Rural Household Multidimensional Poverty And Vulnerability In Degua Tembien District South Eastern Zone Of Tigray Ethiopia

Persistent rural poverty continues to be one of the most striking development challenges ofrnEthiopia and attracted the attention of policy makers, development practitioners andrnresearchers. This study aimed at assessing household’s multidimensional poverty andrnvulnerability (to poverty) using multidimensional poverty measures and lenses focused on a setrnof household capabilities and functioning’s in Degu’a Tembien District. To address thisrnobjective, data were collected from primary and secondary sources. Using stratified randomrnsampling technique, 420 households were sampled from six rural villages to fill a questionnairernthat was used to collect primary data. The study used mixed research methods where crosssectional quantitative and qualitative approaches are used. Descriptive and inferential statisticsrnsuch as percentages, means, chi-square test and ANOVA test were employed to obtain therndistributional characteristics and to describe the associations and variations among variables ofrninterest. The research objectives were addressed using Multiple Correspondence Analysisrnapproach to construct asset indices, and Alkire and Foster methodology to estimaternmultidimensional poverty. Whereas logistic regression was used to identify poverty determinants,rnand the three-step Feasible Generalized Least Square was used to address vulnerability tornmultidimensional poverty.rnThe paper initially investigates household’s asset endowments, which are the foundation ofrnhousehold’s strategies to achieve livelihoods. The findings reveal that although assets are thernbases on which the livelihood of the poor depends, the general household’s asset capacity andrnendowments are generally low. Households are poorly endowed with financial, natural, andrnhuman capitals. The highest proportions of households (45.7%) were categorized in the middlernsocioeconomic group while low proportions of households (20%) were concentrated in thernhighest socioeconomic group. The cluster technique classified 34.3% of households under thernlowest socioeconomic positions.rnThe findings also indicated that household’s incidence of deprivation were generally higher andrnwidespread in landholding, livestock ownership, decision making on income, access tornelectricity, energy for cooking and sanitation where largest percentage of deprivation (>50%)rnwere observed in each indictors. The adjusted headcount ratio, multidimensional headcountrnratio and the multidimensional poverty intensity of households were also found high. The livingrnstandard dimension of poverty was the major contributor to households MPI while deprivationrnin decision making on income, livestock ownership and landholding appears to be the largerrncontributor indicators to overall Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI). Building on thesernresults, determinants of multidimensional poverty were investigated. Result of this analysisrnshows that access to non-household labor, number of plots, contact with extension agents,rneducation level of the household head, household size and household’s annual income arernstatistically significant determinants of multidimensional poverty.rnHouseholds were found highly exposed to various natural shocks particularly to drought, hailedrnrainfall, flood and pest. Reducing the number and quality of food, relying on savings and sale ofrnlivestock were the three dominant coping strategies following shocks. The finding of thisrnempirical analysis demonstrates that greater proportions of households (80.3%) are vulnerablernto future poverty, and the overall vulnerability incidence exceeds the current multidimensionalrnpoverty rate. Out of the total vulnerable households, 24.4% of the currently non-poor households rnxivrnare at risk of becoming multidimensional poor while 55.9% of households who are currentlyrnpoor will remain vulnerable to future multidimensional poverty. The results also discloses thatrnceteris paribus, female headed households, households with a better social capital, financialrnasset and number of plots are associated with reduced vulnerability to multidimensional povertyrnwhile households with better physical capital are found highly vulnerable. Household’s exposurernto drought, hailed rainfall and pest attack were highly vulnerable to multidimensional povertyrnwith higher average level of MPI deprivation. Those who were vulnerable to drought were alsornfound with lower expected volatility in their wellbeing. The finding also shows that householdsrnthat relied on savings, sale of livestock and formal borrowing of money to manage shocks arernassociated with reduced vulnerability to future poverty.rnIn general, the empirical findings of this study have strong implications to vulnerabilityrnreduction efforts in the Degu’a Tembien District. Building asset endowments of the vulnerablernshould be the policy focus to increase and expand household’s capability to invest in variousrnlivelihood activities. The most effective way of reducing poverty is not focusing on the currentrnpoor households, but addressing the larger population who are at risk of becomingrnmultidimensional poor. Therefore, government should also focus on rural vulnerability reductionrnprogram as a strategic effort to increase human and financial capital rather than piecemealrndimension by dimension interventions targeted only on the currently poor households.rnKey Words: Asset endowment; Multidimensional Poverty; Incidence; Intensity; Vulnerability;rnDeprivation

Get Full Work

Report copyright infringement or plagiarism