With the vision of ‘A sustainable world free of poverty and injustice in which technology is used for the benefit of all’ Practical Action has taken special emphasis to develop the livelihoods of Tsunami affected communities in a sustainable way. Practical Action aims at rebuilding livelihoods of post Tsunami through a village based Micro enterprise incubator centers. This approach has along with provision of appropriate technology options, community based development approaches, and demonstrating relevance of application of post disaster sustainable methodologies in livelihood development to planners and implementers in the development process. Disaster Resistant Sustainable Livelihood (DRSL) Development model has introduced by the Practical Action based on the conceptual framework of Sustainable Livelihood Development (Carney. D, 1998) promoted by DIFID. This model provides better understanding of livelihood issues in relation with the disasters. This model explains the importance of livelihood development in disaster resistant manner. Figure 01: Disaster Resistant Sustainable Livelihood (DRSL) Development model Livelihood development in particular community is not a simple task that could adopt same approach in every situation. Basically it depends on the scenario where effected communities live. Some communities are fortunate to live in adequate livelihood support base in their locations where others do not have. The livelihood support base basically indicate by the condition of human, physical, social, finance and natural assets in terms of availability, accessibility and ownership. The communities live in adequate livelihood support base are needed support to either protect or enhance or diversified their livelihood base. The communities live in inadequate livelihood support base need more support to create enabling environment & entitlements, building asset base and development of entrepreneurship. After the devastation of tsunami many relief and humanitarian based development agencies have started their work in Sri Lank with untainted objective of rebuilding the livelihoods of affected communities by providing numerous possessions which are essential in that particular situation. However those short term oriented livelihood development approaches creates a number of tribulations such as duplication of activities, dependency mentality of affected communities, distortion of market place, etc. Having considerate the scenario the Practical Action has introduce a post disaster sustainable livelihood development model based on DRSL framework.

1. Livelihood Development in Post Disaster Situations – Rural Business
Incubation Centre Approach
Chopadithya Edirisinghe
Introduction
Disaster sensitive micro enterprise development initiatives
With the vision of ‘A sustainable world free of poverty and injustice in which
technology is used for the benefit of all’ Practical Action has taken special emphasis to
develop the livelihoods of Tsunami affected communities in a sustainable way. Practical
Action aims at rebuilding livelihoods of post Tsunami through a village based Micro
enterprise incubator centers. This approach has along with provision of appropriate
technology options, community based development approaches, and demonstrating
relevance of application of post disaster sustainable methodologies in livelihood
development to planners and implementers in the development process.
Disaster Resistant Sustainable Livelihood (DRSL) Development model has introduced by
the Practical Action based on the conceptual framework of Sustainable Livelihood
Development (Carney. D, 1998) promoted by DIFID. This model provides better
understanding of livelihood issues in relation with the disasters. This model explains the
importance of livelihood development in disaster resistant manner.
Figure 01: Disaster Resistant Sustainable Livelihood (DRSL) Development model
Livelihood development in
particular community is not
a simple task that could
adopt same approach in
every situation. Basically it
depends on the scenario
where effected
communities live. Some
communities are fortunate
to live in adequate
livelihood support base in
their locations where others
do not have. The livelihood
support base basically
indicate by the condition
of human, physical, social,
finance and natural assets in terms of availability, accessibility and ownership. The
communities live in adequate livelihood support base are needed support to either protect
or enhance or diversified their livelihood base. The communities live in inadequate
livelihood support base need more support to create enabling environment &
entitlements, building asset base and development of entrepreneurship.

