Promoting livelihood opportunities for rural youth - IFAD
Promoting livelihood opportunities for rural youth - IFAD
Promoting livelihood opportunities for rural youth - IFAD
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Investing in the future<br />
Creating <strong>opportunities</strong> <strong>for</strong> young <strong>rural</strong> people<br />
Enabling poor <strong>rural</strong> people to overcome poverty<br />
1
This paper was prepared by Paul Bennell, Senior Partner, Knowledge, Skills and<br />
Development, Brighton, UK, in consultation with Maria Hartl, Technical Adviser <strong>for</strong><br />
Gender and Social Equity in <strong>IFAD</strong>’s Policy and Technical Advisory Division.<br />
The following people reviewed the content: Annina Lubbock, Senior Technical Adviser<br />
<strong>for</strong> Gender and Poverty Targeting, Policy and Technical Advisory Division;<br />
Rosemary Vargas-Lundius, Senior Research Coordinator, Office of Strategy and<br />
Knowledge Management; and Philippe Remy, Country Programme Manager,<br />
West and Central Africa Division.<br />
The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily<br />
represent those of the International Fund <strong>for</strong> Agricultural Development (<strong>IFAD</strong>).<br />
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do<br />
not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of <strong>IFAD</strong> concerning<br />
the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or<br />
concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The designations<br />
“developed” and “developing” countries are intended <strong>for</strong> statistical convenience and<br />
do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular<br />
country or area in the development process. This publication contains material that<br />
has not been subject to <strong>for</strong>mal review. It is circulated to stimulate discussion and<br />
critical comment.<br />
Cover:<br />
Young people harvest rice in the Wangdi area, Bhutan<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/A. Hossain<br />
©2011 International Fund <strong>for</strong> Agricultural Development (<strong>IFAD</strong>)<br />
ISBN 978-92-9072-246-5<br />
August 2011<br />
2
Table of contents<br />
Introduction 4<br />
Who are <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>? 8<br />
Key features of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s 10<br />
Future labour demand in <strong>rural</strong> areas 12<br />
Improving <strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s in <strong>rural</strong> areas 14<br />
Social capital and <strong>youth</strong> empowerment 16<br />
Human capital – basic education 17<br />
Human capital – skills training 18<br />
Financial capital – microfinance and enterprise development 20<br />
Public employment generation 23<br />
Partnerships to promote <strong>youth</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s 24<br />
Concluding remarks 26<br />
References 28<br />
Tables<br />
1 Youth unemployment rates by region 1999 and 2009 7<br />
Boxes<br />
1 EGMM in Andhra Pradesh 11<br />
2 The Rural Finance and Community Improvement Programme, Sierra Leone 17<br />
3 Farmer Field Schools in East Africa 18<br />
4 The San Francisco Agricultural School in Paraguay 19<br />
5 Employment creation <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> in NENA 21
Abbreviations and acronyms<br />
CIS<br />
EGMM<br />
EU<br />
FAO<br />
IFPRI<br />
ILO<br />
MDGs<br />
NENA<br />
PRSP<br />
SSA<br />
UWESO<br />
WDR<br />
YEN<br />
Commonwealth of Independent States<br />
Employment Generation and Marketing Mission<br />
European Union<br />
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations<br />
International Food Policy Research Institute<br />
International Labour Office<br />
Millennium Development Goals<br />
Near East and North Africa<br />
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper<br />
Sub-Saharan Africa<br />
Uganda Women’s Ef<strong>for</strong>t to Save Orphans<br />
World Development Report<br />
Youth Employment Network<br />
3
Introduction<br />
This paper 1 reviews the situation of <strong>rural</strong><br />
<strong>youth</strong> in developing countries and presents<br />
options <strong>for</strong> improving their <strong>livelihood</strong>s in<br />
light of the many growing challenges they<br />
face. The main geographical focus is<br />
sub-Saharan Africa and the Near East and<br />
North Africa.<br />
Rural <strong>youth</strong> in developing countries make up<br />
a very large and vulnerable group that is<br />
seriously affected by the current international<br />
economic crisis. Globally, three-quarters of<br />
poor people live in <strong>rural</strong> areas, and about<br />
one-half of the population are young people.<br />
Climate change and the growing food crisis<br />
are also expected to have a disproportionately<br />
high impact on <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. The Food and<br />
Agriculture Organization of the United<br />
Nations (FAO) estimates that nearly half a<br />
billion <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> “do not get the chance to<br />
realize their full potential” (FAO, 2009).<br />
The 2005 International Labour Organization<br />
(ILO) report on Global Employment Trends<br />
<strong>for</strong> Youth states: “today’s <strong>youth</strong> represent a<br />
group with serious vulnerabilities in the<br />
world of work. In recent years, slowing global<br />
employment growth and increasing<br />
unemployment, underemployment and<br />
disillusionment have hit young people<br />
hardest. As a result, today’s <strong>youth</strong> are faced<br />
with a growing deficit of decent work<br />
<strong>opportunities</strong> and high levels of economic<br />
and social uncertainty” (ILO, 2005).<br />
The lack of decent employment rather than<br />
open unemployment is the central issue in<br />
the majority of <strong>rural</strong> locations. In overall<br />
terms, four times as many young people earn<br />
less than US$2 a day than are unemployed.<br />
Youth are particularly vulnerable in conflict<br />
and post-conflict countries. Very high <strong>youth</strong><br />
unemployment coupled with rapid<br />
urbanization has fuelled civil conflict in<br />
many countries.<br />
It is widely recognized that smallholder<br />
agriculture and non-farm production in<br />
<strong>rural</strong> areas are among the most promising<br />
sectors <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> employment in the<br />
majority of developing countries. However,<br />
harnessing this potential remains an<br />
enormous challenge.<br />
While the crisis of ‘<strong>youth</strong> unemployment’<br />
(particularly in urban areas) has been a<br />
persistent concern of politicians and<br />
policymakers since the 1960s, <strong>youth</strong><br />
development has remained at the margins<br />
of national development strategies in most<br />
countries. We are now witnessing, however,<br />
a resurgence of interest in <strong>youth</strong>, the reasons<br />
<strong>for</strong> which stem from a growing realization<br />
of the seriously negative political, social and<br />
economic consequences stemming from the<br />
precariousness of <strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s.<br />
For many, this amounts to a ‘<strong>youth</strong> crisis’,<br />
the resolution of which requires innovative,<br />
wide-ranging ‘<strong>youth</strong>-friendly’ policies and<br />
implementation strategies.<br />
1 The original version of this paper was shared as a<br />
background paper at the round table on “Generating<br />
remunerative <strong>livelihood</strong> <strong>opportunities</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>” at<br />
the Thirtieth Session of <strong>IFAD</strong>’s Governing Council held<br />
13-14 February 2007 in Rome, Italy. It has been revised to<br />
take into account the latest developments in this area,<br />
especially <strong>IFAD</strong> support <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong> programming.<br />
4
A member of a local cooperative<br />
transplants seedlings in<br />
Ambalatenina village, Madagascar<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/R. Ramasomanana
A worker packages decorative plants<br />
cultivated in a greenhouse, Loreto<br />
Corrientes, Argentina<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/G. Bizzarri
The United Nations’ Millennium<br />
Development Goals (MDGs) single out <strong>youth</strong><br />
as a key target group. Target 16 of the MDGs<br />
is to develop and implement strategies <strong>for</strong><br />
decent and productive work <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
The 2007 World Development Report<br />
published by the World Bank also focused<br />
on <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
The global population of young people aged<br />
12-24 is about 1.3 billion. The <strong>youth</strong><br />
population is projected to peak at 1.5 billion<br />
in 2035 and it will increase most rapidly in<br />
sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and Southeast Asia<br />
(by 26 per cent and 20 per cent respectively<br />
between 2005 and 2035). FAO estimates that<br />
about 55 per cent of <strong>youth</strong>s reside in <strong>rural</strong><br />
areas, but this figure is as high as 70 per cent<br />
in SSA and South Asia. In SSA, young people<br />
aged 15-24 comprise 36 per cent of the entire<br />
