Economic recovery of the new poor created by COVID-19: evidence from Bangladesh

IF 1 Q4 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Development in Practice Pub Date : 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1080/09614524.2023.2267795
Mohima Gomes, Nusrat Jahan, Tanvir Shatil, Nabila Tahsin, Narayan Das, Imran Matin
{"title":"Economic recovery of the new poor created by COVID-19: evidence from Bangladesh","authors":"Mohima Gomes, Nusrat Jahan, Tanvir Shatil, Nabila Tahsin, Narayan Das, Imran Matin","doi":"10.1080/09614524.2023.2267795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThe COVID-19 shock resulted in a large number of people becoming newly poor in Bangladesh, for whom recovery was slow and difficult. In response, BRAC implemented a nationwide program – credit, business planning support, and mentoring – targeting the economic recovery of the new poor. This paper estimates its impact using a mixed method and finds that the program had a significant positive effect on employment, income, and assets, indicating a faster economic recovery of program participants. The learnings from this program can have major policy implications for future disaster responses targeting livelihood recovery, specifically during the time-sensitive transitory phase from relief to long-term development.KEYWORDS: Poverty; economic recovery; livelihood; development; Bangladesh Acknowledgement of author’s positionalityThe authors work at the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), a research institute of Brac University. Brac University is an independent entity under the University Grants Commission (UGC) of the Government of Bangladesh. On the other hand, the intervention was designed and executed by the BRAC NGO, which is not affiliated with BIGD. Therefore, the author’s role at BIGD is free from any biases or interests in promoting BRAC, and rather, their role as independent researchers requires them to conduct impartial research.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Ethical declarationThis study uses primary data collected through in-person surveys. All respondents of this survey were members of the BRAC UPG program. BRAC UPG also reviewed the questionnaire extensively and provided essential feedback, which was duly addressed by BIGD. Being well aware of the research scope, BRAC UPG provided BIGD with the necessary approval and contact details of the members of BRAC UPG program to conduct the survey. All respondents were surveyed upon their verbal consent and no respondent was surveyed without his/her stated permission.Notes1 People whose income dropped below the poverty line for the first time due to a certain event.2 Asset sale, savings depletion, major cut downs on expenditures, indebtedness from high-interest informal loans (Vatsa Citation2004).3 People who are by definition non-poor (with income above the upper poverty line) but vulnerable to poverty (with income below the national median income and close to the poverty line).4 In Bangladesh, about 85 per cent of the MFIs experienced a deterioration of their outstanding credit portfolios, 80 per cent faced high rates of savings withdrawals, and more than 73 per cent had inadequate equity capital to cope with the COVID-19 crisis (Mujeri et al. Citation2020).5 A situation where people seem to be caught between two stages and are unclear what will happen next.6 According to Grant et al. (Citation2004), several terms are used to identify those who experience poverty most intensely – ultra-poor, extremely poor, hard-core poor, destitute, poorest of the poor, and declining poor. The ultra-poor are those who experience extreme poverty. Their income falls below the poverty line of $2.15 USD per day, and they encounter multifaceted issues due to their poverty status.7 Factors such as roofing materials, children's education status, stable income sources, and productive assets are considered to assess the economic conditions.8 Those who did not participate in the program, but belong to a similar economic group as the participating households.9 About 95.79 per cent of the treatment group faced an income loss of 40 per cent or more compared to 94.96t per cen ofthe comparison group.10 About 53.51 per cent of the treatment group faced an asset loss of 40 per cent or more compared to 44.57 per cent of the comparison group.11 The comparison groups have more men members as the men-to-women ratio is higher than in the treatment group.12 Household head’s monthly income (BDT), per capita monthly income (BDT), value of cows (BDT), value of business capital (BDT), value of all productive assets (BDT).Additional informationNotes on contributorsMohima GomesMohima Gomes is working as a research associate at BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), BRAC University. She completed her Bachelor's in economics from the Asian University for Women (AUW), Bangladesh with distinction. She has experience in conducting research that focuses on poverty, skills development, and social development programmes.Nusrat JahanNusrat Jahan is the