Resilience in Somalia and Opportunities for Measurement Innovation for the Resilience Population-Level Measurement Activity
Which resilience capacities matter the most to Somalia? Learn more in these research briefs from the Resilience Population-Level Measurement Activity.
Image
This study focuses on understanding of the resilience capacities that matter in Somalia, based on the current state of evidence. It also explores learning from previous efforts to measure resilience in Somalia and identification of concrete and discrete opportunities for the Resilience Population-Level Measurement (RPM) Activity to continue building on the evidence base and lessons learned. Some key resilience capacities identified through Somalia’s literature review and synthesis of evidence are as follows:
Capacity 1: Social Connectedness and Networks
Key findings of the literature review point that social connections and social networks played a pivotal role during the 2011 famine for many households, helping them access material resources that were critical to coping throughout and surviving the crisis. Some evidence suggests that social networks may have played a similar role during the 2016/2017 drought, particularly in areas that humanitarian actors were unable to access due to insecurity. Beyond this, social connectedness is reported as an important aspect of psychosocial resilience. Through its social connections, a household is able to leverage key tangible and intangible resources that both meet immediate needs and offset the long-term ramifications of a protracted crisis. For further information, please review RPM’s full-length report on social connectedness and how it benefited households and the experience of 2011 famine where the strengths of the evidence rating for this resilience capacity are high.
Capacity 2: Informal Social Safety Nets
Key findings of the literature review indicate that through informal social safety nets, households often are able to access key life and livelihood saving resources, particularly information. These safety nets can take the form of Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLAs) and other local savings schemes, youth and civic groups, and local committees, such as early warning and drought management committees. The literature review finding rated the strengths of this resilience capacity evidence as medium to high. For further understanding of study reviews and synthesis on informal safety nets, please see the full report of the literature review.
Capacity 3: Access to Services
Key finding of the literature review and synthesis indicate that access to services plays a key role in determining a household’s resilience to shocks, with access largely mediated by location and displacement status. Key services highlighted by the literature and interviews include water and sanitation, veterinary services (particularly in rural areas), health and education. While access emerged as a critical capacity regardless of shock type, it may play an important role in households’ capacity to adapt to shocks that have a significant impact on their livelihood activities. Water services and access to animal health workers were particularly critical to households engaged in agriculture and pastoral activity. The literature review finding rated the strengths of this resilience capacity evidence as medium to high. For further understanding of study reviews and synthesis on access to services, please see the full report of the literature review.
Capacities 4 and 5: Livelihood Adaptations and Income Diversification
In the face of frequent and significant climate shocks, the capacity to adapt one’s livelihood emerged as a key source of resilience within the literature. Several studies point that livelihood adaptation played a significant role among those engaged in pastoral and agro-pastoral livelihoods, which operate on a seasonal calendar and, therefore, are far more climate-vulnerable. The literature review finding rated the strengths of this resilience capacity evidence as medium. For further understanding of study reviews and synthesis on these capacities, please see the full report of the literature review.
Capacity 6: Psychosocial Factors/Subjective Factors
There is a growing recognition of the critical role that psychosocial factors play in households’ capacity to respond and recover from shocks. Aspiration, confidence and optimism were found to be key capacities among positively deviant households. In other instances, certain resilience capacities were a pathway to key psychosocial and well-being outcomes. For example, informal social safety nets, such as VSLAs and women’s groups, provided key spaces for participants to seek out and receive psychosocial support that they reported was crucial to coping. The literature review rated this evidence strength as low, as the literature fails to fully differentiate between psychosocial factors of resilience as a programmatic outcome versus as a capacity for coping.
Visit Mercy Corps to learn more about the Somalia Resilience Population-Level Measurement activity and explore additional resources.