labour <strong>for</strong>ce, 33 per cent in the Near East and<br />
North Africa (NENA), and 29 per cent in<br />
South Asia. About 85 per cent of the<br />
additional 500 million young people who<br />
will reach working age during the next decade<br />
live in developing countries. The global<br />
economic downturn has accelerated the<br />
growth of the <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> population because<br />
many young migrants to urban areas are<br />
returning to their <strong>rural</strong> homes and other<br />
young people are discouraged from migrating<br />
to urban areas.<br />
Globally, <strong>youth</strong> are nearly three times<br />
more likely to be unemployed than adults<br />
(ILO, 2010). 2 However, the incidence of <strong>youth</strong><br />
unemployment varies considerably from one<br />
region to another. It is highest in the NENA<br />
region, where nearly one-quarter of all <strong>youth</strong><br />
are classified as being unemployed. It is<br />
lowest in East Asia and South Asia with rates<br />
of 9.0 per cent and 10.7 per cent respectively.<br />
Youth unemployment in sub-Saharan Africa<br />
was 12.6 per cent in 2009 (table 1).<br />
(Breakdowns of <strong>rural</strong> and urban <strong>youth</strong><br />
unemployment rates are not available.)<br />
Particularly high rates of <strong>youth</strong><br />
unemployment are closely linked with<br />
high rates of landlessness – <strong>for</strong> example,<br />
20 per cent in NENA.<br />
2 Young people aged 15-24 are estimated to account <strong>for</strong><br />
60 per cent of the unemployed in sub-Saharan Africa.<br />
TABLE 1<br />
Youth unemployment rates by region 1999 and 2009<br />
Region 1999 2009<br />
Developed economies and EU 13.9 17.7<br />
Central and Eastern Europe and CIS 22.7 21.5<br />
East Asia 9.2 9.0<br />
South East Asia and Pacific 13.1 15.3<br />
South Asia 9.8 10.7<br />
Latin America and the Caribbean 15.6 16.6<br />
Middle East 20.5 22.3<br />
North Africa 27.3 24.7<br />
Sub-Saharan Africa 12.6 12.6<br />
Source: ILO, Global Employment Trends, 2010.<br />
7
Who are <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>?<br />
Age and location are the two key defining<br />
characteristics of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. Age definitions<br />
of <strong>youth</strong> vary quite considerably. The United<br />
Nations defines <strong>youth</strong> as all individuals aged<br />
between 15 and 24. The 2007 World<br />
Development Report, which focuses on<br />
‘the next generation’, expands the definition<br />
of <strong>youth</strong> to include all young people aged<br />
between 12 and 14. Similar definitional<br />
variations exist with regard to location.<br />
Distinguishing between who is <strong>rural</strong> and who<br />
is urban is increasingly difficult, especially<br />
with the expansion of ‘peri-urban’ areas<br />
where large proportions of the population<br />
rely on agricultural activities to meet their<br />
<strong>livelihood</strong> needs.<br />
Traditionally, policy discussions concerning<br />
<strong>youth</strong> have been based on the premise that<br />
<strong>youth</strong> are in transition from childhood to<br />
adulthood and, as such, have specific<br />
characteristics that make them a distinct<br />
demographic and social category. This<br />
transition is multi-faceted. It involves the<br />
sexual maturation of individuals, their growing<br />
autonomy, and their social and economic<br />
independence from parents and other carers.<br />
The nature of the transition from childhood<br />
to adulthood has changed over time and<br />
varies considerably from one region to<br />
another. Rural children in developing<br />
countries become adults quickly mainly<br />
because the transition from school to work<br />
usually occurs at an early age and is<br />
completed in a short space of time. The same<br />
is true <strong>for</strong> poor young <strong>rural</strong> women with<br />
regard to marriage and childbearing. ‘Lack of<br />
alternatives’ is the major reason given <strong>for</strong> very<br />
high levels of marriage and childbearing<br />
among <strong>rural</strong> adolescent girls. Rural survival<br />
strategies demand that young people fully<br />
contribute to meeting the <strong>livelihood</strong> needs<br />
of their households from an early age.<br />
Consequently, <strong>youth</strong> as a transitional stage<br />
barely exists <strong>for</strong> the large majority of <strong>rural</strong><br />
<strong>youth</strong>, and the poor in particular. Many<br />
children aged 5-14 also work (<strong>for</strong> example,<br />
80 per cent in <strong>rural</strong> Ethiopia).<br />
Another related attribute of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> is that<br />
they tend to lack economic independence or<br />
‘autonomy’. The <strong>rural</strong> household is a joint<br />
venture, and the gender division of labour<br />
is such that full, individual control of the<br />
productive process is virtually impossible <strong>for</strong><br />
women in many countries. Given that large<br />
proportions of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> are subordinate<br />
members of usually large extended<br />
households, they are largely dependent on<br />
their parents <strong>for</strong> their <strong>livelihood</strong> needs.<br />
As <strong>youth</strong> grow older, the autonomy of males<br />
increases, but contracts <strong>for</strong> females. Moreover,<br />
in most traditional and poorest populations<br />
in low-income countries, girls typically marry<br />
shortly after menarche or when they leave school.<br />
Rural <strong>youth</strong> are also very heterogeneous.<br />
The World Bank definition of <strong>youth</strong><br />
encompasses the 12 year-old pre-pubescent<br />
boy attending primary school in a remote<br />
<strong>rural</strong> area and a 24-year old single mother of<br />
four children eking out an existence vending<br />
on the streets of a large <strong>rural</strong> village. Since<br />
8
their <strong>livelihood</strong> needs are markedly different,<br />
they require very different sets or ‘packages’<br />
of policy interventions. The same is true <strong>for</strong><br />
other distinct groups of <strong>rural</strong> disadvantaged<br />
<strong>youth</strong> including the disabled, ex-combatants<br />
and orphans. A clear separation also has to<br />
be made between school-aged <strong>youth</strong> and<br />
post-school <strong>youth</strong>. One of the main reasons<br />
<strong>youth</strong> programming has attracted such little<br />
support from governments, NGOs and donor<br />
agencies is that post-school <strong>youth</strong> are usually<br />
subsumed into the adult population as a<br />
whole. The implicit assumption is, there<strong>for</strong>e,<br />
that this group does not face any additional<br />
problems accessing the limited support<br />
services that are available <strong>for</strong> the adult<br />
population as a whole. Nor do they have any<br />
social and economic needs that relate<br />
specifically to their age that would<br />
give them priority over and above other<br />
economically excluded and socially<br />
vulnerable groups. The logical conclusion<br />
of this line of argument is that, given the<br />
limited relevance of <strong>youth</strong> as a distinct and<br />
protracted transitional phase in most <strong>rural</strong><br />
areas coupled with the heterogeneity of<br />
<strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>, <strong>youth</strong> may have limited<br />
usefulness as a social category around which<br />
major <strong>rural</strong> development policy initiatives<br />
should be developed.<br />
It is certainly the case that, with a few<br />
exceptions (such as South Africa), <strong>youth</strong> as<br />
a target group is not a major policy priority<br />
of most governments in low-income<br />
developing countries. Ministries of <strong>youth</strong><br />
are generally very poorly resourced and are<br />
usually subsumed with other government<br />
responsibilities, most commonly culture,<br />
sports and education. With regard<br />
to national poverty alleviation strategies,<br />
<strong>youth</strong> receives very little attention in most<br />
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs).<br />
A 2005 overview of PRSPs conducted by the<br />
Economic Commission <strong>for</strong> Africa concluded<br />
that <strong>youth</strong> are still being overlooked.<br />
In particular, the chapters in PRSPs on<br />
agriculture rarely mention <strong>youth</strong>. Similarly,<br />
the standard chapter on ‘crosscutting’ issues<br />
focuses only on gender, environment and<br />
HIV/AIDS. In only two out of 12 PRSPs <strong>for</strong><br />
African countries that were reviewed <strong>youth</strong><br />
is singled out as a special group in<br />
mainstreaming employment, and, even<br />
in these exceptional cases, urban <strong>youth</strong> is<br />
of greater concern than <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. Even the<br />
World Development Report on <strong>youth</strong> (2007),<br />
devotes only four paragraphs to how to<br />
expand <strong>rural</strong> <strong>opportunities</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> and<br />
focuses mainly on <strong>rural</strong> non-farm activities.<br />
Only a relatively small number of recent<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong> projects specifically targeted <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