2. After the devastation of tsunami many relief and humanitarian based development
agencies have started their work in Sri Lank with untainted objective of rebuilding the
livelihoods of affected communities by providing numerous possessions which are
essential in that particular situation. However those short term oriented livelihood
development approaches creates a number of tribulations such as duplication of activities,
dependency mentality of affected communities, distortion of market place, etc. Having
considerate the scenario the Practical Action has introduce a post disaster sustainable
livelihood development model based on DRSL framework.
Practical Action Approach:
The foundation of Practical Action post disaster sustainable livelihood development
model is started with Rural Business Incubation Centre (RBIC) that is a community base
business development organization located in an affected area. The RBIC is directed by
the elected board of trustees from the area where functionally managed by a manager
who again appointed from the same area. The objective of RBIC is looking after the
livelihoods development aspects of their community while providing guidance to all
other development agencies on possible livelihood development approaches in particular
location.
It is expected
• to create new& sustainable business/livelihood ideas to the community,
• protect and developed the existing livelihoods/businesses within the area,
• linking the community livelihood specific activities with the outside markets,
• liking financial institutions,
• Provide guidance to other development agencies to work in same location in more
sustainable manner.
The practical Action role in this process is very clear as a catalizer in this whole process
and withdrawing from the community once RBIC reach self-motion.
With the above background the Practical Action has selected 4 location to setup RBIC’s
in Sri Lanka where the sites were selected on the basis of damages occurred by the
tsunami to the livelihoods of the communities in respective areas. The first site selected
was Maradamunai, a remote village in the Eastern Province of Sri Lanka, which the main
livelihood of that village is producing handlooms. Nearly one thousand handloom
producers were affected by the tsunami. There are over six producer societies were
existed at the time of destruction however rebuilding of their livelihoods were not
addressed in sustainable manner. The Practical Action introduced this concept and starts
work in all six producer associations together. The affected communities were consulted
to find best approach to develop their livelihoods. It has initiated six repairing centres
within the community to repair the destroyed handlooms. Nearly 250 destroyed
handloom machines were repaired and 50 new machines were manufactured under this
program. It has used over 40% of remaining materials for the repair work as per the
guidance of the community. It has introduced new technologies for handloom making
and designing. Simultaneously the producers were introduced to the new markets

3. through trade fare organized in main tourist city of Kandy. Other development agencies
also start working with the communities in Maradamuani in same manner and Practical
Action has withdrawn from the community once they start their livelihoods.
The second location was Oluwil, again a remote village of the Eastern Province of Sri
Lanka. The communities in Oluwil were involved in making coir products as their main
source of livelihoods. Their coir making machines were destroyed and lost their
livelihoods. The Practical Action has introduced this concept to them as well and
strengthens the coir producers’ society by supporting them to repair their machineries
themselves and repaired the buildings of coir training centre at Oluwil. The community
capacity has increased to link them with other source of development.
Other two RBIC’s were opened in southern province of Sri Lanka to develop the
livelihoods of fishing communities in Gurupokuna and Kudawella.
When comparing to Kudawella the Gurupokuna is an isolated village, which is
comparatively having less damages of tsunami than Kudawella. However both villages
are predominantly fisheries base villages where Kudawella is having more tourist
attractions; the famous blow-hole situated. Many local as well as foreign tourists are
visiting this village to see blow-hole. Therefore numbers of nun-fishery base livelihoods
were existed here in Kudawella as a result of that. With the tsunami destructive waves
majority of them loses their livelihoods.
RBIC approach in Kudawella:
As indicated above Kudawella is an area where five Grama Niladari(GN)1
Divisions
occupied. This was highly populated area where nearly 5000 families living in those five
GN divisions. As a consequence of tsunami nearly one hundred people lost their lives
here and nearly 300 houses were damaged. A one of the largest fisheries harbors in
southern province is situated here in Kudawella where severely damaged by tsunami.
Number of small producers and venders were affected by tsunami saturated around the
blow-hole where a famous tourist attraction of Sri Lanka. Rebuilding of livelihoods of
the communities was highlighted as a result of that.
Number of GOS, NGOS and INGOS started work in Kudawella area to rebuild the
houses, boats, and livelihoods of that community however a Local NGO called
Nawajeewana had been selected as the lead agency of Kudawella rehabilitation program.
Apart from the Nawajeewana there are over 15 local and international NGOs have been
working within the Kudawella soon after the devastation. Majority of those
organizations were focused on rebuilding houses, infrastructure development and
provision of commodities however longer-term livelihood development base approaches
were not appeared. This issue has been discussed with the lead agency of that area
development that is Nawajeewana and they invited Practical Action to come and start
work within the area. Therefore the Practical Action has decided to start longer-term
oriented livelihood development program in Kudawella.
1
The smallest administrate unit of Sri Lanka.

