Grassroots' Vol.'1'Ed.'1' development intervention, which, instead of seeing poverty eradication as a goal with obstacles to overcome, sees rights empowerment as the fulfillment of a potential that already exists within diverse communities (Nyamu-Musembi, 2005). The potential of the Actor-Oriented approach in development application is shown by an example given, where a group of women’s rights activists from various Islamic backgrounds have created an interactive and interpretative “Manual for Women’s Rights Education in Muslim Societies” (NyamuMusembi, 2005, p. 45), which interweaves excerpts from international human rights agreements with verses from the Qu’ran, sharia’a rules, stories, idioms and personal experiences. This manual, actor-oriented as it is, has been more effective in educating and empowering women than the relatively paternalistic application of foreign norms and expectations. It also reveals the “complexities of using rights in practice, (while holding) greater possibilities for leading to positive change” (Nyamu-Musembi, 2005, p. 45). Norman Long, also a recognized authority on the Actor-Oriented approach, considers the yet a different perspective, emphasizing “the central significance of ‘human agency’ and selforganizing processes” (Long, 2003, p. 47) on the development process.Notably, Norman opposes the ‘linear and logical’ order of traditional development project cycles (Long, 2003, p. 51), positing instead that a crucial feature of the post-impasse development theory should be to recognize intervention for what it fundamentally is; “an ongoing, socially constructed and negotiated process, not simply the execution of an already-specified plan or framework for action with expected outcomes” (Long, 2003, p. 52). This break from traditional determinism and reductionism hails from Long’s understanding of social life as being “heterogeneous and polymorphic” (Long, 2003, p. 49), entailing that any social or development
19
action must be context-specific and contextually generated (Long, 2003). As such, the aim of the Actor-Oriented approach is then to facilitate a social interface in which an appreciation for the different provisional, partial and contextual knowledge of the actors involved leads to a methodological and ethnographical mapping of cultural differences, power, authority, interrelationships and opportunities for individuals (Long, 2003). As Long concedes, it is indeed the day-to-day decisions, routines and strategies devised for coping with uncertainties, conflicts and differences that make or break development policy (Long, 2003). Thus, until the field recognizes this reality, it will not move beyond the impasse. Sustainable Livelihoods Approach The Sustainable Livelihoods approach originated from Amyarta’s Sen’s works on “famine analysis and asset vulnerability analysis” (Ellis & Biggs, 2001, p. 445) in the context of livelihoods failing to weather social, political, and economic shocks. The approach focuses on the analysis of assets in the form of human, natural, physical, social and financial capital, and their capacity to be built upon to increase the sustainability of a livelihood (Scoones, 1998). A livelihood in this case, “comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living” (Scoones, 1998, p. 4) and is largely dependent on the context; the factors, stresses and shocks in which a particular society finds itself (Chambers & Conway, 1991). This focus on the ability of a livelihood to survive consistent stresses and momentary shocks is crucial to the long term viability of development and highlights the need to build upon opportunities for development as they are identified using asset analysis (Chambers & Conway, 1991). The asset analysis program encourages a community, or even a household livelihood, to “re-imagine itself in terms of its strengths rather than