Reconstructing Livelihood Change Under Constraint: A Reflexive Qualitative Account of Skills Training among Female Sex Workers in Nigeria

Purpose: This study examines how Female Sex Workers (FSWs) interpreted and navigated livelihood opportunities following participation in an NGO-led skills training programme in Nigeria. The study also examines what a reconstructive, practitioner-informed qualitative approach can reveal about livelihood change under constrained research conditions. Design/methodology/approach: Conventional data collection was restricted due to institutional confidentiality, ethical concerns, and the vulnerability of participants. The study therefore employed a reconstructive qualitative methodology drawing on practitioner recollections from prolonged engagement with the programme. Reflexive journaling, analytic memoing, and informal consultation with former colleagues supported the development of interpretive thematic insights. The approach foregrounds positionality, interpretive limits, and methodological transparency. Findings: Livelihood trajectories were episodic, reversible, and shaped by the economics of immediacy. While skills training temporarily expanded participants’ sense of possibility, structural constraints—including stigma, childcare pressures, capital limitations, and volatile informal markets—often prevented sustained livelihood conversion. Many women combined or alternated between newly acquired skills and sex work, reflecting pragmatic responses to uncertainty rather than lack of motivation. The training held symbolic and affective value, offering moments of recognition even when material transformation did not occur. Originality/value: The study contributes conceptually by challenging linear models of livelihood transition and highlighting the contextual, identity-based pressures shaping decision-making among marginalised women. Methodologically, it demonstrates the value of reconstructive, practice-informed qualitative analysis when direct engagement with participants is ethically or institutionally infeasible. It offers a transparent account of how situated practitioner knowledge can generate insight while maintaining reflexive accountability.