Sustainable Income

Outcome

% of target population that gained access to environmentally and economically sustainable sources of income

This indicator measures the extent to which the target population has gained access to environmentally and economically sustainable sources of income as a result of the intervention. It is used to track progress in enabling people to engage in new or improved income opportunities (“green” and other sustainable livelihoods) that are viable over time and do not cause harm to the local environment.

Determine the indicator value by using the following methodology:

 

1) Define what you mean by “gained access to income”. This guidance defines it as gaining a new or additional, longer-term source of income that reaches a minimum value (to be set by you depending on the context of your intervention).

 

2) Prepare a clear, easy-to-use checklist (yes/no) that can be used to evaluate the economic and environmental sustainability of each additional source of income. Consider using the four criteria listed below that represent the minimum sustainability threshold. A person passes the threshold if the answer is “yes” to the two economic criteria and “no” to the two environmental criteria.

Economic Sustainability

  - Increased income: Has the new income generating activity increased the respondent’s average monthly income by at least [specify the % - e.g. 10% or 20%]?

  - Income stability: Did the respondent have such an increased income at least 3 times in the past [specify the number of months – e.g. 5 or 6 months]?

Environmental Sustainability

  - Resource Use: Does the income generating activity rely on using natural resources in a way that cannot be sustained in the long-term? (e.g. deforestation, water exhaustion)

  - Environmental Impact: Does the activity cause / is likely to cause harm to the environment? (e.g. pollution or land degradation)

 

3) Use review of existing records or conduct a survey among a representative sample of the target population to assess how many of them gained additional source of income which passes the minimum sustainability threshold. A person passes the threshold if the answer is “yes” to the two economic criteria and “no” to the two environmental criteria.

  

4) To determine the indicator value in percentages, divide the number of respondents who gained additional source of income that meets the minimum sustainability threshold by the total number of surveyed respondents. Multiply the result by 100 to convert it to a percentage.

The data can be disaggregated by the respondent’s gender and type of supported livelihoods activities.

1) Keep the criteria practical and locally relevant. Use the 4 core questions; only add more if they are easy to measure.

  -

2) The environmental criteria are intended as basic risk-screening questions, not as a full environmental impact assessment. Responses should be based on reasonable judgement and available information.

 

3) Provide sufficient training for data collection / analysis staff on how to apply the sustainability checklist consistently.

 

4) Keep in mind that it is common that some income generating activities are not economically sustainable. In some cases, unfortunately, they also are not environmentally sustainable. Therefore, when setting the target for this indicator, be realistic. If your results indicate that 100% of the target population have gained a sustainable source of income, it may suggest that the data collection or analysis process was overly optimistic.

 

5) The indicator is one of DG ECHO’s Key Outcome Indicators.

 

6) To make the measurements manageable, the methodology focuses only on whether the new income-generating activity meets a minimum sustainability threshold - i.e. it does not cover all dimensions of economic and environmental sustainability. If your project is not funded by ECHO (and you are therefore not required to use its wording), consider reformulating the indicator as: “Number or % of [specify target group] that gained an additional source of income that meets a minimum sustainability threshold.” The underlying methodology and interpretation remain the same, but this wording better reflects what such measurements can realistically cover.