Download
1 / 20
210 likes | 589 Views
DESTITUTION IN WOLLO, ETHIOPIA Stephen Devereux Kay Sharp Yared Amare. Funded by DFID. Presentation outline. Background to the project Overview of Q 2 elements through the research process (design sampling data-collection analysis)
E N D
DESTITUTION IN WOLLO, ETHIOPIAStephen DevereuxKay SharpYared Amare Funded by DFID
Presentation outline • Background to the project • Overview of Q2 elements through the research process (design sampling data-collection analysis) • Focus on 3 “qualitative” methods embedded (infiltrated?) in the household questionnaire • self-assessed dependence • using recall data to estimate trends • proportional piling to estimate income diversification
Background to the Study Driven by: • NGO observations that a growing number of people in vulnerable areas like Wollo were unable to support themselves even in a good harvest year – i.e. poverty appeared to be worsening, not falling as World Bank / government income-poverty measures suggested. • Concern to shift policy focus (and donor funds) from repeated relief distributions, to addressing causes and processes of destitution. ~ Time pressure to contribute to PRSP process. • Need to quantify and independently verify (or refute) the qualitative, location-specific information from SC’s own research and monitoring (Household Food Economy methods).
North-eastern highlands Wag Hamra North Wollo South Wollo Background to the Study Area (Wollo) • 4.5 million people • 91% (4 m) rural • Drought-prone, but dependent on rainfed agriculture • Remote and inaccessible terrain • Food insecure and malnourished every year; recurrent food crises • Chronic ‘emergency’ food aid needs Addis Ababa
Research Questions 1. What is destitution? 2. How many people are destitute? 3. Is destitution increasing? 4. How do people become destitute?
Design phase Integrated / simultaneous design of data collection instruments: • “qualitative” (open-ended / flexible/ multi-level/ PRA and anthropology-derived) methods • “quantitative” component (questionnaire for random household survey) Cross-fertilisation and migration of some elements from one to the other.
Sampling • Overlapping random and purposive samples Household questionnaire survey: • 3-stage random household sample for questionnaire (n = 2,127 households, in 107 villages) • Geographically stratified by 9 “Food Economy Zones” “Qualitative” consultations: • Villages purposively selected from the random survey sites (n = 9, one in each FEZ).
Data collection • Simultaneous quant / qual fieldwork • Continuous interaction between field teams • Quality control / ongoing support and training for questionnaire interviewers • Identification of issues for open-ended investigation • Follow-up case-study interviews with questionnaire respondents
Analysis • Qualitative insights used to select and scale questionnaire indicators to construct ‘destitution index’ (see IDS Working Paper 217) • Iterative process ~ comparison / cross-checking of emerging quantitative and qualitative findings • Write-up – some sections purely “qualitative” or purely “quantitative”; most use both.
“Qualitative” methods within the questionnaire:1) Self-assessed dependence
Operational definition of ‘destitution’: Destitution is a state of extreme poverty that results from the pursuit of ‘unsustainable livelihoods’, meaning that a series of livelihood shocks and/or negative trends or processes erodes the asset base of already poor and vulnerable households until • they are no longer able to meet their minimum subsistence needs, • they lack access to the key productive assets needed to escape from poverty, and • they become dependent on public and/or private transfers.
Components of ‘objective’ Destitution Index(PCA-weighted)
“Qualitative” methods within the questionnaire:2) Assessing trends: can recall data substitute for time-series?
Trends in Destitution (from household recall / self-assessment)
Survival functions(Risk of households becoming destitute) • Shows cumulative probability of non-destitute households becoming destitute over the past 10 years. • Result: 20% probability that a non-destitute household in 1992/ 93 would become destitute by 2001/ 02. • Risk is double (40%) for female-headed households.
“Qualitative” methods within the questionnaire:3) Estimating household income diversification by proportional piling
Proportional piling – instructions to interviewers • Place a pile of 100 beans in the middle of the floor (or on a mat or any other convenient place where all the participating household members can see). Draw a circle (or place a symbol) for each activity or income source the household identified in the last question [checklist of all livelihood activities engaged in by all household members in the past 12 months]. • Add circles (or symbols) for free food aid, free cash [pilot relief programme substituting cash for food aid], other gifts (cash or food) and remittances. • Explain that the pile of beans represents all the food, cash or other income produced or received by the household in the last year. Ask the household members to discuss together and agree roughly how much of this came from each source, and place the corresponding number of beans on each circle or symbol. • While they are discussing, copy the code numbers of the household’s activities into column 19. If there are any activities without codes, write the name in column 20. • When they have agreed, ask one of them to count the beans on each circle, tell you the number and say the name of the activity or source. Write the number of beans in column 21. • Check that the numbers total 100 – if not, check the counting again.
