIES, INSTITUTIONS AND PROCESSES STRUCTURES Levels of government Laws Private Policies sectorCulture Institutions PROCESSES - More income - Increased well-being - Reduced vulnerability - Improved food security - More sustainable use of natural resources LIVELIHOOD OUTCOMES LIVELIHOOD ASSETS LIVELIHOOD STRATEGIES Influence & Access Key H = Human capitalS = Social capital N = Natural capitalP = Physical capital F = Financial capital TO

5. Methodology of investigation VULNERABILITY CONTEXT Participatory appraisal (qualitative) ? Secondary data analysis (qualitative) POLICIES, INSTITUTIONS AND PROCESSES LIVELIHOOD OUTCOMES Risk UNCERTAINTY Additions: Risk / uncertainty - Gender Gender analysis - MARKETINGMARKETING Marketing issues Livelihoods analysis (quantitative) H N P F S LIVELIHOOD ASSETS Influence & Access LIVELIHOOD STRATEGIES 30 questionnaires per village (H,M,T) 3 wealth groups (R,M,P)

6. Vulnerability context SHOCKS natural: agricultural: economic: TRENDS agricultural: economic: physical: social: CANAL WATER AVAILABILITY SEASONS (WET/DRY) RELIGIOUS “SEASONS” droughts, floods crop failures changed prices intensification, mechanisation improved infrastructures non-farm employment, improved welfare erosion of community values

7. Livelihood assets (1) education HH residentselectricity cattle ownershipland ownership Human capital Natural capitalFinancial capital Social capital Physical capital

8. Livelihood assets (2) Human capital 1 (for IGAs) - workers - education Natural capital - land - water Financial capital - savings - credit (bank loan) - cattle / goats Human capital 2 (for HH wellbeing) - food expenditure - non-food expenditure - fish consumption Physical capital - house - privately owned water sources

9. Livelihood assets (2)

10. Pentagons

11. Access Highlight that the notions of “assets” and “access” are very close when it comes to measuring them. Focus on access to water sources and water uses: present summary stats

12. Livelihood strategies Long-term, short term, weakening (long-term) trends.

13. Livelihood strategies Classification - “type 75” Principally crop Crop income  75% Principally non-farm (wage / self-empl.) Non-farm income  75% (wage / self- employment) Principally off-farm (agricultural labour) Off-farm income  75% Farm / non-farm employment Crops + non-farm  75 %, crop  75% but > off-farm and non-farm  75% but > off-farm. Farm / off-farm employment Off-farm + crops  75%, off-farm  75% but > non-farm and crops  75% but > non-farm. Non-farm / off-farm employment Non-farm + off-farm  75%, non-farm  75% but > crops and off-farm  75% but > crops Mixed (type 75 only):  2 main activities  75% Mix

14. Livelihood strategies, poverty & vulnerability

15. Summary livelihoods in the irrigation system more landless more agricultural labourers more poverty more cattle, larger land more physical capital more farming more wage empl. more rich landowners higher education more natural capital

16. Poverty-focused aquaculture Definition: small-scale extensive / semi-intensive affordable low risk Access Availability of: - water (reliability) - fish seed - cheap, durable materials - fish food Market demand Cages in canals H  T  Cage rearing of fingerlings in flowing water H  T  H  T  Cage fattening fish in seepage zones Stocking open wells H  T  Potential interventions:

17. Aquaculture interventions - done by DL???

18. Beneficiaries Potential conflicts

19. Aquaculture in canals: Costs (1) Aquaculture trials: - Food conversion ratio - Start weight (tilapia) - Survival rate - Labour: men / women / both - Cycle length Sensitivity analysis:

20. Aquaculture in canals: Costs (2) Main results of sensitivity analysis What the best options are

21. Farming - labour - capital - land - water - seasons Cage aquaculture - labour - capital - cycles Competition for resources Versus Optimal allocation Linear programming

22. Farming Vs Aquaculture: LP matrix To redo with Lindsay’s cage aqua data

23. Farming vs Aquaculture: Results To redo

24. Alternative income generating activities Summary of main IGAs encountered in the area of study. How does aquaculture potentially compare with these (based on a ‘qualitative’ comparison of initial investment, training, time required, flexibility, returns)

25. Livelihood benefits Summarise main points raised before (target groups, types of aqua Potential livelihood benefits (provided aqua is done in a certain way): - increased income - improved status for women - show how one “entry point” (I.e. aquaculture) can have an effect on all other corners of the pentagon)

26. Constraints - Policy implications Aquaculture: yes… but … profitability? … shift in resource allocation … possible with strengthening of credit provision, in particular to women (“self-help groups”) aquaculture awareness & knowledge transmitted to resource-poor groups modified canal water management to target tail end of the irrigation system