An integrated economic and social analysis to assess the impact of vegetable and fishpond technologies on poverty in rural Bangladesh:
Abstract"This study examines the poverty reduction implications of the introduction of three different agricultural technologies by government and NGOs in three rural sites across Bangladesh. The first is new vegetable seeds developed by AVRDC introduced in Saturia to women owning small amounts of land by a local NGO, based on a training and credit dissemination approach. The second is polyculture fish technology developed by WorldFish Center and introduced by a government extension program based on private fishponds operated mostly by men in Mymensingh. The third is the same polyculture fish technology, but introduced through a local NGO in Jessore based on the arrangement of leased fishponds operated by groups of low income women, supported by training and credit provision. The study found a number of significant poverty impacts. Among the strongest was in the case of the vegetable technology, which is targeted towards women in households with relatively small amounts of land and is a ‘non-lumpy' technology requiring a very low level of investment, but with proportionately significant returns and positive impacts on female empowerment and child nutritional status. The private fishpond technology was less successful in terms of poverty impact, since only better-off households tend to own ponds. This technology, however, had positive effects on the pond and crop profits of these households. The operation of the group fishpond technology, though a potentially beneficial agricultural program for poor households, was significantly undermined by collective action problems. Relative to women who did not have access to this group-based program, female group members appeared to have more mobility, greater likelihood of working for pay, higher off-farm incomes, and better nutritional status. The group fishpond technology was found also to increase vulnerability in a number of ways, such as through the theft of fish from ponds, or through gendered intra-household inequalities in (a) technology-related time burdens and (b) access to markets for and hence income from the agricultural outputs produced. The study overall showed a higher level of trust for NGO as opposed to government services, but also highlighted the variable performance of NGOs. Political dimensions to NGO activity also emerged as important, and are perceived by some sections of the community to affect the dissemination of technologies and extension support services for the technologies. Quantitative and qualitative data were found to complement each other well in the research across a range of issues. For example, the survey addressed female empowerment adopters by measuring the frequency of women's attendance of meetings etc, while the focus groups revealed the importance non-monetary exchange of vegetables between households to maintain social networks and reduce vulnerability. There were also gains through the overall use of the sustainable livelihoods framework as a way of sharpening understanding of the different entry points at which technology can impact on household well-being and vulnerability. Authors' Abstract
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in its series EPTD discussion papers with number 112.
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Women in agriculture; Agricultural research; Sustainable livelihoods; Gender; Agricultural growth; Agricultural technology;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-06-02 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kaplowitz, Michael D. & Hoehn, John P., 2001. "Do focus groups and individual interviews reveal the same information for natural resource valuation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 237-247, February.
- Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Maluccio, John A., 2000.
"Intrahousehold allocation and gender relations,"
FCND discussion papers
84, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Filmer, Deon & King, Elizabeth M. & Pritchett, Lant, 1998. "Gender disparity in South Asia : comparisons between and within countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1867, The World Bank.
- Pitt, Mark M & Rosenzweig, Mark R & Hassan, Md Nazmul, 1990.
"Productivity, Health, and Inequality in the Intrahousehold Distribution of Food in Low-Income Countries,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1139-56, December.
- Pitt, Mark M. & Rosenzweig, Mark R. & Hassan, Md. Nazmul, 1989. "Productivity, Health and Inequality in the Intrahousehold Distribution of Food in Low-Income Countries," Bulletins 7480, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
- Quisumbing, Agnes R. & de la Briere, Benedicte, 2000.
"Women's assets and intrahousehold allocation in rural Bangladesh,"
FCND discussion papers
86, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Quisumbing, Agnes R. & de la Briere, Benedicte, 2000. "Women's assets and intrahousehold allocation in rural Bangladesh," FCND briefs 86, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Haddad, Lawrence James & Peña, Christine & Nishida, Chizuru & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Slack, Alison T., 1996. "Food security and nutrition implications of intrahousehold bias," FCND discussion papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Peter Davis, 2007. "Discussions Among the Poor: Exploring Poverty Dynamics With Focus Groups in Bangladesh," Working Papers id:1106, eSocialSciences.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.