These projects were mainly concentrated<br />
in the NENA region, where levels of open<br />
unemployment among <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> are<br />
particularly high. However, considerably<br />
more attention is now being given to <strong>youth</strong><br />
programming, with a particular focus on<br />
promoting <strong>youth</strong> employment through both<br />
farm and non-farm enterprise development.<br />
In the past, <strong>IFAD</strong> provided only limited<br />
funding <strong>for</strong> capacity development, especially<br />
skills training, <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> in agricultural<br />
activities. In part, this was because there is<br />
no specific education component in <strong>IFAD</strong>’s<br />
core mandate, although vocational training is<br />
offered across all agricultural specializations.<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong> is, however, becoming increasingly<br />
interested in providing support <strong>for</strong> targeted<br />
training <strong>for</strong> young farmers.<br />
9
Key features of <strong>rural</strong><br />
<strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s<br />
Most <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> are either employed<br />
(waged and self-employed) or not in the<br />
labour <strong>for</strong>ce. The issue, there<strong>for</strong>e, is not so<br />
much about unemployment, but serious<br />
under-employment in low productivity,<br />
predominantly household-based activities.<br />
The ILO estimates that about 300 million<br />
<strong>youth</strong>s (one-quarter of the total) live on less<br />
than US$2 a day. The unemployed are mainly<br />
better educated urban <strong>youth</strong> who can af<strong>for</strong>d<br />
to engage in relatively protracted job searches.<br />
It is better, there<strong>for</strong>e, to focus on improving<br />
the <strong>livelihood</strong>s of the most disadvantaged<br />
<strong>youth</strong> rather than those who are unemployed.<br />
Access to key productive assets, particularly<br />
land, is a critical issue <strong>for</strong> young people.<br />
It is often argued (although usually not<br />
based on robust evidence) that <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong><br />
are increasingly disinterested in smallholder<br />
farming and tend to travel nationally and,<br />
increasingly, across international borders,<br />
in search of employment.<br />
This exodus of young people from <strong>rural</strong> areas<br />
is resulting in a marked ageing of the <strong>rural</strong><br />
population in some countries. In some<br />
provinces in China, <strong>for</strong> example, the average<br />
age of farmers is 45-50 years. Recent research<br />
shows that migration from <strong>rural</strong> to urban<br />
areas will continue on a large scale, and that<br />
this is an essential part of the <strong>livelihood</strong><br />
coping strategies of poor <strong>rural</strong> people.<br />
Temporary migration and commuting are<br />
also a routine part of the combined<br />
<strong>rural</strong>-urban <strong>livelihood</strong> strategies of poor<br />
people across a wide range of developing<br />
countries (Deshingkar, 2004). In many parts<br />
of Asia and Africa, remittances from <strong>rural</strong> to<br />
urban migration are overtaking the income<br />
from agriculture. It is important, there<strong>for</strong>e,<br />
that young people in <strong>rural</strong> areas are prepared<br />
<strong>for</strong> productive lives in both <strong>rural</strong> and urban<br />
environments. Policymakers should, in turn,<br />
revise negative perceptions of migration and<br />
view migration as socially and economically<br />
desirable (see box 1).<br />
10
BOX 1<br />
EGMM in Andhra Pradesh<br />
The Employment Generation and Marketing Mission (EGMM), which was established by the Andhra<br />
Pradesh state government in India, is a good example of a successful, pro-migration employment<br />
generation scheme <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. It relies on an extensive network of 800,000 self-help groups that<br />
works closely with the business community to help <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> find <strong>for</strong>mal-sector employment.<br />
Rural academies provide short high-quality, focused training courses in retail, security, English, work<br />
readiness and computers. Youth trained in the programme earn about three to four times the<br />
income of a <strong>rural</strong> farm household in the state.<br />
Rural <strong>youth</strong> tend to be poorly educated,<br />
especially in comparison with urban <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
The extent of ‘urban bias’ in the provision<br />
of publicly funded education and training<br />
services is large in most low-income<br />
developing countries (see Bennell, 1999).<br />
The deployment of teachers and other key<br />
workers to <strong>rural</strong> areas amounts to nothing<br />
less than a crisis in many countries. Poor<br />
quality education, high (direct and indirect)<br />
schooling costs, and the paucity of ‘good<br />
jobs’ continue to dampen the demand <strong>for</strong><br />
education among poor parents.<br />
Rural <strong>youth</strong> have been heavily involved<br />
in civil wars, and other <strong>for</strong>ms of conflict<br />
in a growing number of countries, which<br />
poses a major threat to the long-term<br />
development prospects of these countries.<br />
Traditional safety nets are breaking down<br />
and <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> expectations <strong>for</strong> a better life<br />
are increasing, especially with access to global<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation technologies.<br />
Rural <strong>youth</strong> face major health problems,<br />
including malnutrition, malaria and<br />
HIV/AIDS. It is important, however, to keep<br />
the direct health threat posed by HIV/AIDS<br />
in proper perspective. Except <strong>for</strong> a handful<br />
of very high prevalence countries,<br />
HIV prevalence among <strong>rural</strong> teenagers<br />
remains very low. In very large countries in<br />
sub-Saharan Africa such as Ethiopia, Nigeria,<br />
the Democratic Republic of the Congo and<br />
all of Asia and Central and South America,<br />
the incidence of HIV infection among <strong>rural</strong><br />
teenagers is well under one per cent.<br />
The main impact of the AIDS epidemic on<br />
<strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s is the rapidly growing<br />
number of children and <strong>youth</strong> whose parents<br />
have died from AIDS-related illnesses.<br />
As with the <strong>rural</strong> population as a whole,<br />
<strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> are engaged in a diverse range<br />
of productive activities, both agricultural and<br />
non-agricultural. Statistics are limited, but the<br />
proportions of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> engaged in waged<br />
and self-employment in both these main areas<br />
of activity varies considerably across countries.<br />
The lack of access to basic infrastructure in<br />
<strong>rural</strong> areas is also a key issue. In the majority<br />
of countries in SSA, less than 10 per cent of<br />
<strong>rural</strong> households have access to electricity and<br />
less than half have access to drinking water<br />
within 15 minutes of their homes.<br />
The impact on <strong>youth</strong> can be particularly<br />
severe. For example, girls and young<br />
women are usually responsible <strong>for</strong> water<br />
collection, and the lack of electricity<br />
seriously limits training and other<br />
employment creation <strong>opportunities</strong>.<br />
11
Future labour demand<br />
in <strong>rural</strong> areas<br />
Over the coming decades, there will be much<br />
debate and uncertainty about the roles and<br />
contributions of the agricultural and <strong>rural</strong><br />
non-farm sectors in the development process.<br />
It is impossible, there<strong>for</strong>e, to make robust<br />
projections of future labour demand in <strong>rural</strong><br />
areas. Rural reality is changing fast in many<br />
countries. Agriculture is increasingly<br />
sophisticated and commercial, and a<br />
growing share of <strong>rural</strong> incomes comes from<br />
the non-farm economy. Many poor <strong>rural</strong><br />
people are part-time farmers or are landless.<br />
It is widely recognized that <strong>rural</strong> diversification<br />
will be the lynchpin of successful agricultural<br />
trans<strong>for</strong>mation in the future. Where <strong>rural</strong><br />
diversification is not economically feasible, the<br />
alternative will be the transition of economic<br />
activity from <strong>rural</strong> to urban areas. Whatever the<br />
outcome, <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> will be at the <strong>for</strong>efront<br />
of this process of change.<br />
Rural non-farm activities account <strong>for</strong> a large<br />
and growing share of employment and<br />
income, especially among the poor and<br />
women who lack key assets, most notably<br />
land. The <strong>rural</strong> non-farm sector is seen as the<br />
‘ladder’ from under employment in lowproductivity<br />
smallholder production to<br />
