Beyond moving out: Rural poverty

dynamics in Nepal

Ramesh Sunam 04 November 2013

Research motivation

“Livelihoods have become de-linked from farming; poverty

and inequality from land ownership; and poverty and

inequality from occupation and activity”

(Rigg 2006, p.198)

World Development Report 2008:

Agriculture for Development by World

Bank

Repeasantisation or the death of peasantries?

The question of food security – a burning issue

Contextual motivation – why Nepal?

Economic growth around 4%

Political upheavals

Still poverty reduction?

Poverty dynamics – social exclusion and

adverse incorporation

What contributed to poverty

reduction?

Accounting for Simultaneity

Source: Krishna, A. (2010)

Moving out Falling

Research questions

How is poverty (re)produced and reduced in the rural Tarai of

Nepal?

• To what extent have rural households moved out and moved into

poverty?

• What factors rural people consider in explaining their mobility?

• How glocal processes influence diversification, marginalisation,

and commoditisation of land and labour, having profound

ramifications for poverty?

Methodology

“Stages of progress” methodology – developed by Krishna (2010)

Fieldwork– 50 interviews, 170 surveys

Study site

“Stages of progress” methodology – for poverty dynamics

Stages of progress

1 Food for the family

2 Some clothes for family while going to towns or

social functions

3 Sending children to school

4 Repairing the existing shelter (roof with iron

sheets)

5 Covering basic medical expenses Poverty cut-off

Escaped poverty = Migration + Farming

Remained poor = Landless, Labourers

Proposition 1: Factors leading to poverty are quite different from that lifting

households out of poverty.

Reasons for escape % of poverty

escaping HHs

Foreign labour migration 60

Own

farming/sharecropping

22/42

Small business 41

Government job 21

Private job including

labouring

25

“…consigns the rural poor to continuing penury” (Rigg 2006, p.

195).

Outmigration – labour migration

Source: ADS 2013

How about those who cannot migrate?

Falling into poverty

Reasons for descent % of HHs falling into

poverty

Poor health and health

related expenses

19

Cultural costs

(marriage, dowry,

death rituals)

48

Land loss 62

Proposition 2: While non-farm economy including outmigration led to

upward mobility, the ultra-poor heavily rely on land-based livelihoods

The landless

Labouring – farm and off-farm

Access to market

opportunities/private jobs –

unreachable

Proposition 3: While individual conditions have lifted people out of poverty but

structural factors (land, social structure; integration into local/global economy)

explain immiseration and intergenerational poverty

The question of relational poverty

Social exclusion

Adverse incorporation

These all give importance to land reform –

access to land

Conclusion

Understanding poverty from the lived experience of the poor

Falling into poverty – little explored dimension but critical

“Lives and livelihoods in the Rural South are becoming increasingly

divorced from farming and, therefore, from the land”

(Rigg 2006, p.180)

“The state support…helped to lift the peasantry out of poverty and

consolidate its middle-income position”

(Walker 2012, p.36)

Access to land - tenancy reforms – terms and conditions

Informal economy – working conditions – wages

…turn their rural citizens from

landowners into landless

labourers?

THANK YOU