Vulnerability to Rural Multidimensional Poverty in Southern Ethiopia

Abstract

While few studies have quantified the extent and examined the determinants of static multidimensional poverty, studies on the extent and determinants of dynamic rural multidimensional poverty are scarce. This study quantified the extent and examined the determinants of vulnerability to rural multidimensional poverty using the Chaudhri (2002) approach and the generalized ordered logit model respectively. Data were gathered from 415 random rural households in 2021 in southern Ethiopia. The study showed that the levels of rural multidimensional poverty and the vulnerability to rural multidimensional poverty are 72.3 and 84% respectively. This suggests that vulnerability is more widespread compared to current poverty. Besides, 66 (15.90%), 220 (53.10%), and 129 (31.08%) households are non-vulnerable (\(V<0.50\)), moderately vulnerable, and extremely vulnerable (\(V\ge 0.56\)) to future poverty respectively. About 276 (66.51%) and 97(23.37%) households are in chronic, and transitory rural multidimensional poverty. Of 349 vulnerable households, 129 (36.96%) of households are extremely vulnerable to future poverty. Of 173 extremely poor households, 167 (96.53%) households are extremely vulnerable to future deprivation. Female-headed households are more extremely vulnerable compared to male-headed households. Regression results highlighted that land size (β = − 3.07, t = − 4.65, p < 0.001), tropical livestock unit (β = − 0.67, t = − 4.32, p < 0.001), credit (β = -3.93, t = − 3.69, p < 0.001), mobiles per household (β = − 0.58, t = − 4.21, p < 0.001), extension visits (β = − 0.33, t = − 3.81, p < 0.001), death of animals (β = 2.21, t = 3.37, p < 0.001), age of household head (β = − 0.17, t = − 4.84, p < 0.001), being male-headed (β = − 0.88, t = − 2.15, p < 0.01), and crop failure (β = 1.38, t = 3.91, p < 0.001) are significantly affecting vulnerability to rural poverty. Hence, rural poverty reduction strategies need to aim not only to reduce current or ex-post poverty but also to prevent ex-ante or future poverty. The findings underscore the importance of promoting access to rural land, credit, extension services, irrigation, information technology, and education to reduce vulnerability to future deprivation of rural households.