regular wage employment in the local<br />
economy and from there to jobs in the<br />
<strong>for</strong>mal sector. The key policy goals <strong>for</strong> the<br />
<strong>rural</strong> non-farm sector are to identify the key<br />
engines of growth, focus on sub sectorspecific<br />
supply chains, and build flexible<br />
institutional coalitions of public and private<br />
agencies (see Haggblade et al 2002).<br />
Traditionally, manpower planners have<br />
assumed that increased demand <strong>for</strong> labour<br />
in a particular sector, such as smallholder<br />
agriculture, depends on the projected rate<br />
of growth of output and the elasticity of<br />
employment with respect to output <strong>for</strong> that<br />
specific sector. However, in countries without<br />
unemployment benefit systems, these<br />
assumptions generally do not apply. 3<br />
Consequently, an increase in the demand<br />
<strong>for</strong> labour is reflected in an increase in the<br />
quality rather than the quantity of<br />
employment: workers move from unpaid to<br />
wage jobs, from worse jobs to better jobs, etc.<br />
Subsistence agriculture and in<strong>for</strong>mal sectors<br />
are ‘sponges’ <strong>for</strong> surplus labour. Also, the<br />
traditional manpower planning analysis sets<br />
up a false conflict between increasing<br />
productivity and increasing employment.<br />
It leads employment planners to talk about<br />
the threat posed to jobs of too fast growth in<br />
productivity, whereas the process is entirely the<br />
opposite. Increasing productivity is at the centre<br />
stage <strong>for</strong> any strategy to increase the quality of<br />
employment (Godfrey, 2005 and 2006).<br />
Growth in productive-sector wage<br />
employment is a source of dynamism in the<br />
labour market as a whole. When wage<br />
employment increases, the self-employed in<br />
both <strong>rural</strong> and urban areas, also face less<br />
competition <strong>for</strong> assets and customers and enjoy<br />
an increase in the demand <strong>for</strong> their products.<br />
3 This is because total employment is largely supply<br />
determined and employment elasticities of demand tend to<br />
vary inversely with output growth.<br />
12
The regions that have been most successful<br />
recently in increasing demand <strong>for</strong> labour and<br />
reducing the incidence of poverty are those<br />
where the share of productive-sector wage<br />
earners in total employment has been rising.<br />
Unless demand <strong>for</strong> labour is expanding it is<br />
very difficult to design and implement<br />
programmes to increase the integrability<br />
of disadvantaged <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
Boosting labour demand will depend on<br />
promoting growth sectors in the <strong>rural</strong><br />
economy in line with dynamic comparative<br />
advantage (which will be natural resourcebased<br />
in most countries) supported by an<br />
appropriate macroeconomic policy framework.<br />
Young women collect water,<br />
Dan Bako village, the Niger<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/D. Rose
Improving <strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s<br />
in <strong>rural</strong> areas<br />
A clear distinction should be made between,<br />
on the one hand, social and economic<br />
policies that are not specifically targeted at<br />
<strong>youth</strong>, but nonetheless benefit <strong>youth</strong>, either<br />
directly or indirectly, and, on the other hand,<br />
<strong>youth</strong>-specific policies that do target <strong>youth</strong><br />
as a whole or groups of <strong>youth</strong>. It is widely<br />
alleged that <strong>youth</strong> development is at the<br />
periphery of the development agenda in most<br />
countries. And yet, given that <strong>youth</strong> comprise<br />
such a large proportion of the <strong>rural</strong> labour<br />
<strong>for</strong>ce, most development projects and<br />
programmes in <strong>rural</strong> areas do promote <strong>youth</strong><br />
<strong>livelihood</strong>s to a large extent. Youth is the<br />
primary client group <strong>for</strong> education and training<br />
programmes as well as health and health<br />
prevention activities. Even so, participatory<br />
assessments often show that <strong>rural</strong> communities<br />
want more <strong>youth</strong>-focused activities.<br />
The 2007 World Development Report (WDR)<br />
on <strong>youth</strong> concludes that <strong>youth</strong> policies often<br />
fail. Youth policies in developing countries<br />
have frequently been criticized <strong>for</strong> being<br />
biased towards non-poor, males living in<br />
urban areas. Given the paucity of <strong>youth</strong><br />
support services in many countries, they<br />
tend to be captured by non-poor <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
For example, secondary school-leavers in<br />
SSA have increasingly taken over <strong>rural</strong><br />
training centres originally meant <strong>for</strong> primary<br />
school-leavers and secondary school<br />
dropouts. National <strong>youth</strong> service schemes<br />
enrol only university graduates and<br />
occasionally secondary school leavers,<br />
most of who are neither poor or from <strong>rural</strong><br />
areas. Many schemes have been scrapped during<br />
the last given deepening fiscal crises coupled<br />
with the relatively high costs of these schemes.<br />
The World Bank’s 2007 global inventory<br />
of interventions to support young workers is<br />
based on 289 documented projects and other<br />
interventions in 84 countries. However, only<br />
13 per cent of the projects were in SSA and<br />
NENA and less than 10 per cent of<br />
interventions were targeted exclusively in<br />
<strong>rural</strong> areas. Two other notable findings are<br />
the predominance of skills training<br />
interventions and the very limited robust<br />
evidence available on project outcomes and<br />
impacts (Betcherman et al, 2007).<br />
A common misconception of <strong>youth</strong> policy<br />
has been that boys and girls are a<br />
homogeneous group. Uncritical focusing on<br />
<strong>youth</strong> could, there<strong>for</strong>e, divert attention away<br />
from the gender agenda since female and<br />
male <strong>youth</strong> often have conflicting interests.<br />
Rural adolescent girls are virtually trapped<br />
within the domestic sphere in many<br />
countries. Because boys spend more time<br />
in productive activities that generate income,<br />
they are more visible and are more likely,<br />
there<strong>for</strong>e, to be supported.<br />
Sexual reproductive health issues have<br />
increasingly dominated <strong>youth</strong> policy during<br />
the last decade. Up to the 1990s, the main<br />
preoccupation of governments and donors was<br />
to reduce <strong>youth</strong> fertility rates (through later<br />
marriage and smaller families). Since then, the<br />
focus (in at least in SSA) has shifted to reducing<br />
the risks of HIV infection among <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
14
Children harvest lotus flowers<br />
in Galgamuwa, Sri Lanka<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/G.M.B. Akash<br />
At the most general level, <strong>youth</strong> employment<br />
policies should focus on (i) increasing the<br />
demand <strong>for</strong> labour in relation to supply;<br />
and (ii) increasing the ‘integrability’ of<br />
disadvantaged <strong>youth</strong> so that they can take<br />
advantage of labour market and other<br />
economic <strong>opportunities</strong> when they arise.<br />
There are three main aspects of <strong>youth</strong><br />
integration namely, remedying or<br />
counteracting market failure (labour, credit,<br />
location, training systems), optimizing labour<br />
market regulations, and improving the skills<br />
of disadvantaged <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
There is a fairly standard list of policy<br />
interventions to improve the <strong>livelihood</strong>s<br />
of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> that are enumerated in policy<br />
discussions as well as in policy documents<br />
and the academic literature. The United<br />
Nation’s World Programme of Action <strong>for</strong><br />
Youth, which was originally promulgated<br />
in 1995, identifies the following ‘fields of<br />
action’: education, employment, hunger<br />
and poverty, health, environment, drug<br />
abuse, juvenile delinquency and leisure.<br />
Youth <strong>livelihood</strong> improvement programmes<br />
typically distinguish between interventions<br />
that improve capabilities and resources<br />
(especially education, health, ‘life skills’,<br />
training and financial services/credit) and<br />
those that structure <strong>opportunities</strong> (individual<br />
and group income generation activities,<br />
promoting access to markets, land,<br />
infrastructure and other services), the<br />
protection and promotion of rights and the<br />
development of <strong>youth</strong> institutions.<br />
There is also increasing awareness of the<br />
inter-relatedness and linkages between<br />
different kinds of interventions <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
In particular, in the context of the AIDS<br />
epidemic, it is contended that improved<br />
<strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s may reduce the incidence<br />
