FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://repository.ui.edu.ng/handle/123456789/261

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.Vulnerability

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Poverty and Vulnerability in Rural South-West Nigeria
    (ARPN, 2012) Adepoju. A.O.; Yusuf, S. A.
    The near failure of various programmes and strategies by successive governments in Nigeria has been linked to the improper diagnosis of poverty as a static concept. There are growing concerns that poverty is not reducing due to the lack of understanding of its dynamic nature and vulnerability to poverty. This study investigates poverty and vulnerability to poverty in rural South-West Nigeria (SWN). Primary data were collected from 582 rural households in a two-wave panel survey (harvesting and lean periods) employing a multi-stage sampling technique. Data were analyzed using; Foster, Greer and Thorbecke (FGT) poverty measure; 3-Stage Feasible Generalized Least Squares (3FGLS); Tobit and Probit regression methods. Poverty lines of N3313.57 and N4093.21 were estimated for the two periods, respectively. Based on these, the incidence of poverty was 35.0% and 43.6% for the first and second periods. At the standard vulnerability threshold of 0.5, 55.7% of rural households in SWN were vulnerable to poverty. A unit increase in household size and dependency ratio aggravated vulnerability by 0.05 and 1.28, while attainment of secondary and tertiary education reduced vulnerability by 0.14 and 0.23, respectively (P<0.01). Vulnerability also translated into significantly (P<0.01) higher poverty by increasing the ex-post probability of becoming poor by 0.34. However, there were some factors related with vulnerability but not poverty and some related to poverty but not vulnerability. The study therefore suggests that poverty alleviation programs must focus not only on those factors which aggravate poverty but also vulnerability, in order to employ several specialized approaches to tackle these multifarious problems.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Households’ vulnerability to poverty in ibadan metropolis, oyo state, nigeria
    (2010) Adepoju, A. O.; Okunmadewa, F.Y.
    This paper empirically assessed vulnerability to poverty at the household level using a two-period panel data set obtained from 150 households sampled from two local government areas within Ibadan Metropolis. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, poverty indices and probit regression analysis. Analysis of the socio-economic characteristics and their relationship with vulnerability to poverty revealed that large-sized households headed by men who were old, widowed, self-employed, uneducated or who had only primary school education and no access to any form of credit, were more vulnerable than other households. The estimated probit regression model showed that marital status and tertiary education status of respondents reduced vulnerability to poverty while primary education status and household size enhanced households vulnerability to poverty.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Vulnerability and Poverty Transitions Among Rural Households in South West Nigeria
    (2011) Adepoju, A. O.
    Successive governments in Nigeria have implemented poverty alleviation programmes and strategies without commensurate reduction in poverty. The near failure of these programmes and strategies has been associated with improper diagnosis of poverty as a static rather than dynamic concept. Poverty dynamics enables a better appreciation of the extent of poverty over time by distinguishing between households exiting and entering into poverty, those never poor and the persistently poor. The dynamics of and vulnerability to poverty in rural Southwest Nigeria (SWN) were therefore investigated. Primary data were collected from a two-wave panel survey (harvesting and lean periods) employing a multi-stage sampling technique. The first stage was a random selection of Oyo and Osun states. Thereafter, was the random selection of three Local Government Areas (LGAs) from each state. Ten rural Enumeration Areas (EAs) were randomly selected from each LGA and ten households were systematically selected from each EA. In all, 600 households were interviewed in the Harvesting Period (HAP) out of which 582 could be tracked in the Lean Period (LEP) which constituted the sample size. The sample was weighted using the inverse of the overall selection probabilities to make it representative of the region. Information was collected on socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, monthly consumption expenditure as well as economic infrastructure available in the respondents’ communities. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Foster, Greer and Thorbecke poverty measure, 3- Stage Feasible Generalized Least Squares, Tobit, Probit and Multinomial Logit regression methods. A higher proportion of the households (79.6%) were headed by males. The mean age and household size of the respondents were 50.8 ± 15.3 years and 5.0 ± 3.3 respectively. The mean per capita household consumption expenditure at HAP was N4970.36 ± N3274.25, while that of LEP was N6140.43 ± N5113.94 with poverty lines of N3313.57 and N4093.21 respectively. The incidence of poverty was 35.0% for HAP and 43.6% for LEP. At the standard vulnerability threshold of 0.5, 55.7% of rural households in SWN were vulnerable to poverty. A unit increase in household size and dependency ratio aggravated vulnerability by 0.05 and 1.28, while attainment of secondary and tertiary education reduced (p<0.01) vulnerability by 0.14 and 0.23 respectively. Vulnerability also translated into significantly (p<0.01) higher poverty by increasing the ex-post probability of becoming poor by 0.34. Household poverty transitions revealed that 49.5% of the households were never poor, 28.2% were chronically poor, while 22.3% were transiently poor. However, of the transient poor, while 6.8 percent exited poverty, 15.5 percent moved into poverty. Vulnerability aggravated both chronic and transient poverty by impacting on the odds of being chronically poor and moving into poverty by 10.05 and 1.80, respectively (p<0.05). The poor in Southwest Nigeria were a heterogeneous group consisting of the transient and chronic poor. Vulnerability trapped poor households in poverty while propelling the non-poor into it. Poverty dynamics and vulnerability underscored the centrality of effective poverty reduction tools in Southwest Nigeria