Beneath The Surface
Pathways from poverty
THIS is the story of a poor-turned rich household from Shibchar village under Laksmipur district. We have picked up this household from a sample of 2010 under a Brac-backed repeated sample survey carried out in three periods: 1988, 2000, and 2007.
At the outset, the household appeared among the bottom 40 percent in terms of percapita income. By 2007, it graduated into the top 10 percent by the same indicator. The story is invoked to argue for two points: (a) different pathways out of poverty apply for different groups of poor, and (b) other than land, there are many ladders which could help households graduate out of poverty.
In 1988, the concerned household was headed by Mahfuzul Huq Bepari (50), educated up to 5th grade. He was the only earning member of an "oversized" household comprising eleven members: Bepari and his wife, three daughters, and six sons. All sons and daughters were school going with five attending secondary level and three primary level. The primary occupation of Bepari was petty business.
Owning 60 decimals of land, the household had also to eke out a living by renting-in one acre of land from the tenancy market. Half of the members had no health problem; other half seasonally suffered.
Occasional natural calamities affixed agony on the household. The household owned few livestock animals and trees to make life easier. However, it was also heavily indebted, taking money from institutional and non-institutional sources. Income from business and homestead based activities hovered around Tk. 36,000 a year. In per capita terms this amounts to Tk. 3,272 a year.
Bepari seemingly banked on two important pathways. First, he leaned on cultivating MV and homestead-based crops to ensure food security for the household (technology). Second, he established close contacts with agricultural extension officers to reap home the rewards from new technology.
For example, Bepari used to meet upazila agricultural officer, block supervisors, livestock official more than 10 times a year. He also discussed with local elites about increasing agricultural output (dissemination).
And third, he had developed social networks and norms (social capital) so much so that credit from institutional and non-institutional sources could be easily available at soft terms. By and large, Bepari's household could overcome the odds in the presence of the above-mentioned factors and somehow arrest the slide in economic condition at that time. Children were not withdrawn from schools.
By 2000, three sons went to other districts for jobs after completing, on average, 10 years of schooling. Internal remittances served as a sigh of relief for the household. Monthly net income was Tk. 12,000.
Bepari gave up cultivating crops, possibly due to growing older, but continued with business. However, home-based activities added some benefits. The house was repaired and made of tin-mud and tin.. A separate kitchen was built. Thus, the improvement this time came mainly from human capital formation and domestic migration.
The household could somehow meet natural exigencies. All of the existing seven members could take three satisfactory meals a day. Other than rice, the menu consisted of fish (four days a week) and meat (one day a week). The perception is that economic condition of the household improved significantly owing to: (a) more earning members and hence increased earnings and (b) better business that is still continued.
By 2007, Bepari died and his wife took over as head of the household that comprised 10 members including in-laws and grand children. Meantime, two of the members have managed to go abroad and one migrated to other district for a job. The migrations took place in 2002, 2003 and 2006.
Interestingly, the information on job availability -- home and abroad -- was supplied by relatives and elites of the village (social capital). Again, the cost of going abroad (Tk. 250,000 each) was managed from own savings and the help by relatives.
In 2006, the outside members remitted Tk. 800,000 to the household. In per capita terms, this amounts to Tk. 80,000! Thus, from a feeble and one of the lowest per capita income of Tk. 3,272 a year in 1988, the household now stands with one of the highest per capita income among a sample of 2010 households.
It has now a pucca-pucca-pucca house with sanitary latrine. Television or entertainment and mobile phones for communication are now available. Another house was built. Both houses have nine rooms.
Fish and meat are now regular items in the menu of the household members who continue with three satisfactory meals a day throughout the year. Both in good and bad times, 4,000 grams of rice are cooked for the household. Every week, Tk. 2,000 is being spent on buying daily necessities only. Religious and social functions cost Tk. 10,000 a year. The household claims itself to be of higher middle class category and adduced its uplift, during the last 20 years and even last one year, mainly to remittances.
The transition of Bepari's household from being poor to becoming rich warrants an explanation on the pathways. We reckon that few factors turned the tide and are important for an uplift of the kind that our concerned household witnessed.
First, human and social capital are two of the most important ingredients for the poor to get out of the poverty trap. Second, adoption of new technology in agriculture and accumulation of extension from government or NGOs is a sine qua non for raising land productivity and thus ensuring food security. Third, a vibrant tenancy market is needed for the poor to become de facto owners of land. Finally, more earning members with relatively good health always tend to help a household overcome poverty. A very unusual household size and landlessness could hardly stop the upward march due to the factors mentioned above.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments