The Sustainability of Livelihoods during Crisis - Mapping Evidence, Gaps, and Future Directions

Human society is staring at an unprecedented convergence of cascading crises that threaten the sustainability of livelihoods worldwide. Despite the critical importance of understanding how such crises impact the ability of individuals and communities to sustain their livelihoods, research in this area remains fragmented and limited, especially within the sustainability domain. This gap is addressed by conducting a comprehensive meta-synthesis of 102 peer-reviewed journal articles (shortlisted via manual review of 862 articles) guided by the variables provided by the Sustainable Livelihood Approach (SLA). Building on theoretical literature on SLA, this article conceptualises crisis as a contextual variable affecting the relationship between livelihood resources, livelihood strategies, and sustainable livelihood outcomes. Through scientometric and content analysis, the article clarifies the complex interconnections between crises and sustainable livelihoods. By identifying longitudinal research trends and synthesising key findings on the sustainability of livelihoods during crises, it enables a deeper understanding of livelihood sustainability in an increasingly crisis-ridden world. Co-authorship analysis reveals limited collaboration: 217 researchers from 148 organisations produced these studies, but there are only two large research clusters. Content analysis reveals the following key insights: a) existing studies on the sustainability of livelihoods during crises need to characterise the various dimensions of crises in greater detail; b) when characterising sustainability-oriented livelihood outcomes during crises, there is minimal evidence of sustainability-related trade-offs or synergies amongst outcomes (3 studies: 3.3%); c) minimal evidence is available on the feedback effects of such outcomes; and, d) more research must be conducted on how power and conflict affect the association between sustainability of livelihoods and crises (12 studies,13.2%, examined conflict causes). This article is a valuable tool for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers, as it: a) identifies gaps for further research; b) provides a structured framework for analysing how different types and dimensions of crises affect livelihood resources, strategies, and outcomes; and c) offers actionable insights for designing sustainable livelihood interventions in the face of future crises.