IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/miffrp/303061.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Poverty and Weather Shocks: A Panel Data Analysis of Structural and Stochastic Poverty in Zambia

Author

Listed:
  • Ngoma, Hambulo
  • Mulenga, Brian P.
  • Snyder, Jason
  • Banda, Alefa
  • Chapoto, Antony

Abstract

While it is generally accepted that climate change will exacerbate poverty for small and medium sized farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) over the coming years, at least due to rising variability and rainfall shocks (Mulenga, Wineman, and Sitko 2017; Hallegatte et al. 2016), a number of questions remain unanswered. Which types of the poor are more exposed to climate risk and how do the impacts of climate and weather shocks vary across stochastically and structurally poor households? Addressing these questions is crucial for improved targeting of interventions intended to build the resilience of smallholder farmers. Smallholder farmers’ reliance almost entirely on rain-fed agriculture and their limited capacity to cope with weather shocks exposes them to climate risks. Weather shocks negatively impact smallholders through their effects on agricultural productivity, which is the mainstay of rural smallholder households. If left unchecked, weather shocks can lead to increased poverty incidence and intensity. In this paper, we utilize data from a nationally representative two-wave panel of recent agricultural household surveys to conduct a high resolution analysis of the spatial distribution of poverty, and how the different types of poverty are impacted by exposure to climate change variability. The data allows us to (a) control for observed and unobserved sources of household heterogeneity, and (b) distinguish between the structurally poor, i.e., those households that have very little assets or savings, and the stochastically poor, i.e., those households that have low savings but enough assets that they could liquidate if necessary to smooth consumption during a climate shock Out of the 14,508 rural households interviewed in Zambia in 2012 and 2015, about 51% were structurally poor (low income and assets) and 5% were stochastically poor (low income and high assets). About 23% of households that were structurally poor in 2012 remained structurally poor in 2015, hence, chronically poor. A third of the structurally not poor in 2012 fell into poverty in 2015, while about 19% of poor households in 2012 managed to escape poverty in 2015. Structurally poor households in Zambia are more exposed to drought risk. Lower than normal rainfall, as measured by a negative precipitation index, significantly increases the probability of being structurally poor by 2.3 percentage points. Three implications follow from our findings. First, there is a need for well-structured and targeted social promotion programs to lift the viable but chronically and structurally poor and stochastically poor households from poverty. This can be achieved within the agricultural sector by using the electronic voucher delivery systems to better target large-scale, anti-poverty programs such as the farmer input support program. Along with improved targeting, the use of the electronic based voucher systems crowds-in private sector investments, which make available diverse inputs for farmers and also help develop the rural nonfarm sector where farmers can earn extra incomes. Smart-subsidies should be flanked by output market linkages and/or market development in order to enhance market participation and help improve incomes from agricultural production. Second, for those not commercially viable, there is a need for a better targeted and sustained social welfare program specifically meant for this group. Thus there is need for sustained social protection (e.g., social cash transfers) in order to prevent the non-poor from falling into poverty. And lastly, the intricate linkages among climate variability, climate risk, and poverty call for more support to enable farmers not only adapt to, but also mitigate climate change and variability. Such support may be v directed towards climate-smart agriculture adoption, autonomous and planned adaptation, improved extension, and climate information services.

Suggested Citation

  • Ngoma, Hambulo & Mulenga, Brian P. & Snyder, Jason & Banda, Alefa & Chapoto, Antony, 2019. "Poverty and Weather Shocks: A Panel Data Analysis of Structural and Stochastic Poverty in Zambia," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 303061, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:miffrp:303061
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.303061
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/303061/files/RP%2B154.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.303061?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Boansi, David & Owusu, Victor & Tambo, Justice Akpene & Donkor, Emmanuel & Asante, Bright Owusu, 2021. "Rainfall shocks and household welfare: Evidence from northern Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    2. Giulia Malevolti, 2022. "Can weather shocks give rise to a poverty trap? Evidence from Nigeria," Working Papers - Economics wp2022_10.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    3. Hambulo Ngoma & Patrick Lupiya & Mulako Kabisa & Faaiqa Hartley, 2021. "Impacts of climate change on agriculture and household welfare in Zambia: an economy-wide analysis," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-20, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Food Security and Poverty; International Development;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:miffrp:303061. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damsuus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.