|
|
I am currently
undertaking PhD research in Peru and attempting to use the
SL framework as a tool to compare different sites in the city.
I am planning to build up what we learn from the target communities
in a geographic information
system (GIS). I would like the maps to tell a story about
the relationship between national, formal infrastructure and
livelihoods at a much more local level. Exploring the indicators
used to "measure" infrastructure is a key element
of the study. I have selected 4 sites: semi rural (up river),
central urban (marginal), central urban (highly serviced)
and down river (marginal). Further
Information on the research.
Questions:
1. I have some background in the application of SL assessments
in emergency relief when the timescale for gathering data
is accelerated. I have 6 to 8 months
to prepare in the UK beforehand followed by 8 months in situ.
Is this long enough!?
2. I will be applying the SL framework to an established tourist
enclave. It could be argued that livelihoods here are precarious
(although the factors at play maybe more global in scale)but
have SLs been applied to communities that are not immediately
considered vulnerable?
3. I am not assessing the impact before and after a particular
development project and I am not using the SL framework to
produce a development plan. I am comparing the contemporary
impact of different levels of service. From what I have read
so far, this research approach is still a legitimate application
of
the framework but it would be useful to have views of other
users
Regards,
Kate Crawford
Civil and Environmental Engineering
University College London
+020 7679 2691
+020 7380 0986
E-mail: ucesccr@ucl.ac.uk
Further
information:
I would like the maps to tell a story about the relationship
between national, formal infrastructure and livelihoods at
a much more local level. For example, the World Bank infrastructure
reports use national, aggregate indicators to
compare levels of water or waste services internationally
but I want to examine the unsustainable micro scale effects
which underlie these statistics.
Exploring the indicators used to "measure" infrastructure
is a key element of the study and I am using work on Splintering
Urbanism (Graham and Marvin at Newcastle University) to set
in context the different levels of service within Cusco: the
globally connected tourist enclave in the centre, surrounded
by
patches of poverty which (at first glance) follow the flows
of waste water, flood water and municipal solid waste out
of the city.
I
have selected 4 sites: semi rural (up river), central urban
(marginal), central urban (highly serviced) and down river
(marginal). The site boundaries will have to be determined
by the size of the community involved but, from
preliminary surveys, each "patch" to be mapped will
be between 500m2 and 1km2. These patches will overlie a much
larger, broad brush map showing the main components of formal
infrastructure and the river basin (waste treatment
plants, landfill sites, rivers, main drains, substations,
potable water coverage). From here, relationships between
the capacity and the location of macro elements of infrastructure
and the vulnerability context, "capitals" and outcomes
will be examined.
|
