Asset Publisher

Livelihood productive assets/infrastructures (specify) "restored to, improved from, built" [if necessary, specify the reference period for comparison "pre disaster level, baseline level"]

Livelihood productive assets/infrastructures (specify) < restored to, improved from, built > [if necessary, specify the reference period for comparison < pre disaster level, baseline level > ]

Code: KOI-2-2
Result Level:
  • Outcome
Objectives:
  • Ownership and access to productive assets
  • Disaster Risk Reduction and Natural Resources Management
Description:

Change in number and/or quality of livelihood productive assets/infrastructures.

Increased number, improvement or preservation of livelihood assets and infrastructures indicates increase in food security, economic security and resilience. This indicator is aligned with the two previous indicators, but is focused on infrastructures and productive assets, that at the same time support the production capacity of households/communities/productive associations.

  • It includes all kind of livelihood physical/natural assets recovery activities (e.g. productive land, forestry area, river basin, transformation infrastructures)
  • It includes group and individual IGA (income generation activities) infrastructures recovery or improvement.
  • It includes agriculture, livestock, pisciculture, aquaculture, apiculture, etc., infrastructure support (for their recovery or improvement).
  • It includes household/community/productive association creation or reconstruction of productive infrastructures.

At community level we need to specify the type of community/group and to indicate the inclusion/access of all members of these groups to the common assets.

This indicator also include the "build back better" approach, which not just recover what households/productive groups had before the crisis/shock, but also improve their assets/infrastructures to make them more resilient and sustainable.

Disaggregated By:
  • Geography/Livelihood zone;
  • Wealth groups; Livelihood group (e.g. pastoralist, farmers, traders);
  • Period to achieve the objective;
Direction of change:
  • Remain stable or increase
Data source:

Both secondary and primary data collection can be used according to context.

  • Baseline/Endline. If multiyear programme consider also a mid-term evaluation.
  • Secondary data. Reliable/relevant sources from other actors, clusters or government (e.g. assessment information, reference to a normal situation).

Unit of Measurement: Depending on the livelihood infrastructure/asset (e.g. forest ha, coastline metre-kilometre, number of water sources)

Data Collection methods:

  • Secondary data analysis;
  • Livelihood infrastructure recovery measure;
  • Household surveys and focus group discussions;
  • Key informant interviews.
Sector/Subsector:
  • Livelihoods and Natural Resources Protection
  • Income Generation Activities and Employment
  • Primary production
Source:
Examples:

At the end of the project X ha of agricultural land in Mahama sector restored to pre disaster level. X km of irrigation channels in rural area of Kirehe district restored and improved from base-line level. X cooperative warehouses built in Kihere district at the end of the project

Measure Notes: