• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Why the Study

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2023

Membagikan "Why the Study"

Copied!
31
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)
(2)

Export slowdown, supply chain disruptions, demand contraction, standstill in formal and informal activities during COVID-19 caused widespread economic distress

Social groups and economic lobbies in Bangladesh voicing their demand from the beginning

But there was a need for systematic evidence on depth and spread of the poverty impact of COVID-19 to bring attention to this cause

Why the Study

(3)

Team Members

Dr. Narayan C Das, Senior Research Fellow

Dr. Imran Matin, Executive Director

Shakil Ahmed, Senior Research Associate

Atiya Rahman, Senior Research Associate

Tahsina Naz Khan, Research Associate

Montajina Tasnim, Research Associate

Nusrat Jahan, Head, Knowledge Management

Dr. Hossain Zillur Rahman, Executive Chairman

Md. Abdul Wazed, Senior Fellow, PPRC & Former DG, BBS

Umama Zillur, Research Associate

Sabrina Miti Gain, Research Associate

Fatema Mohammad, Research Associate

Field Research Team

BIGD PPRC

(4)

The Study

Sample: 12,000 HHs

Rural 51%

Urban 49%

Sample Source:

Urban:from a census in 2016-2017 of 24,283 slum HHs in 35 slums across 9 districts in Dhaka, Chattogram, Khulna, Barisal and Rangpur Rural: from a nationally representative (divisional level) survey of 26,925 HHs across 64 districts

Study Period

4 April 12 April

Average HH size

4.85

Success: 5,471 HHs

Respondent Profile

Female-headed HHs

12%

(5)

Income Categories

Extreme poor: per capita income below national lower poverty line

Moderate poor: per capita income above lower poverty line &

and below upper poverty line

Non-poor: above upper poverty line, further divided into

Vulnerable non-poor: above upper poverty line but below median national income

Non-poor: above median national income

(6)

Respondent HHs’ Economic Profile

(pre-COVID)

48

12

24

16 46

20

11

24 47

16 18 20

Extreme poor Moderate Poor Vulnerable non-poor Non-poor

% of households rural urban Overall

below lower poverty line

above lower & below upper poverty line

above upper poverty line & below median

income

Above median income

(7)

Households’ Main Source of Income

(pre-COVID)

20

37 39 1

2

18

24

38 16

5

Business (%) Salaried/wage labour (%) Casual Labour (%) Agriculture/livestock rearing (%) Help/Assistace/others (%)

% of respondents

Rural Urban

(8)

Impact on

Income and

Employment

(9)

Urban to Rural Movement at the Onset of Lockdown

 Only 6% urban HHs moved to their rural

homes because of COVID-19 during or before survey period Slightly more non-poor urban HHs moved to

their rural homes

 No significant difference across occupations

(10)

Economic Inactivity among Main Income Earners

(in early April)

54%

72%

65% 65%

57% 58%

Rural Urban Extreme poor Moderate poor Vulnerable non-poor

Non-poor

% of m ain earne rs

(11)

55

93

112

207

15 24 38

74

Extreme poor Moderate Poor

Vulnerable non-poor

Non-poor

Per capita daily income in Feb (BDT) Per capita daily income in early April (BDT)

Drastic Reduction in Household Income

108 95

27 37

Urban Slum Rural

75% 62%

73% 75%

67%

65%

Per capita daily income (BDT)

(12)

Food Insecurity

(13)

48

55 59

74

34 40

46

57

Extreme poor Moderate Poor Vulnerable non- poor

Non-poor Per capita food expenditure in normal day (BDT) Per capita food expenditure in early April (BDT)

60

52

44 41

Urban Slum Rural

28% 22% 27% 27% 22%

Drop in Per Capita Food Expenditure

22%

Per capita daily food expenditure (BDT)

(14)

Nutritional Impact: Households Having 3 Meals

Urban-rural Income categories Urban Rural Extreme

poor

Moderate poor

Vulnerable non-poor

Non- poor

% of HHs with 3 meals in February 97 99 98 97 98 98

% of HHs with 3 means in early

April 73 85 73 78 87 89

% HHs decreasing 3 meals 24 14 25 20 12 9

(15)

Nutritional Impact: Coping through Reduction in Food Consumption

47

32

42 42

37 32

Urban Rural Extreme poor Moderate Poor

Vulnerable non-poor

Non-poor

% of households

(16)

Coping

(17)

How are Respondents Meeting Their Food Need?

(% of HHs, as of 12 April)

Personal Social External

24

67

52 47

1

25

14

5 38

83

35 32

4

10

4 0

Household Income Savings Borrowing Reducing food Selling asset Family/ relatives/ neibhgours Government support NGO support

% of H ouseholds

Urban Slum Rural

(18)

Self-assessed Staying Capacity: How Long Can They Feed Their Families w/o External Support

38

19

27

13

3 19

15

29

25

11

0-3 days 4-6 days 7-14 days 15-30 days 31 days and above

% of households can live with existing resources

Urban Slum Rural

8 April < 8 May

(19)

Priority Concerns during the Crisis

(Multiple responses) Top three concerns Extreme

poor

Moderate Poor

Vulnerable non-poor

Non- poor

INCOME AND LIVELIHOODS

Maintaining family 78 71 68 59

Decrease in income 66 67 73 66

Losing Job 34 32 27 25

Indebtedness 26 28 22 20

FOOD SECURITY

Increase in food price 42 46 41 38

Reduction in food supply in the market

4 4 8 5

HEALTH Mental Stress 23 20 22 26

COVID-19 infection 51 55 61 60

Lack of health care services 6 5 6 7

EDUCATION Education of the children 5 5 5 7

(20)

Gender Impact

(21)

Female-headed Households

 In urban slums, among female-headed households,

greater reduction in both food expenditure (31% vs 27%) and number of meals (34% vs 22%) compared to male counterpart.

 In rural areas, only in case of the number of meals (19%

vs 14%)

 But, significantly more female-headed households reported getting support from:

Government

Neighbours, friends, relatives NGOS

(22)

Support

(23)

Need Assessment: Support Wanted

(Early April)

78 70

70 67

60 65 70 75 80

Urban Slum Rural

Cash Support (% of hhs) Food Support (% of hhs)

81 77

70

60

72 70 68

58

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Extreme poor

Moderate Poor

Vulnerable non-poor

Non-poor

(24)

Per Capita Support Requested vs Income Loss from February

RURAL (BDT)URBAN (BDT)

1331 1593

1383 1682

1450 1054

1549

1153

2730

1504

Extreme poor Moderate poor All poor New poor' Poor & 'new poor'

1614 1908

1702 2036

1745 1248

2287

1560

3035

1748

Extreme poor Moderate poor All poor New poor' Poor & 'new poor'

Support requested Decrease in income from February

(25)

Analytical

Takeaways

(26)

Vulnerable Non-Poor HHs (in Feb) Sliding Down the Poverty Ladder

84 70

3 3

5 22

8 5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Urban slum Rural

Extreme poor Moderate poor Vulnerable non-poor Non-poor

73% fell below poverty line

87% fell below poverty line

(27)

The ‘New Poor’: Rethinking Poverty Dynamics

21.6

25.1 22.9

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

Rural Urban National

New poor as % of total population New poor are those

that were vulnerable non-poor before COVID- 19 but became poor

after COVID-19

(28)

How Much is Needed to Support the Poor & ‘New Poor”

Rural Urban Per capita per month support (average amount

requested by the poor and ‘new poor’) 1,450 1,745 Total poor and ‘new poor’ in Bangladesh 42,994,127 27,028,719 Total amount of support (Crore BDT per month) 6,232 4,716

Poor (Extreme poor and Moderate poor) and the ‘New Poor’

constitute 43% of the population of Bangladesh

(29)

BDT 10,949 crore per month required to

support the poor and ‘new poor’

(30)

Policy

Implications

(31)

Deep and system-wide poverty impact

Initially more severe for the urban poor

Emergence of “new poor” class needs rethinking of approaches to poverty

Large-scale social

protection support critical to avert widespread food

insecurity Need for both food and

cash support in nearly equal measure.

Last mile delivery challenges

Real-time tracking of the health and livelihood impact of Covid-19 and how well personal and external support are mitigating such impact is crucial for more effective policy response

Policy Implications

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

World extreme poverty rate in the 1990 was 36 percent based on $1.25 poverty line a day, and after MDGs was implemented over the period 2000-2015, the world extreme poverty rate became