head of Business Development and Knowledge Management of BIGD, BRAC University. She holds a Master's degree in Public Administration-Development Practice from the School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), Columbia University. Before joining BIGD, she worked as a research coordinator at the Bangladesh Office of Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA).Tanvir ShatilTanvir Shatil is an anthropologist by training and completed his Bachelor's and Master's degrees from Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh. He is currently working as a research coordinator at BIGD, BRAC University and has a good command over qualitative research methods.Nabila TahsinNabila Tahsin is working as a research associate at BIGD, BRAC University and completed her Bachelor's and Master's in economics from the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. She has experience working on research focusing on poverty, disability, and the evaluation of development programmes.Narayan DasDr. Narayan Das is a development economist working as a senior research fellow at BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), BRAC University. He has a PhD in Agricultural and Resource Economics from the University of California at Berkeley. His research focuses on poverty analysis, quantitative analysis of development policies, and impact assessment of social programmes and labour markets.Imran MatinDr. Imran Matin currently serves as the executive director of the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), a research and post-graduate education institute at BRAC University. Dr. Matin holds a PhD in Economics from the University of Sussex, UK. Before assuming his current role, he worked with BRAC, Save the Children International and Innovations for Poverty Action.","PeriodicalId":47576,"journal":{"name":"Development in Practice","volume":"83 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2023.2267795","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe COVID-19 shock resulted in a large number of people becoming newly poor in Bangladesh, for whom recovery was slow and difficult. In response, BRAC implemented a nationwide program – credit, business planning support, and mentoring – targeting the economic recovery of the new poor. This paper estimates its impact using a mixed method and finds that the program had a significant positive effect on employment, income, and assets, indicating a faster economic recovery of program participants. The learnings from this program can have major policy implications for future disaster responses targeting livelihood recovery, specifically during the time-sensitive transitory phase from relief to long-term development.KEYWORDS: Poverty; economic recovery; livelihood; development; Bangladesh Acknowledgement of author’s positionalityThe authors work at the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), a research institute of Brac University. Brac University is an independent entity under the University Grants Commission (UGC) of the Government of Bangladesh. On the other hand, the intervention was designed and executed by the BRAC NGO, which is not affiliated with BIGD. Therefore, the author’s role at BIGD is free from any biases or interests in promoting BRAC, and rather, their role as independent researchers requires them to conduct impartial research.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Ethical declarationThis study uses primary data collected through in-person surveys. All respondents of this survey were members of the BRAC UPG program. BRAC UPG also reviewed the questionnaire extensively and provided essential feedback, which was duly addressed by BIGD. Being well aware of the research scope, BRAC UPG provided BIGD with the necessary approval and contact details of the members of BRAC UPG program to conduct the survey. All respondents were surveyed upon their verbal consent and no respondent was surveyed without his/her stated permission.Notes1 People whose income dropped below the poverty line for the first time due to a certain event.2 Asset sale, savings depletion, major cut downs on expenditures, indebtedness from high-interest informal loans (Vatsa Citation2004).3 People who are by definition non-poor (with income above the upper poverty line) but vulnerable to poverty (with income below the national median income and close to the poverty line).4 In Bangladesh, about 85 per cent of the MFIs experienced a deterioration of their outstanding credit portfolios, 80 per cent faced high rates of savings withdrawals, and more than 73 per cent had inadequate equity capital to cope with the COVID-19 crisis (Mujeri et al. Citation2020).5 A situation where people seem to be caught between two stages and are unclear what will happen next.6 According to Grant et al. (Citation2004), several terms are used to identify those who experience poverty most intensely – ultra-poor, extremely poor, hard-core poor, destitute, poorest of the poor, and declining poor. The ultra-poor are those who experience extreme poverty. Their income