of high-risk ‘transactional’ sexual<br />
relationships, which are mainly motivated by<br />
material gain (the ‘sex-<strong>for</strong>-food, food-<strong>for</strong>-sex’<br />
syndrome). Integrated programming is,<br />
there<strong>for</strong>e, desirable, but is complicated, both<br />
with to programme design and implementation.<br />
15
According to the sustainable <strong>livelihood</strong>s<br />
approach, the <strong>livelihood</strong> ‘capital assets’ of<br />
<strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> can be broken down into the<br />
following four main types: political and<br />
social, physical and natural, human and<br />
financial. A wide range of <strong>livelihood</strong><br />
improvement interventions has been<br />
undertaken with respect to these asset types.<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong>’s core mandate focuses mainly on<br />
strengthening the productive base of <strong>rural</strong><br />
households and, as such, is most directly<br />
related to interventions that improve physical<br />
and natural and financial assets as well as jobrelated<br />
human capital through skills training.<br />
The available evidence strongly suggests that<br />
comprehensive multiple services approaches<br />
(such as the Jovenes programmes in South<br />
America) are more effective than fragmented<br />
interventions <strong>for</strong> generating sustainable<br />
employment <strong>opportunities</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. However,<br />
such approaches are relatively expensive, which<br />
continues to limit their applicability in most<br />
low-income developing countries.<br />
Social capital and <strong>youth</strong> empowerment<br />
Youth, especially in <strong>rural</strong> areas, do not<br />
usually constitute an organized and vocal<br />
constituency with the economic and social<br />
power to lobby on their own behalf.<br />
Consequently, empowering <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> to<br />
take an active role in agriculture and <strong>rural</strong><br />
development is critical. Successful <strong>youth</strong><br />
policies also depend on effective<br />
representation by <strong>youth</strong>. Traditionally, despite<br />
their size, <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> have had limited social<br />
and political power. Older people, and<br />
especially older males, tend to dominate<br />
decision-making at all levels in <strong>rural</strong> societies.<br />
In SSA, some writers refer to this as a<br />
gerontocracy. The subordinate position of<br />
<strong>youth</strong> has been further compounded by the<br />
traditional welfare approach – <strong>youth</strong> are<br />
viewed as presenting problems that need to<br />
be solved through the intervention of older<br />
people. It is now widely accepted, however,<br />
that <strong>youth</strong> can play a major role in improving<br />
governance nationally and locally, and in<br />
implementing key economic and social<br />
policies. In particular, <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> should be<br />
at the <strong>for</strong>efront of ef<strong>for</strong>ts to broaden<br />
<strong>opportunities</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> people. Urban bias<br />
with respect to macro-, sector- and meso-level<br />
policies and related resource allocations is<br />
also likely to become even more acute as the<br />
problems in urban areas increase and needs<br />
to be countered. Well-designed interventions<br />
are required to build up the political and<br />
social capital of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. Youth have to<br />
be mobilized so that they are able to<br />
participate fully and gain ownership over<br />
<strong>youth</strong> development strategies and policies.<br />
This becomes even more challenging <strong>for</strong><br />
young people who are under 18 and who are,<br />
there<strong>for</strong>e, still considered to be children.<br />
New ways of working with young people<br />
in <strong>rural</strong> areas are being pioneered in many<br />
countries. Rural <strong>youth</strong> organizations and<br />
networks should be established and<br />
strengthened. There are many exciting<br />
developments in this area. For example, the<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong>-funded Rural Youth Talents Programme<br />
in South America is based on a new strategy<br />
that seeks to systematize and publicize the<br />
experiences and lessons learned from <strong>rural</strong><br />
<strong>youth</strong> programming. The ILO-supported<br />
Youth-to-Youth Fund in Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea,<br />
Liberia, Sierra Leone and three East African<br />
countries (Kenya, Uganda and the United<br />
Republic of Tanzania) also demonstrates how<br />
<strong>youth</strong>-led organizations can effectively<br />
promote <strong>rural</strong>-based farming and non-farming<br />
enterprises. The Mercy Corps Youth<br />
Trans<strong>for</strong>mation Framework has adopted a<br />
similar approach in 40 fragile environment<br />
countries. Community Action Plans have been<br />
successfully piloted in Jordan, which map<br />
<strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong> <strong>opportunities</strong> with the<br />
greatest potential and foster an entrepreneurial<br />
mindset with a strong focus on life-skills<br />
training. The provision of financial services<br />
<strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> in Sierra Leone is another<br />
pioneering initiative (see box 2).<br />
16
BOX 2<br />
The Rural Finance and Community Improvement Programme,<br />
Sierra Leone<br />
The objective of this initiative is to help poor <strong>rural</strong> people, especially <strong>youth</strong>, gain access to<br />
financial services by establishing financial services associations. Each <strong>for</strong>mally registered<br />
association enables <strong>rural</strong> communities to access a comprehensive range of financial services.<br />
It capitalizes on in<strong>for</strong>mal local rules, customs, relationships, local knowledge and solidarity, while<br />
introducing <strong>for</strong>mal banking concepts and methods. The current associations are wholly managed<br />
by young people. Each association has a manager and a cashier selected by the programme from<br />
the local community.<br />
Human capital – basic education<br />
Nearly 140 million <strong>youth</strong>s in developing<br />
countries are classified as ‘illiterate’. More<br />
generally, the preparation of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> <strong>for</strong><br />
productive work is poor (see Atchorarena and<br />
Gasperini, 2009). According to the 2007<br />
World Development Report, ‘changing<br />
circumstances’ mean that much greater<br />
attention needs to be given to the human<br />
capital needs of <strong>youth</strong>. These “include new<br />
health risks, the changing nature of politics<br />
and the growth of civil society, globalization<br />
and new technologies, expansion in access to<br />
basic education and the rising demand <strong>for</strong><br />
workers with higher education”.<br />
There is no simple, direct link between<br />
education and employment. However, the<br />
best way to improve the future employment<br />
and <strong>livelihood</strong> prospects of disadvantaged<br />
young people in both <strong>rural</strong> and urban areas<br />
is to ensure that they stay in school until they<br />
are least functionally literate and numerate.<br />
Expanding girl’s education is the most<br />
obvious lever to change the situation of<br />
young women. In the majority of low-income<br />
developing countries, however, <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong><br />
still do not acquire these basic competencies.<br />
In Ethiopia, <strong>for</strong> example, nearly threequarters<br />
of 15-24 year olds have no<br />
schooling. In SSA and South Asia more<br />
than one-third of <strong>youth</strong> were still classified as<br />
illiterate in 2002. The availability of primary<br />
schooling in <strong>rural</strong> areas is improving rapidly<br />
in many countries, but the quality of<br />
education remains generally very low and<br />
is even declining in some countries.<br />
There are also major concerns about<br />
the relevance of schooling in <strong>rural</strong> areas.<br />
Curricula are criticized <strong>for</strong> not adequately<br />
preparing children <strong>for</strong> productive <strong>rural</strong> lives<br />
and, worse still, fueling <strong>youth</strong> aspirations to<br />
move to urban areas. Calls persist <strong>for</strong> the<br />
vocationalization of schooling in <strong>rural</strong> areas,<br />
despite the fact that previous initiatives to<br />
do so have failed in most countries <strong>for</strong><br />
both supply and demand-side reasons.<br />
Governments and other providers should,<br />
there<strong>for</strong>e, focus on delivering reasonable<br />
quality basic education. The current push <strong>for</strong><br />
eight years of universal basic education in<br />
most countries means that most children will<br />
not complete their schooling until they are<br />
15-16 years old.<br />
17
BOX 3<br />
Farmer Field Schools in East Africa<br />
FAO, other UN agencies and NGOs are supporting the establishment of Farmer Field Schools in<br />
