| dc.creator |
Lay, Jann |
|
| dc.creator |
M'Mukaria, George Michuki |
|
| dc.creator |
Omar Mahmoud, Toman |
|
| dc.date |
2007 |
|
| dc.date.accessioned |
2013-10-16T06:10:22Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2013-10-16T06:10:22Z |
|
| dc.date.issued |
2013-10-16 |
|
| dc.identifier |
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/4250 |
|
| dc.identifier |
ppn:560906692 |
|
| dc.identifier |
RePEc:zbw:gdec07:6543 |
|
| dc.identifier.uri |
http://koha.mediu.edu.my:8181/xmlui/handle/10419/4250 |
|
| dc.description |
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. |
|
| dc.language |
eng |
|
| dc.relation |
Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Göttingen 2007 / Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics 20 |
|
| dc.rights |
http://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen |
|
| dc.subject |
I31 |
|
| dc.subject |
O17 |
|
| dc.subject |
Q12 |
|
| dc.subject |
ddc:330 |
|
| dc.subject |
Income diversification |
|
| dc.subject |
Non-agricultural activities |
|
| dc.subject |
Inequality |
|
| dc.subject |
Dorfwirtschaft |
|
| dc.subject |
Landwirtschaftlicher Kleinbetrieb |
|
| dc.subject |
Diversifikation |
|
| dc.subject |
Ländliches Einkommen |
|
| dc.subject |
Einkommensverteilung |
|
| dc.subject |
Kenia (West) |
|
| dc.subject |
Afrika südlich der Sahara |
|
| dc.title |
Boda-bodas rule: Non-agricultural activities and their inequality implications in Western Kenya |
|
| dc.type |
doc-type:conferenceObject |
|