falls below the poverty line of $2.15 USD per day, and they encounter multifaceted issues due to their poverty status.7 Factors such as roofing materials, children's education status, stable income sources, and productive assets are considered to assess the economic conditions.8 Those who did not participate in the program, but belong to a similar economic group as the participating households.9 About 95.79 per cent of the treatment group faced an income loss of 40 per cent or more compared to 94.96t per cen ofthe comparison group.10 About 53.51 per cent of the treatment group faced an asset loss of 40 per cent or more compared to 44.57 per cent of the comparison group.11 The comparison groups have more men members as the men-to-women ratio is higher than in the treatment group.12 Household head’s monthly income (BDT), per capita monthly income (BDT), value of cows (BDT), value of business capital (BDT), value of all productive assets (BDT).Additional informationNotes on contributorsMohima GomesMohima Gomes is working as a research associate at BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), BRAC University. She completed her Bachelor's in economics from the Asian University for Women (AUW), Bangladesh with distinction. She has experience in conducting research that focuses on poverty, skills development, and social development programmes.Nusrat JahanNusrat Jahan is the head of Business Development and Knowledge Management of BIGD, BRAC University. She holds a Master's degree in Public Administration-Development Practice from the School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), Columbia University. Before joining BIGD, she worked as a research coordinator at the Bangladesh Office of Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA).Tanvir ShatilTanvir Shatil is an anthropologist by training and completed his Bachelor's and Master's degrees from Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh. He is currently working as a research coordinator at BIGD, BRAC University and has a good command over qualitative research methods.Nabila TahsinNabila Tahsin is working as a research associate at BIGD, BRAC University and completed her Bachelor's and Master's in economics from the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. She has experience working on research focusing on poverty, disability, and the evaluation of development programmes.Narayan DasDr. Narayan Das is a development economist working as a senior research fellow at BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), BRAC University. He has a PhD in Agricultural and Resource Economics from the University of California at Berkeley. His research focuses on poverty analysis, quantitative analysis of development policies, and impact assessment of social programmes and labour markets.Imran MatinDr. Imran Matin currently serves as the executive director of the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), a research and post-graduate education institute at BRAC University. Dr. Matin holds a PhD in Economics from the University of Sussex, UK. Before assuming his current role, he worked with BRAC, Save the Children International and Innovations for Poverty Action.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19造成的新贫困人口的经济复苏:来自孟加拉国的证据
Tanvir Shatil是一名训练有素的人类学家,他在孟加拉国贾汉吉尔纳加尔大学完成了学士和硕士学位。他目前在BRAC大学BIGD担任研究协调员,精通定性研究方法。Nabila Tahsin是BRAC大学BIGD的一名助理研究员,她在孟加拉国达卡大学完成了经济学学士和硕士学位。她曾从事贫困、残疾和发展项目评估方面的研究工作。Narayan DasDr。纳拉扬·达斯,发展经济学家,BRAC大学BRAC治理与发展研究所(BIGD)高级研究员。他拥有加州大学伯克利分校农业与资源经济学博士学位。他的研究重点是贫困分析、发展政策的定量分析以及社会方案和劳动力市场的影响评估。伊姆兰MatinDr。Imran Matin目前担任BRAC治理与发展研究所(BIGD)的执行董事,该研究所是BRAC大学的研究和研究生教育机构。马丁博士拥有英国苏塞克斯大学经济学博士学位。在担任现职之前,他曾在BRAC、国际救助儿童会和扶贫创新行动组织工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Development in Practice
Development in Practice DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Gain free access to articles published in the special issue on Citizen"s Media and communication, and watch videos from Conversations with the Earth an indigenous-led multimedia campaign exhibiting at COP15 in Copenhagen. Development in Practice offers practice-based analysis and research relating to development and humanitarianism providing a worldwide forum for the exchange of ideas and experiences among practitioners, scholars, policy shapers, and activists. By challenging current assumptions, and by active editorial engagement with issues of diversity and social justice, the journal seeks to stimulate new thinking and ways of working.
期刊最新文献
Agricultural knowledge and youth participation in agriculture and agribusiness in an African context Livelihood diversification and household economic well-being in rural Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India Non-aligned common front: strategic imaginaries of the new international economic order (NIEO) Introduction: the future of teaching gender and development Muslim pracademics as double brokers: a faith-sensitive, intersectional framework for understanding pracademics’ experiences and positionalities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1