East Africa. The schools combine FAO’s popular Farmer Field School teaching methodology, which<br />
is designed to teach adult farmers about the ecology of their fields through first-hand observation<br />
and analysis, and the Farmer Life School, which uses similar analytical techniques to teach human<br />
behaviour and AIDS prevention.<br />
A recently conducted comprehensive impact evaluation of Farmer Field Schools in Kenya, Uganda<br />
and the United Republic of Tanzania by a team from the International Food Policy Research Institute<br />
(IFPRI) concluded that participation increased income by 61 per cent across the three countries as<br />
a whole. The most significant change was <strong>for</strong> crop production in Kenya (80 per cent increase) and<br />
in the United Republic of Tanzania <strong>for</strong> agricultural income (more than a 100 per cent increase).<br />
The main reason <strong>for</strong> these positive impacts is that adoption of new agricultural technologies and<br />
innovations is significantly higher among farmers who attend the schools. Another key finding is<br />
that younger farmers are more likely to participate in the schools than older farmers in all three<br />
countries and that female-headed households benefited significantly more than male-headed<br />
households in Uganda (Davis, 2009).<br />
Given the endemic problems of <strong>rural</strong><br />
schooling with high drop-out rates, support<br />
<strong>for</strong> non-<strong>for</strong>mal education programmes has<br />
increased considerably during the last decade.<br />
For example, Morocco’s Second Chance<br />
schools target 2.2 million children between<br />
8 and 16 years old who have never attended<br />
school or have not completed the full<br />
primary cycle. More than three-quarters of<br />
this group live in <strong>rural</strong> areas and about<br />
45 per cent are girls. The Bangladesh Rural<br />
Advancement Committee model of non<strong>for</strong>mal<br />
education is now being replicated in<br />
a number of countries, including several<br />
in sub-Saharan Africa.<br />
Human capital – skills training<br />
The <strong>rural</strong> world is changing rapidly in most<br />
countries. Rural <strong>youth</strong> must, there<strong>for</strong>e, be<br />
equipped with the requisite skills to exploit<br />
new <strong>opportunities</strong>. However, the provision of<br />
good quality post school skills training (both<br />
pre-employment and job-related) remains<br />
very limited in most <strong>rural</strong> areas. The key issue<br />
in many countries is that national vocational<br />
training systems have been unable to deliver<br />
good quality and cost-effective training to<br />
large numbers of both school leavers and the<br />
currently employed. It is essential, there<strong>for</strong>e,<br />
that all training is based on precise assessments<br />
of job <strong>opportunities</strong> and skill requirements.<br />
Many governments would like to establish<br />
extensive networks of <strong>rural</strong> training<br />
institutions, but do not have the necessary<br />
resources to do this. Most evaluations have<br />
found that the cost-effectiveness of <strong>youth</strong>related<br />
<strong>rural</strong> training is generally low<br />
(Middleton et al, 1993 and Bennell, 1999).<br />
Typically, training services are fragmented and<br />
there is no coherent policy framework to<br />
provide the basis of a pro-poor <strong>rural</strong> training<br />
system. There are some notable exceptions,<br />
mainly in South America – <strong>for</strong> example,<br />
18
BOX 4<br />
The San Francisco Agricultural School in Paraguay<br />
The San Francisco Agricultural School is run by the Fundacion Paraguaya. The school’s curriculum<br />
combines the teaching of traditional high-school subjects and technical skills with the running of<br />
17 small-scale <strong>rural</strong> enterprises, most of which are based on the school’s campus. All enterprises<br />
are strictly based on existing market demands and, <strong>for</strong> this reason, the income generated from<br />
them covers all the running costs of the school, including teacher salaries and depreciation. All of its<br />
students are productively engaged either in wage employment or self-employment within four<br />
months of graduation. Teacher accountability is very high because their own salaries are directly<br />
dependent on the immediate success of the school’s enterprises (ILO, 2008).<br />
the countrywide <strong>rural</strong> training and business<br />
support organization, SENAR, in Brazil.<br />
The key challenges in providing high-quality<br />
training and extension services <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong><br />
are low educational levels, poor learning<br />
outcomes, scattered populations, low effective<br />
demand (from both the self-employed and<br />
employers) and limited scope <strong>for</strong> costrecovery.<br />
Church organizations and NGOs<br />
have supported much of the vocational<br />
training <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> school leavers in many<br />
developing countries, but funding constraints<br />
have resulted in significantly reduced<br />
enrolments in many countries during the last<br />
decade. The stigma attached to vocational and<br />
technical education is another major issue in<br />
most countries. Poor employment outcomes<br />
are a common weakness of <strong>rural</strong> training<br />
programmes. For example, about one-half<br />
of the young people who participated in the<br />
India-wide Training of Rural Youth <strong>for</strong><br />
Self-Employment have been unable to<br />
find employment. However, some training<br />
initiatives have been very successful. Farmer<br />
Field Schools in East Africa and the Fundacion<br />
Paraguaya are notable examples (see boxes 3<br />
and 4). In Uganda, the Programme <strong>for</strong> the<br />
Promotion of the Welfare of Children and<br />
Youth has provided good quality training,<br />
particularly in remote <strong>rural</strong> and war affected<br />
areas. Colombia and Nicaragua also have<br />
successful <strong>rural</strong> training programmes <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
The capacity of service providers to support<br />
<strong>rural</strong> clienteles, especially <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>, in all<br />
key sectors – such as education, health,<br />
policing, justice, <strong>rural</strong> infrastructure and<br />
agricultural extension – needs to be<br />
strengthened significantly in most<br />
countries, which has major implications <strong>for</strong><br />
higher education and training systems.<br />
Agricultural education at all levels also<br />
needs to be revitalized.<br />
19
Training and capacity-building activities<br />
now comprise an important component of<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong>-supported activities and absorb up to<br />
30 per cent of resources in some projects.<br />
Since key target groups are often illiterate or<br />
have little <strong>for</strong>mal schooling, this presents<br />
additional challenges <strong>for</strong> providing effective<br />
training. A good example of <strong>IFAD</strong> support<br />
in this area is the Skills Enhancement <strong>for</strong><br />
Employment Project in western Nepal,<br />
which targets Dalit and other seriously<br />
disadvantaged <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. The project has an<br />
ambitious goal of ensuring that 70 per cent<br />
of all trainees are in productive employment<br />
after six months. The project is implemented<br />
by ILO and is based on the ILO’s Training <strong>for</strong><br />
Economic Empowerment methodology,<br />
which is firmly rooted in participatory<br />
planning approaches and market-driven<br />
enterprise development. The Prosperer project<br />
in Madagascar is another good example of a<br />
new generation of <strong>youth</strong>-oriented projects<br />
being funded by <strong>IFAD</strong>. It seeks to improve the<br />
income of disadvantaged, poor <strong>youth</strong> in three<br />
regions of the country by providing<br />
diversified income-generating <strong>opportunities</strong><br />
and promoting entrepreneurship in <strong>rural</strong><br />
areas. A total of 8,000 young people will be<br />
supported over the next five years.<br />
Access to land and natural resources and land<br />
tenure security lie at the heart of all <strong>rural</strong><br />
societies and agricultural economies and are<br />
central to <strong>rural</strong> poverty eradication. Growing<br />
populations, declining soil fertility and<br />
increasing environmental degradation, the<br />
HIV/AIDS pandemic and new <strong>opportunities</strong><br />
<strong>for</strong> agricultural commercialisation, have all<br />
heightened demands and pressures on land<br />
resources and placed new pressures on land<br />
tenure systems, often at the expense of poor<br />
people and vulnerable groups such as women<br />
and <strong>youth</strong>. In many developing countries<br />
inheritance remains the main means <strong>for</strong><br />
young people to access land. Typically,<br />
though, it is sons who inherit land, and<br />
daughters only gain access to land through<br />
marriage. Ongoing subdivision of land<br />
through inheritance has resulted in<br />
fragmented and unviable land parcels and<br />
increasingly the <strong>youth</strong> are becoming landless.<br />
