Development, widely considered a solution to long-term population displacement, can paradoxically create more displacement. This chapter explores this paradox through the lens of evaluation studies. Early evaluation studies identified a gap between country laws, which positioned development displacement and resettlement as a subset of property and expropriation laws, and international policy, which centralized livelihood measures, living standards, and outcomes for people affected. The chapter explores the international policy conceptualization of livelihoods as embedded in a sociocultural context, requiring strategies to recreate livelihoods, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and their results in terms of livelihood outcomes. It compares international policy perspective and evaluation outcomes with selected evolving Asian country safeguard systems, to examine the extent to which livelihoods are addressed and evaluated. The gap between international and national standards is narrowing, but livelihood measures form the weakest point in many laws concerning land takings. Differences in time frames, focus, mandates, and resources in project preparation and implementation reflect these divergent objectives. Methods for assessing livelihood risk, planning livelihood support, and for M&E of livelihood outcomes, are rare in country frameworks. Some approaches that may provide a way forward in building the knowledge base on livelihood success and sustainability through evaluation at the country level are presented.
|Title of host publication||Evaluation for Agenda 2030: Providing Evidence on Progress and Sustainability|
|Editors||R van den Berg, I Naidoo & S Tamondong|
|Place of Publication||Exeter|
|Publisher||International Development Evaluation Association (IDEAS)|
|Publication status||Published - 2017|