Jejak Online

Newsletter LEAD Cohort 9

Sustainable Livelihood: Dream or Reality?

Nosi Lestariwati, The Club Store, Jakarta

"You cannot do (start to do) anything without doing everything." This remark caught my attention while following a lecture on Sustainable Livelihood by Elizabeth Carriere from the Department for International Development (DFID) during the last National Training Session in May. We were exploring the Sustainable livelihoods framework which has six principles: people centered, holistic, dynamic, building on strength, micro-macro links, and sustainability. As this framework presents the main factors that affect people's livelihood and the relationships between them, I can see why the above phrase can lead to some confusion or to a certain extent, frustation.

Just for a while imagine yourself as a palm coconut farmer in Pandeglang, West Java. You are a skilled farmer & produce good harvest but the road to the market is bad and policies made by Cooperatives of the farmers have benefited the market more than the farmers. Eventually with low market prices and high cost of transportation, the farmers end up with low margins and fail to improve their livelihood - or lets just say quality of life. I mean which human being would not desire to live in a house with tile floor, have access to clean water, buy sufficient food and clothing for their children and watch a little bit of television?

From the holistic and micro-macro link principle of this framework, in order to improve the farmer's livelihood you also have to build better roads and correct policies made by the corrupted Cooperative's management. Maybe that is not all because one day there might be natural disasters like pest attack or disease or a sudden volcanic eruption and economical barier like the increasing price of fertilizers. What is the point of asking "So where do we start?" when we have to do everything. Or better yet when we are assured (by other people) that every possible factor is being done, the question arise, "Then why is nothing happening while we are already doing everything?"

What do we see, what do we know from the books or newspapers that we read or from what we see on television and what do we hear on the radio everyday? I read that fifteen companies in Jakarta have formally announced their willingness to join in a program to prevent air pollution, then there is the Blue Sky Program initiated by the governor of DKI Jakarta, Vice President Megawati campaigned for a cleaner Ciliwung river with the Minister of Setllement and Regional Infrastructure, and so on and so forth. Everyday I watch mothers teach their children to throw garbage in the dust bin, many houses use energy saving light bulbs, but on the other hand rivers are constantly polluted, more trees are cut down and the air in Jakarta gets heavier day to day (I notice a big difference when I breath in Jakarta and in a small hideaway in Bogor). In an international level, even USA has turned down the Kyoto Protocol to preserve the environment in favor of economical reason. Does this mean we are back to square one?

Till some time later I read an article in Kompas daily, Emil Salim, a professor & doctor in economics who was formerly the Minister of Environment in Soeharto's New Era, mentioned that the issue of sustainable development which considers the balance of economical, social-political and environmental aspect in development has failed to be implemented in Indonesia since huge emphasis is given to economical aspect alone. To overcome this situation, environmental issues must be handled directly by the president instead of the current scheme where such issues are handled at the ministry level. Apparently a National Body on Sustainable Development has been set up and chaired by the Vice President of Indonesia. From a political point of view this is a promising step which is expected to have a positive impact and achieve more balance of economical, social-political and environmental factors.

The above idea started to shed a light in my dark tunnel and I can understand in a more emotional or convincing manner the Sustainable Livelihood framework. The Micro-Macro Link should take place so that whatever society is doing to support the environment is backed up by government regulation (but sometimes goes the other way around). People should be the focus of change because people make the policies, use the land etc, and from a holistic term every component of a nation should come together and play the role they are supposed to play or in other words 'be functional' (does this exist?). To go forward in securing sustainable development, people like Emil Salim, government agencies and legal organizations need to struggle in political and economical aspect, the business sector need to struggle in technical aspects while social institutions (families, schools, community organizations, etc) struggle for educational and social aspects.

When all of this has been done and what happens around us does not support sustainable development then it is the 'moral' aspect which should be questioned and paid attention to. A lack of will, a lack of interest to secure a beter future and uncaring attitude needs the attention of all educators, both in the formal sector and informal sector. As Elizabeth Carriere pointed out that we should 'be smarter' in using this sustainable livelihood framework, and look for other unidentified shocks or trends or stressors which hamper the attainment of the desired livelihood outcomes.