RURAL BANGLADESH - PreventionWeb

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Socioeconomic Profile Findings Lack of participation in the political process is not surprising throughout the six rural zones, given the community opinions expressed in the focus groups that people remain poorly represented. Conflicts among the villagers, which may be based on land disputes, access to water rights in the Haor or Char regions, or committee decisions, are normally resolved by community shalish, elderly people, members, chairman, or occasionally by political party leaders in most of rural Bangladesh. The situation is a bit different in the CHT, where two parallel systems of administration, the Union Parishad administrative unit and the traditional council of karbaris, headmen and circle chiefs form the basis of political and local decision-making. Villagers are more familiar and comfortable with and express more confidence in the traditional system. Non- Bengali CHT communities appear not to trust what they perceive as an imposed system of governance by a perceived power structure that supports the interests of outsiders. However, confidence in the traditional administrative system, which is predominantly hereditary and non-democratic in nature, is by no means universal. Villagers expressed dismay with unjust decisions, including land redistribution for influence and cases of bribe taking over land registration. 5. LIVELIHOOD STRATEGIES 5.1 AGRICULTURE Cropland Sizes & Landlessness: Landlessness increasingly encumbers households in rural Bangladesh. Last year, less than half of the study households (48 percent) cultivated on farmland. Only 14 percent of the invisible poor cultivated on farmland compared to 80 percent of non-vulnerable households. Agricultural cultivation is strongly correlated with socioeconomic class and as well with sex of household head. Approximately half of maleheaded households were involved in farmland cultivation compared to 22 percent of femaleheaded households. Household cultivation also varies by region. Majority of the households in CHT (65 percent) and Northwest (56 percent) last year cultivated farmland. In contrast, only 43 to 44 percent of households in Char, Haor, and Coastal regions cultivated on farmland. This has to do with the land ownership pattern as stated in Table 22, which indicates that a higher proportion of the study households own agricultural land in CHT and Northwest. Table 37: Household Cultivation on Farmland % within Zone Code Yes No N Percent of Households Cultivated Farmland Last Year Zone Code CHT Costal Drought N/W Char Haor Total 65.0% 43.1% 48.2% 56.3% 44.1% 44.4% 48.3% 35.0% 56.9% 51.8% 43.7% 55.9% 55.6% 51.7% 448 441 442 442 444 444 2661 67
Socioeconomic Profiles of WFP Operational Areas and Beneficiaries Continue Table 37 % within HH socio economic status Yes No N % within Sex of household head N Percent of Households Cultivated Farmland Last Year HH socio economic status Non vulnerable 2 3 79.8% 60.4% 36.4% 14.1% 48.3% 20.2% 39.6% 63.6% 85.9% 51.7% 414 993 858 396 2661 68 Most vulnerable Percent of Households Cultivated Farmland Last Year Yes No Sex of household head Total Female Male Total 23.1% 49.8% 48.3% 76.9% 50.2% 51.7% 155 2506 2661 As expected, farm size increase is highly correlated with socioeconomic status. Land distribution patterns are highly skewed and apparently worsening. Non-vulnerable households cultivate land more than six times larger than that of invisible poor households (352 decimals compared to 56 decimals). In a rural economy dominated by agricultural production and the need for land, non-vulnerable households cultivate holdings averaging five times larger than the farm size of vulnerable households and three times larger than that of on-the-edge households. Farmers in the Northwest and Drought-prone region cultivate more than two acres, which is substantially larger than any of the other regions. Households in the Char and Haor regions cultivate only 114 and 126 decimals of farmland respectively. Female-headed households cultivate relatively smaller farm sizes than do their male-headed counterparts (122 decimals of land compared to 164 decimals). Table 38: Mean Farm Size (in Decimals) Last Year Mean Mean Farm Size WFP priority zone CHT Coastal Drought N/W Char Haor Total Farm size 174.75 152.76 203.15 203.19 114.29 125.73 162.52 Mean Mean Farm Size Socioeconomic status Non Vulnerable 2 3 Most vulnerable Total Farm size 351.63 115.44 69.39 56.09 162.52 Mean Mean Farm Size Sex of household head Female Male Total Farm size 121.79 163.77 162.75 Land Tenure Patterns: Amongst households that cultivated farmland last year, virtually all non-vulnerable households and more than three-quarters of on-the-edge households pursued
Page 2 and 3:
RURAL BANGLADESH SOCIO-ECONOMIC PRO
Page 4 and 5:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This socioeconomic
Page 6 and 7:
Bibliography 97-99 TABLES & FIGURES
Page 8 and 9:
Table 51 Dietary Diversity by House
Page 10 and 11:
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal P
Page 12 and 13:
♦ ♦ ♦ Household survey of 2,7
Page 14 and 15:
households, who farmed on seven tim
Page 16 and 17:
Water & Sanitation: Up to 97% of ru
Page 18 and 19:
RECOMMENDATIONS The following recom
Page 20 and 21:
Socio-Economic Profiles of WFP Oper
Page 22 and 23:
Methodology II METHODOLOGY The asse
Page 24 and 25:
Methodology A list of the qualitati
Page 26 and 27:
Methodology d. Wealth Ranking Exerc
Page 28 and 29:
Livelihoods in Rural Bangladesh: A
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37: Livelihoods in Rural Bangladesh: A
Page 42 and 43: Socioeconomic Profile Findings age
Page 44 and 45: Socioeconomic Profile Findings hous
Page 46 and 47: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Tabl
Page 48 and 49: Socioeconomic Profile Findings The
Page 50 and 51: Socioeconomic Profile Findings On-t
Page 52 and 53: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Cont
Page 54 and 55: Socioeconomic Profile Findings scho
Page 56 and 57: Socioeconomic Profile Findings 12 p
Page 60 and 61: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Figu
Page 66 and 67: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Vari
Page 72 and 73: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Aver
Page 76 and 77: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Use
Page 78 and 79: Socioeconomic Profile Findings invi
Page 80 and 81: Socioeconomic Profile Findings cate
Page 82 and 83: Socioeconomic Profile Findings ♦
Page 88 and 89: Socioeconomic Profile Findings agri
Page 94 and 95: Socioeconomic Profile Findings Remi
Page 96 and 97: Socioeconomic Profile Findings for
Page 98 and 99: Socioeconomic Profile Findings 5.4
Page 100 and 101: Socioeconomic Profile Findings incr
Page 108 and 109: Socioeconomic Profile Findings mont
Page 112 and 113: Socioeconomic Profile Findings whic
Page 114 and 115: Socio-Economic Profiles of WFP Oper
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190:
show all

RURAL BANGLADESH - PreventionWeb

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?