The HIV/AIDS pandemic has resulted in<br />
increasing land grabbing of widows’ and<br />
orphans’ lands by male relatives of the<br />
deceased, particularly in Africa. Increasing<br />
landlessness amongst the <strong>youth</strong> has resulted<br />
in an increase in inter-generational conflicts<br />
over land. Lasting solutions to land tenure<br />
insecurity of the <strong>youth</strong> could include:<br />
the strengthening of legislation and legal<br />
services to women and <strong>youth</strong> in order to<br />
recognize and defend their rights to land;<br />
the development of land markets as<br />
mechanisms <strong>for</strong> accessing land; and perhaps<br />
most importantly, the identification and<br />
promotion of off-farm economic activities<br />
that target the <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
Young people tend to view agriculture as<br />
an unsatisfactory option unless they have<br />
secure control over family lands. In the<br />
United Republic of Tanzania, as part of the<br />
national action plan <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> employment,<br />
labour intensive <strong>rural</strong> infrastructure<br />
development has been actively supported<br />
among <strong>youth</strong> groups in ‘green belts’ around<br />
major urban centres. The programme has also<br />
supported <strong>youth</strong> to own land by allocating<br />
areas <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> infrastructure development<br />
and enacting laws to protect <strong>youth</strong> from<br />
discrimination in leasing land.<br />
Financial capital – microfinance and<br />
enterprise development<br />
As the 2005 World Youth Report points out<br />
“entrepreneurship is not <strong>for</strong> everyone and so<br />
cannot be viewed as a large-scale solution to<br />
the <strong>youth</strong> employment crisis”. Nonetheless,<br />
there is growing interest in the targeted<br />
provision of micro-finance <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong>, because<br />
it is recognized that, education and training<br />
do not on their own usually lead to<br />
sustainable self-employment. To date,<br />
however, services in this area remain limited.<br />
Numerous problems have been encountered<br />
in pilot projects. The lack of control of loans<br />
20
Women attend a literacy class in Qusiva village,<br />
Syrian Arab Republic<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/J. Spaull<br />
BOX 5<br />
Employment creation <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> in NENA<br />
Sizeable enterprise development projects <strong>for</strong> young people are being funded by <strong>IFAD</strong> in Egypt and<br />
the Syrian Arab Republic. In Egypt, the focus is mainly on agro-processing and marketing activities<br />
in key high value and organic agricultural export sectors. Private banks will manage loans and close<br />
links will be established with agricultural exporters. The project is being implemented through<br />
community development organizations, which will take the lead in identifying <strong>youth</strong> participants. It is<br />
expected that 30,000 jobs will be created by the project during its eight-year lifetime. The project in<br />
the Syrian Arab Republic focuses on promoting <strong>youth</strong> enterprise in agricultural marketing activities in a<br />
poor area of the country.<br />
21
A young man makes and repairs<br />
shoes in Ruhengeri Town, Rwanda<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/M. Millinga
y <strong>youth</strong> borrowers is a major issue, screening<br />
mechanisms are weak, and intensive training<br />
is needed in how to make best use of the<br />
money. Youth, and especially the very poor,<br />
are also frequently reluctant to borrow<br />
money. Integrated packages of inputs<br />
(credit, training, advisory support, other<br />
facilities) are often necessary, but this<br />
imposes major demands on organizations<br />
and significantly reduces the number of<br />
beneficiaries. Agricultural and enterprise<br />
development extension staff should be<br />
trained more to work with young people.<br />
The recent experience of the Population<br />
Council with microcredit schemes <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong><br />
highlights the overriding importance of<br />
specific contextual factors in determining<br />
outcomes and impacts. In other words, what<br />
works in one place may fail completely in<br />
another (Amin, 2010). One of the largest<br />
<strong>youth</strong> credit schemes is currently being<br />
funded by <strong>IFAD</strong> in the Chongqing Province<br />
in China, where more than 100,000 returned<br />
migrant workers have been provided with<br />
microfinance and training in order to start<br />
a variety of agricultural and <strong>rural</strong> enterprises.<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong> provides substantial support <strong>for</strong> nonfarm<br />
enterprise development, but most<br />
projects in this area have not (at least until<br />
very recently) had any specific focus on <strong>rural</strong><br />
<strong>youth</strong>. Nonetheless, <strong>youth</strong> have benefited<br />
from these interventions. The success of<br />
what has become a national network of<br />
village banks in Benin is a good example.<br />
Similarly, as part of the <strong>IFAD</strong>-funded <strong>rural</strong><br />
enterprise project in Rwanda, 60 per cent of<br />
the 3,500 young people who completed sixmonth<br />
apprenticeships either started their<br />
own enterprises or continued to work as<br />
full-time employers in the enterprise where<br />
they were apprenticed. In Uganda, <strong>IFAD</strong><br />
(through the Belgian Survival Fund) provided<br />
US$3 million funding between 2000 and<br />
2004 to the development programme of<br />
the Uganda Women’s Ef<strong>for</strong>t to Save<br />
Orphans (UWESO). Loans were made to<br />
7,000 households with orphan members,<br />
with an overall loan recovery rate of<br />
95 per cent. In addition, 655 orphans were<br />
trained as artisans. However, as is invariably<br />
the case with project-elated training activities,<br />
insufficient data is available about the<br />
subsequent employment activities of these<br />
trainees to be able to reach firm conclusions<br />
about the cost-effectiveness of this training.<br />
Public employment generation<br />
Rural public works programmes are<br />
substitutes <strong>for</strong> unemployment benefit or<br />
income support systems in countries that<br />
cannot af<strong>for</strong>d such systems. If properly<br />
designed, they can per<strong>for</strong>m the role of a<br />
guaranteed employment scheme <strong>for</strong> the<br />
disadvantaged of all ages and they can be<br />
used to identify self-selecting groups of young<br />
workers who are most in need. However, a<br />
key conclusion of the World Bank Youth<br />
Inventory study is that “few public works<br />
programmes targeted on <strong>youth</strong> seem to lead to<br />
high employment chances <strong>for</strong> participants”<br />
(Betcherman et al, 2007).<br />
23
Partnerships to promote<br />
<strong>youth</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s<br />
A broad consensus exists that the rapid<br />
scaling up of <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> development<br />
policies and programmes must be based<br />
on a multi sector approach with close<br />
coordination and partnerships between<br />
a wide array of public and private<br />
organizations. Youth networks and<br />
partnerships have to be established and<br />
effectively used at local, national and<br />
international levels.<br />
The presence and impact of international<br />
and national <strong>youth</strong> development<br />
organizations and initiatives continues to<br />
expand rapidly in all developing country<br />
regions. There are already a number of<br />
international global networks that focus<br />
on <strong>youth</strong> development. The FAO Rural Youth<br />
Development Programme is expected to play<br />
a major coordinating role, but lack of<br />
resources has prevented it from doing so in<br />
recent years. The Youth Employment Network<br />
(YEN), which was launched jointly by the<br />
United Nations, the World Bank and the<br />
ILO in 2001 to address the problem of<br />
unemployment among young people has<br />
been increasingly active. Currently, there are<br />
21 YEN Lead Countries, all of which have<br />
developed comprehensive national action<br />
plans <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> employment. The Network<br />
is also expected to regularly benchmark <strong>youth</strong><br />
policies and programmes. The Commonwealth<br />
Plan of Action <strong>for</strong> Youth Empowerment is<br />
another similar international initiative. An<br />
Inter-Agency Network on Youth Development<br />
has also been recently established by the UN.<br />
The International Youth Foundation, which is<br />
the most prominent international civil society<br />
organization in this area, seeks to mobilize<br />
the global community of businesses,<br />
governments and civil society organizations.<br />
To date, it has provided grants to nearly<br />
350 organizations in 86 countries. Major<br />
corporate sponsors include Merrill Lynch,<br />
Microsoft, Starbucks, Samsung and Nokia.<br />
Its highest profile initiatives are Entra 21,<br />
