|
EconStor >
Institut für Weltwirtschaft (IfW), Kiel >
Economists Online >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/4250
|
| | |
Full metadata record
| DC Field | | Value | | Language |
| dc.contributor.author | | Lay, Jann | | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | | M'Mukaria, George Michuki | | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | | Omar Mahmoud, Toman | | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | | 2009-01-28T14:22:06Z | | - |
| dc.date.available | | 2009-01-28T14:22:06Z | | - |
| dc.date.issued | | 2007 | | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | | http://hdl.handle.net/10419/4250 | | - |
| dc.description.abstract | | Diversification into non-agricultural activities in rural areas can be broadly classified as either survival-led or opportunity-led. The existence of these two types of non-agricultural activities implies a U-shaped relationship between the share of income derived from non-agricultural activities and household wealth as well as total household income. Survival-led engagement in non-agricultural activities would be inequality-decreasing through increasing the incomes of the poorer parts of the population and would reduce poverty. Opportunity-led diversification, by contrast, would increase inequality and have a minor effect on poverty, as it tends to be confined to non-poor households. Using data from a household survey conducted by ourselves in Western Kenya, we find the overall share of non-agricultural income in this very poor region to be important, but below the sub-Saharan African average. Multivariate analyses confirm the existence of both survival-led and opportunity-led diversification. Yet, the poverty and inequality implications of the differently motivated diversification strategies differ somewhat from our expectations. As expected, we find high-return activities to be confined to richer households, while both rich and poor households are engaged in low-return activities. Very poor households even appear to be excluded from the latter. Simple simulation exercises illustrate the inequality-increasing and very limited poverty effects of increases in high-return income, whereas increased low-return income shows substantial poverty reduction leverage. Our findings indicate that rural households do not only face asset constraints, but also very limited or relatively risky high-return opportunities outside agriculture. | | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | | eng | | en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | | Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Göttingen 2007 / Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics 20 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | I31 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | O17 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | Q12 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.ddc | | 330 | | - |
| dc.subject.keyword | | Income diversification | | en_US |
| dc.subject.keyword | | Non-agricultural activities | | - |
| dc.subject.keyword | | Inequality | | - |
| dc.subject.stw | | Dorfwirtschaft | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Landwirtschaftlicher Kleinbetrieb | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Diversifikation | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Ländliches Einkommen | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Einkommensverteilung | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Kenia (West) | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Afrika südlich der Sahara | | en_US |
| dc.title | | Boda-bodas rule: Non-agricultural activities and their inequality implications in Western Kenya | | en_US |
| dc.type | | Conference Paper | | en_US |
| dc.identifier.ppn | | 560906692 | | en_US |
| dc.rights | | http://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen | | - |
| Appears in Collections: | | Publikationen von Forscherinnen und Forschern des IfW Economists Online Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, 2007 (Göttingen)
|
| Files in This Item:
| |
| File |
Description |
Size | Format |
| Lay.pdf | | 147.78 kB | Adobe PDF |
|
| No. of Downloads:
| |
| last Month |
last 3 Month |
total |
|
|
|
|
|
Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|