In the complex humanitarian landscape of Northeast Nigeria, protracted conflict, particularly in Borno State, has resulted in massive displacements (over 2.1 million people).
It has disrupted lives and livelihoods, and left many households dependent on humanitarian aid, finding sustainable solutions to support affected communities is critical. In light of this, livelihood interventions have become crucial, not just for immediate relief but also for enabling long-term recovery and resilience.
Since 2018, Christian Aid Nigeria has been implementing a livelihood intervention model designed to enable recovery and sustainable development among internally displaced persons (IDPs) and host communities. The model focuses on empowering communities to rebuild their economic independence through sustainable income-generating activities (IGAs), aquaculture, livestock and crop production.
Our recent study assessing the effectiveness of this model reveals outcomes that can guide future interventions in the humanitarian and livelihood sector.
Image credits and information
Read the full research report for more evidence of the model’s effectiveness.
Key findings: Demonstrating the Impact of Christian Aid’s Livelihood Model
The quasi-experimental study conducted in two communities in Borno State compared the outcomes of our livelihood interventions in Malakyariri community with those of non-participants engaged in similar economic activities in Simari community. The key findings include:
Improved Economic Resilience
Participants in Christian Aid’s livelihood programme demonstrated better economic outcomes. While both groups reported profitability in their IGAs, participants from the intervention group had greater success in asset acquisition and income diversification. For example, 50% of Christian Aid participants reported alternative income sources compared to only 28% of the control group. This diversification is crucial for building resilience against future shocks
‘I did not have capital to start up a business before but with the coming of livelihood intervention, I was able to start up a business and maintain it, now I can even feed myself and my family well and take care of my needs.’
- a female FGD respondent from Malakyariri
Image credits and information
Enhanced food security and nutrition
Using indicators like the Food Consumption Score (FCS) and Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), the study found that Christian Aid’s intervention significantly improved food security.
Households in the intervention group had a higher dietary diversity, with 51% reaching the high dietary threshold, compared to 29% in the control group. This improvement highlights the model’s effectiveness in addressing not just economic needs but also nutrition and overall well-being.
Image credits and information
Strengthened support structures
Access to Village Savings and Loan Associations (VSLA) played a key role in the intervention’s success. Approximately 78% of participants in the intervention group were active members of savings groups, compared to just 20% in the control group. This access to communal savings mechanisms facilitated better financial planning, debt management, and business expansion. In addition, 53% of those in the intervention group had savings compared with 26% in the control group. A young person in Malakyariri said:
‘We pay a thrift of ₦220 ($0.52) weekly. ₦20 ($0.048) is for social welfare, in case someone is sick or wants to wed, gives birth to a child or lost someone.’
Gender empowerment
The model also promoted gender equality by enabling both men and women to participate in and benefit from IGAs. Women in particular reported increased capacity to contribute to household income, leading to greater financial stability and reduced household tensions. As one female participant noted,
‘I am seeing the impact on myself because my family is benefiting, I can pay my children’s PTA levies, and I do not have to wait for my husband to take care of everything.’
Challenges and areas for improvement
Despite the positive outcomes, challenges remain. High costs of raw materials, limited access to markets, and low local patronage of products were common issues faced by both groups. Addressing these barriers requires more robust market linkage support and quality enhancement to make locally produced goods competitive. As one respondent from Simari said:
‘After the training and support we received to produce sanitary pads and liquid soap, we have produced a large quantity of them, but, for months now they remain piled up at home, with nobody buying them.’
Lessons for the humanitarian sector: Scaling the model
The success of Christian Aid’s livelihood intervention model offers several valuable lessons for practitioners and donors working in humanitarian and livelihood sectors, particularly in conflict-affected regions. Our recommendations include:
1. Integrating livelihoods into humanitarian programming: The study highlights the importance of embedding livelihood support within emergency responses. By equipping communities with sustainable economic activities, we can transition from short-term relief to long-term resilience. This integration can enhance outcomes across sectors, such as education and food security, by empowering families to meet their own needs.
2. Building community-based support structures: The role of VSLAs in enhancing financial stability and resilience cannot be overstated. Establishing community-led savings and loan associations can help scale impact, ensuring that interventions leave behind sustainable support systems even after projects end.
3. Investing in transferable skills and market linkages: To address challenges like market access, livelihood programmes should focus on training participants in high-demand skills and facilitating connections with markets. This includes investing in quality control and packaging to improve the competitiveness of locally produced goods.
4. Tailoring interventions to local contexts: The success of the Christian Aid model is partly due to its adaptability. By understanding local dynamics and engaging community stakeholders, the model ensured relevance and acceptance, which is crucial for sustainable impact. Future programmes should consider the unique socio-economic conditions of target areas to enhance effectiveness.
Conclusion
Christian Aid’s livelihood intervention model has demonstrated great potential in transforming the lives of conflict-affected communities in Nigeria.
By focusing on sustainable income generation, food security, and community support systems, the model provides a blueprint for other humanitarian actors looking to achieve similar impact. As donors and practitioners, investing in evidence-based, community-driven livelihood interventions is not just a strategy for recovery—it is a pathway to long-term resilience and development.
To leverage these insights, we encourage stakeholders in the humanitarian sector to collaborate, innovate, and scale up livelihood models that are proven to work. By doing so, we can not only address immediate needs but also build a future where vulnerable communities are empowered to thrive independently.
