View article

Recent conceptualizations of livelihoods have proposed frameworks that seek to reflect the diversity and complexity of ways in which different groups make a living. They also highlight how policies must build on the existing strengths of people's livelihood strategies in order to expand their options and choices (Bebbington, 1999; Carney, 1998; Scoones, 1998). These frameworks have been developed from a rural perspective, and while they are sufficiently broad to incorporate non-natural resource-based livelihood strategies – for example, income diversification and rural–urban linkages (Ellis, 1998; Tacoli, 1998), as well as some variations in the nature of the vulnerability context – their usefulness in urban contexts still has to be tested. In particular, it is the frameworks' ability to account for the specific characteristics of the livelihood strategies of the poorer or more vulnerable urban groups and to recognize the non …