which equips disadvantaged <strong>youth</strong> in<br />
Latin America and the Caribbean with<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation and communication technology<br />
and life skills, and its Global Partnership<br />
to Promote Youth Employment and<br />
Employability. However, most of its<br />
programmes are oriented mainly to <strong>for</strong>malsector<br />
employment in urban areas. Poorer<br />
countries also tend to be under-represented<br />
in its activities.<br />
Establishing effective national <strong>youth</strong><br />
development strategies is a major challenge.<br />
As the 2007 World Development Report<br />
notes, “influencing <strong>youth</strong> transitions requires<br />
working across many sectors, yet few<br />
24
countries take a coherent approach to<br />
establish clear lines of responsibility and<br />
accountability <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> outcomes.”<br />
There is a need <strong>for</strong> long-term coordinated<br />
interventions, which are part and parcel of<br />
a much broader national integrated strategy<br />
<strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> development, growth and job creation.<br />
At both the national or subnational level,<br />
where <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> can be identified as a highpriority<br />
social category with distinct<br />
development and <strong>livelihood</strong> improvement<br />
needs, <strong>IFAD</strong> should concentrate on<br />
developing strategic partnerships with other<br />
organizations that focus on improving the<br />
<strong>livelihood</strong>s of <strong>youth</strong>, and <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> in<br />
particular. This is especially important in<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong>’s own core areas of mandated activity,<br />
namely increasing agricultural and non<br />
agricultural productivity and employment<br />
and income generation. However, <strong>IFAD</strong><br />
should also contribute to policy <strong>for</strong>mulation<br />
and implementation in other key areas,<br />
such as curriculum development <strong>for</strong><br />
agriculture courses.<br />
A worker grinds cassava in a<br />
local business in Wenchi,<br />
Ghana<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/P. Maitre
Concluding remarks<br />
The urgent need to intensify development<br />
ef<strong>for</strong>ts on <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> is increasingly<br />
recognized by governments, civil society<br />
organizations and international development<br />
agencies. This is reflected in a variety of<br />
exciting new initiatives that seek to improve<br />
the <strong>livelihood</strong>s of disadvantaged <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong>.<br />
The overriding challenge is to unleash the<br />
energy and creativity of young people living<br />
in <strong>rural</strong> areas, especially those who are the<br />
most marginal and vulnerable. Rural <strong>youth</strong>,<br />
and especially young women, need to be<br />
empowered to become agents of innovation<br />
and social actors capable of developing new,<br />
viable models of <strong>rural</strong> development.<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong> is increasing its support <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong><br />
programming. As part of this ef<strong>for</strong>t, <strong>IFAD</strong> is<br />
collaborating with the ILO to review<br />
strategies and programmes <strong>for</strong> promoting<br />
productive employment among <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong><br />
in developing countries. Given the enormous<br />
challenges these young people face,<br />
this support should be intensified in the future<br />
with <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> mainstreamed in all <strong>IFAD</strong><br />
policies and programmes.<br />
The development of coherent, comprehensive<br />
national policies on <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> should<br />
become a top priority <strong>for</strong> all governments,<br />
but this must be backed up with more<br />
research. The prominence of national action<br />
plans <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong> employment should also be<br />
increased, and it is essential that they are fully<br />
embedded in other key national planning<br />
documents, especially PRSPs. This should be<br />
closely linked with increased ef<strong>for</strong>ts to promote<br />
<strong>youth</strong> participation in all areas of policymaking.<br />
Finally, the knowledge base of what works<br />
needs to be strengthened rapidly, especially<br />
with regard to innovative, strongly pro-poor<br />
<strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> development programmes and<br />
projects that have been successfully scaled-up.<br />
26
A young woman sells vegetables at a market<br />
in La Trinidad, Philippines.<br />
©<strong>IFAD</strong>/GMB Akash
References<br />
Amin, S. (2008) Enhancing the benefits of girls’ <strong>livelihood</strong> strategies. Transitions to Adulthood<br />
Brief no. 17, Washington D.C., Population Council.<br />
Atchoarena, D. and L. Gasperini (2009) Education <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> development: towards new policy responses.<br />
Rome, FAO.<br />
Bennell, P.S. (1999) Learning to change: skills development among the economically vulnerable and<br />
socially excluded in developing countries. Geneva, ILO.<br />
Bennell, P.S. (2000) Improving <strong>youth</strong> <strong>livelihood</strong>s in sub-Saharan Africa: a review of policies and<br />
programmes with particular reference to the link between sexual behaviour and economic well being.<br />
Ottawa, IDRC/USAID.<br />
Betcherman, G., M. Godfrey, S. Puerto, F. Rother and A. Stavreska (2007) A review of interventions<br />
to support young workers: findings of the Youth Employment Inventory. Social Protection Discussion<br />
Paper No. 7015. Washington D.C., World Bank.<br />
Davis, S., E. Nkonya, E. Kato, D.Ayalew, M. Odendo, R. Miiro and J. Nkuba (2009) Impact of<br />
Farmer Field Schools on agricultural productivity, poverty and farmer empowerment in East Africa.<br />
Washington, IFPRI.<br />
Deshingkar, P. (2004) Understanding the implications of migration <strong>for</strong> pro-poor agricultural growth.<br />
London, Overseas Development Institute.<br />
FAO (2009) Rural <strong>youth</strong>: tapping the potential. FAO Rural Youth Development Programme.<br />
Rome, FAO.<br />
Freedman, D. (2008) Improving skills and productivity of disadvantaged <strong>youth</strong>. ILO Employment<br />
Sector Working Paper No. 7. Geneva, ILO.<br />
Godfrey, M. (2005) Youth employment policy in developing and transition countries –<br />
prevention as a well as a cure. Mimeo.<br />
Godfrey, M. (2006) Youth employment in sub-Saharan Africa: an assessment of existing<br />
interventions. Paper presented to workshop in the World Bank on 7 February 2005.<br />
Haggblade, S., Hazel, P. and T. Reardon (2002) Strategies <strong>for</strong> stimulating poverty-alleviating growth in<br />
the <strong>rural</strong> non-farm economy in developing countries. Washington D.C., IFPRI.<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong> (2006) Assessment of <strong>rural</strong> poverty in the Near East and North Africa. Rome, <strong>IFAD</strong>.<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong> (2009) “Working with <strong>youth</strong>.” Making a difference in Asia and the Pacific. Issue 29. Rome, <strong>IFAD</strong>.<br />
ILO (2005) Global employment trends <strong>for</strong> <strong>youth</strong>. Geneva, ILO.<br />
ILO (2010) Global employment trends, January 2010. Geneva, ILO.<br />
International Youth Foundation (2010) Global partnerships to promote <strong>youth</strong> employment and<br />
employability. Baltimore, IYF.<br />
Kehler, L. L.F. Sanabria and P. Teeple (2009) Market-driven <strong>youth</strong> programmes and the bottom-line.<br />
Youth and Work<strong>for</strong>ce Development PLP Technical Note. USAID, SEEP Network.<br />
Washington D.C., USAID.<br />
Mercy Corps (2009) Youth development: sector approach. Portland, Mercy Corps.<br />
Middleton, J., A. Ziderman and A. van Adams (1993) Skills <strong>for</strong> productivity: vocational education<br />
and training in developing countries. Washington D.C., World Bank.<br />
Shenoy, M., S. Lakhey and P. Shah (2009) Creating jobs <strong>for</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>youth</strong> in Andhra Pradesh, India.<br />
Washington. D.C., World Bank.<br />
United Nations (2007) World <strong>youth</strong> report. New York, United Nations.<br />
United Nations (2009) Review of national action plans on <strong>youth</strong> employment: putting commitment<br />
into action. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. New York, United Nations.<br />
World Bank (2006) 2007 World development report: the next generation. Washington D.C.,<br />
World Bank.<br />
28
Contact<br />
Maria Hartl<br />
Technical Advisor<br />
Policy and Technical Advisory Division<br />
<strong>IFAD</strong><br />
E-mail: m.hartl@ifad.org<br />
29
30<br />
International Fund <strong>for</strong><br />
Agricultural Development<br />
Via Paolo di Dono, 44<br />
00142 Rome, Italy<br />
Tel: +39 06 54591<br />
Fax: +39 06 5043463<br />
E-mail: ifad@ifad.org<br />
www.ifad.org<br />
www.<strong>rural</strong>povertyportal.org