World Food Policy
or less sophisticated methodologies.
The central problem lies elsewhere, in
the form of variables, the evolution of
which must be monitored in order to
identify if there is a resilience trajec-
tory or not. As such, it seems relevant
to take a local stakes-based approach
that takes into account the diversity
of local situations and communities.
It involves identifying and monitoring
over time what, locally, is the main is-
sue (or the small number of issues) to
buffer from shocks and which should
be recovered, as a priority, following a
shock. These local stakes will, as a re-
sult, determine perceptions and guide
practices in front of adversity (Lallau
and Droy 2014).
Resilience Horizons
T
his raises another major issue:
how do you define a resilient Sa-
helian household? This presents
us with two problems. The first relates to
the choice of a timeframe for observing
“stake variables”. The second relates to
the fact that risks are renewed and com-
bined, shocks of different kinds are suc-
cessive and cumulative, and the threat
continues and influences practices after
the shock itself; this is precisely what
characterizes poverty: the scale and
persistence of adversity experienced.
This often prevents the identification of
straightforward “event/response” type
mechanisms, except perhaps in cases of
rare extreme events. This makes it es-
sential to address resilience in terms of
trajectories.
However, these trajectories
must not be perceived as linear. On
the contrary, this raises the question
of discontinuities and the thresholds
below or above which the nature of
practices and processes would change.
Once again, resilience adapts well to
standard humanitarian frameworks,
since two thresholds might make sense
here: a destitution or survival thresh-
old and a resilience threshold, close
to the livelihood protection threshold
used by HEA assessors. Below the first
threshold, the household is trapped
in a survival situation, and the stake
variables are at crisis level. The second
threshold corresponds to the situation
on the basis of which the household
can start building an autonomous mo-
mentum to improve its living condi-
tions and its capabilities, and which
is not compromised by the least un-
certainty. It manifests itself through
levels judged to be satisfactory con-
sidering what matters locally. Between
these two thresholds, there is a pre-
vailing form of resistance, dominat-
ed by levels judged dissatisfactory of
stake variables, and by defensive live-
lihoods practices. Thinking in terms
of thresholds allows aid to be directed,
by highlighting the levers that enable
households to cross them, by statisti-
cally revealing resilience factors and
vulnerability factors. The threshold
analysis therefore has two levels. The
first is static and requires us to distin-
guish between two threshold values
for each identified stake. The second
is dynamic and involves studying how
its values are combined and how they
move, or do not move, from one state
to another.
134