4. With that understanding it has started to identify the type of livelihoods losses, the
existing support mechanisms, and needs of the communities. A wide awareness program
has lunched to make aware communities about the disaster resistant sustainable
livelihood development approach in livelihood rebuilding. It has emphasis that is not
some physical donations program happening here but strengthening them to develop their
livelihoods in sustainable manner. With that understanding beneficiaries were selected
using criteria’s of damage occurred, entrepreneurial skills, and willingness to re-start
their livelihoods. The capacities of selected beneficiaries were evaluated individually to
identify the training needs. It has selected 60 entrepreneurs to initiate the work. It has
found many entrepreneurs having problem of finding suitable business idea for them
selves and also it has found that all most all of them were in diffident mental conditions.
The initial program was scheduled to address those issues. A standard ILO-SIYB
training module in business idea generation that is Generate Your Business Idea(GYB)
module has enriched with positive thinking training module and used to envisioning the
affected communities. Positive thinking and GYB training module has provided a
window to organize affected communities in development process. With that it was
asked to the community to select a management/steering committee for them to continue
the process. In here it was emphasis the importance of leadership of that committee in
future development of their livelihoods. Simultaneously it has indicated that this process
is not a Practical Action activity but their activity for the development of their own
livelihoods. Importance of linking with all stakeholders in livelihood development of
their locality was re-emphasized. Elected members for the management committee have
been trained for leadership and RBIC management. Simultaneously the participants
have been trained on business planning according to the business ideas what they
generated. Hands-on training on technology in food processing, fish processing provided
to the participants according to their needs. Two members of the community have
trained to build compost bins as this was a newly emerged need of the rebuilding process.
Outcomes:
The key outcome of this approach is now the community organization is functioning as a
mediator to other development agencies to working particular location. A women
chairperson is providing the direction to the management committee which the members
consider it is very successful. As a result of that many women entrepreneurs came
forward and start work with the RBIC. They provide the information and support
service to 12 different development agencies to work within their locality. Therefore the
rural level coordination in providing livelihood support to the affected communities is
ensured. The leadership training offered to the office bearers is very much helpful to
achieve this. Livelihood development requirements and issues of different livelihood
clusters within the community have been identified by the RBIC and separate
development plans for each cluster are now being formulating. This was done in a
community consultation process. The community proposals for the development of
different sectors have been identified through this process as well. The RBIC is now
forward those community proposals for different development agencies. The venders
association of Kudawella Blow-hole were set-up by different NGO are now willing to

5. joint with RBIC for future development works. The management committee is willing
to conduct their first anniversary meeting in 15 December 2006 and willing to develop a
strategic plan for another five years period.
Secondly the group has taken construction contracts on building roads and other damage
infrastructures as an institution. This is not only provides temporary employments to the
community members but also the capacity of the society have been increased to
community level construction and construction management. Therefore the community
itself is now in a position to takeover any contracts related to infrastructure development
within their location.
As a rural level business development service providing institution the RBIC has
considered the best practices of business development even in the post disaster situations.
As this is a community own institution the community has not provide total free services
to their members. All services that has provided by the RBIC has started to charge their
service fee. With that the management committee decided to continue this process for
future with own savings.
The community has started several livelihood activities as a result of mediation of the
RBIC. 30 Individual business plans prepared by the participants for their business ideas
and already 22 individuals started business according to their plans. The entrepreneurs
are now participating trade exhibitions happen in local level as a group. Simultaneously
a group of six women entrepreneurs started a snack products manufacturing business
using equipment hired from the RBIC. Other two women entrepreneurs start making
concrete bins hiring equipment from the RBIC.
At present the RBIC is representing various forums and chambers as a rural level where a
member of CPN (community Protection Network) organized by CHA. They accepted 10
business plans prepared by the entrepreneurs for loans. The Sewalanka (a NGO
working in the area) approved another 10 business plans for providing loans. The small
venders near blow-hole area have interested to join with RBIC and now they are in a
process of initiating a development plan for them. The FORUT has agreed to offer a
contract to the RBIC to manufacture compost bins for their other sites. A proposal on
entrepreneurship development of the Kudawella area has developed and forward to
Mercy Corps by the RBIC. The Management committee of the RBIC has decided to
continue their activities for next year by their own funds.
Lesson learnt:
The concept of RBIC is mainly to develop the livelihoods of affected communities in
sustainable manner however the approaches adopted by other development agencies
specially on donations creates disturbances to the process. It has created dependency
mentality of affected communities in general. The activities what RBIC is suggested are
basically long term and different from the direct donations and grants. Therefore it is not
very attractive as the other short term base assets donation programs. There should be a
strong community mobilization process in this approach prior to this approach.

