Resilience systems analysis: eastern Democratic Republic of Congo

Experts in risks, in livelihood systems and key decision makers explore how to strengthen resilience in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Conducting a shared analysis of resilience has numerous benefits, but requires the right mix of experts and decision makers. Benefits include: increased sources for, and quantity of, background information, therefore also increasing the ability to triangulate data; reducing the cost of the analysis; reducing individual actor bias; and supporting general agreement about which actions should be prioritized; and gaining ownership by different stakeholders, therefore increasing the range of tools and programs that can be used to target risks and boost resilience.

After an introduction to the main concepts, participants worked on the risks affecting eastern DRC - what are the different risks, both now and within the next three years? What are their causes and effects, and how are they linked to stresses? How do they affect vulnerable groups differently?

Using the sustainable livelihood approach helped participants structure an analysis of how the different risks impact the different livelihood assets. Participants then explored the characteristics of each asset and what populations are currently doing to better absorb, or adapt to these potential shocks.

This workshop, applying the resilience systems analysis to the specific context of eastern DRC highlighted the following points:

• There was general agreement that the overall risk landscape will evolve over the next three years, with many (but not all) risks increasing in terms of probability and/or impact.
• Social capital - and particularly the role of host families in supporting the capacity of displaced households to absorb socks - is critical in eastern DRC, and this should be taken into account in programming. Further study on this area may also be useful.
• Dealing with negative coping capacities, and understanding them more, will also be useful in this context.
• Currently, only certain types of capitals and livelihood assets are regularly monitored and addressed; meaning that key parts of the system may be irreversibly deteriorating, undermining overall resilience. It is easy to monitor physical capital as this is where aid organisations are focusing their efforts, but we don't know enough about what happens to other capitals - for example social capital, financial capital and political capital.