RURAL BANGLADESH - PreventionWeb

♦
compared to vulnerable and invisible poor households, but their incomes are
approximately half that of non-vulnerable households.
Group 3 – approximately 32% of the surveyed households – referred to as ‘vulnerable’
households – they average eight months of adequate food provisioning per year, leaving
four months of food insecurity, consume a less diverse diet consisting of eight food
groups, eat less than three meals per day, own assets averaging 495,000 taka in value,
and have an average monthly per capita income of 775 taka. Vulnerable households are
food insecure for significant periods of time throughout the year and are relatively
livelihood insecure, possessing few assets and inadequate incomes.
♦ Group 4, Highly Vulnerable Households – approximately 15% of the surveyed
households – which TANGO refers to as the ‘invisible poor’ – average three months of
adequate food provisioning per year, although most of the invisible poor are food
insecure for the entire year, consuming an inadequate diet consisting of seven food
groups, and eating only two meals per day on average. The invisible poor own virtually
no assets, averaging only 91,000 taka in value, and have an average monthly per capita
income of 674 taka. Also known in Bangladesh as the ‘ultra poor’ or the ‘hard-core
poor,’ the invisible poor, are highly food insecure, depend on food assistance, and are
called the invisible poor because they lack access to virtually every aspect of financial,
natural, human, social, and political capital in Bangladesh. This includes a lack of access
to many development, income-generating and safety-nets programs offered by NGO,
government, and bilateral agencies operating in rural Bangladesh.
Assets & Resources: Asset ownership was highly correlated with income and food security
indicators. The value of household assets for the non-vulnerable group is approximately 95
times more than that of the invisible poor. In a land hungry country, where rural families
depend on agricultural production on cultivable land as the major source of their livelihoods,
land continues to represent the most essential asset defining rural food security. Yet only
four out of every ten households own any cultivable land; the invisible poor are invariably
functionally landless. Non-vulnerable households own more than 265 decimals of functional
land for cultivation, while the mean area of land owned by the invisible poor is only 38
decimals. The value of assets owned by female-headed households is approximately twothirds
the value of assets owned by male-headed households. Female-headed households
also own smaller areas of land, fewer numbers of livestock and fewer numbers of other
productive and unproductive assets compared to male-headed households.
Livelihood Strategies: Landlessness increasingly encumbers households in rural
Bangladesh. Less than half of the survey households cultivated on farmland last year,
however only fourteen percent of invisible households engaged in agricultural production
on farmland in contrast to eighty percent of the non-vulnerable households. The proportion
of households engaged in cultivation on farmland increases by socioeconomic household
status. Non-vulnerable households cultivate on significantly larger areas of land compared
to households from any other socio-economic group. New technologies have increased
agricultural production during the last decade. However, distribution of and access to the
new technologies has been highly uneven, benefiting landed farmers with access to assets
and resources, while bypassing a large group of less fortunate farmers. The poorest
households are heavily dependent on labour for their household income needs. Less than a
quarter (22%) of female-headed households cultivate on farmland compared to half of their
male-headed counterparts. These female-headed households have fewer household members
able to participate in the labour force and have high dependency ratios. The non-vulnerable
x