6. The success of the RBIC is purely based on the capacity of the management committee
and the efficiency of the Centre Manager. The management committee is getting
pressures from the community of asking gifts and grants. Therefore capacity
development and mobilization of management committee is essential in this process. The
first manager appointed for Kudawella RBIC was not in very active one where the
activities were drag for several months. However removing him from the position was
again difficult as it creates conflict situation within the village. Removal of inefficient
manager and appointing a new manager has done through strong mediation of director
board in a very careful manner. This was one of the major lessons we learnt in this
process. Therefore appointing a centre manager and the board of directors would be the
most important activity of RBIC. Not only appointing them but also continuous
development of their management capacity is essential in this process.
Increasing membership of RBIC is again indicating some conflict among the existing
members where the existing members fear about diluting the future benefits for them.
Therefore it needs to create wider awareness of the benefits of increasing membership of
the society. In future occurrence this has to address during the mobilizing period while
informing all stakeholders about the importance of having wider coverage.
The community capacity on providing leadership to the other development agencies in
their location of RBIC community was increased significantly through the continuous
capacity development programs organized by the facilitation organization (practical
Action). Therefore this has to taken in to consideration when planning to set up RBIC in
new location. Provision of leadership to other development agencies is not an easy task
because many donors are coming to the area with a pressure of spending their budgets in
shorter time period. This issue has to be address in strategic manner right from the
beginning of the process. The enslavement and dependency type of situation would be a
significant hindering factor in this exercise. It needs continuous emphasis to strengthen
the capacity of the management committee to overcome such situations. The capacity of
preparation of livelihood development plans for their area would be one of the important
areas that community can develop and show their importance in rebuilding process. With
that strong planning ability their negotiating power over the unplanned development
proposals proposed by the donor agencies increased. These negotiation skills may leads
to strong village level coordination ability of the respective RBIC.

7. The success of the RBIC is purely based on the capacity of the management committee
and the efficiency of the Centre Manager. The management committee is getting
pressures from the community of asking gifts and grants. Therefore capacity
development and mobilization of management committee is essential in this process. The
first manager appointed for Kudawella RBIC was not in very active one where the
activities were drag for several months. However removing him from the position was
again difficult as it creates conflict situation within the village. Removal of inefficient
manager and appointing a new manager has done through strong mediation of director
board in a very careful manner. This was one of the major lessons we learnt in this
process. Therefore appointing a centre manager and the board of directors would be the
most important activity of RBIC. Not only appointing them but also continuous
development of their management capacity is essential in this process.
Increasing membership of RBIC is again indicating some conflict among the existing
members where the existing members fear about diluting the future benefits for them.
Therefore it needs to create wider awareness of the benefits of increasing membership of
the society. In future occurrence this has to address during the mobilizing period while
informing all stakeholders about the importance of having wider coverage.
The community capacity on providing leadership to the other development agencies in
their location of RBIC community was increased significantly through the continuous
capacity development programs organized by the facilitation organization (practical
Action). Therefore this has to taken in to consideration when planning to set up RBIC in
new location. Provision of leadership to other development agencies is not an easy task
because many donors are coming to the area with a pressure of spending their budgets in
shorter time period. This issue has to be address in strategic manner right from the
beginning of the process. The enslavement and dependency type of situation would be a
significant hindering factor in this exercise. It needs continuous emphasis to strengthen
the capacity of the management committee to overcome such situations. The capacity of
preparation of livelihood development plans for their area would be one of the important
areas that community can develop and show their importance in rebuilding process. With
that strong planning ability their negotiating power over the unplanned development
proposals proposed by the donor agencies increased. These negotiation skills may leads
to strong village level coordination ability of the respective RBIC.