Download Free Evaluating The Effectiveness Of Out Grower Projects In Reducing Poverty In Rural Zambia A Case Of The Eastern Province Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Evaluating The Effectiveness Of Out Grower Projects In Reducing Poverty In Rural Zambia A Case Of The Eastern Province and write the review.

Doctoral Thesis / Dissertation from the year 2020 in the subject Business economics - Business Management, Corporate Governance, University of Lusaka, language: English, abstract: The Living Conditions Monitoring Survey (LCMS) conducted in 2015 revealed that rural poverty stood at 76.6 percent and 23.4 percent for urban poverty respectively. To this effect, rural poverty still remains high and predominantly a rural phenomenon. This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of the out-grower schemes on reducing poverty and answer the general research question on how effective were the out-grower schemes in reducing poverty in rural Zambia. Pragmatism was the philosophical view that underpinned the study and it applied to the mixed research method approach for this study. The convergent parallel strategy of the mixed research method approach was used. The target population was 50,000 smallholder farmers and a questionnaire with open ended questions (qualitative) and closed questions (quantitative) was administered to a sample size of 396 smallholders farmers. Simple random sampling was used to select smallholder farmers.Qualitative data was analyzed by using the inductive process of building from the data to broad themes and then to interpretation. Quantitative data was analysed by using the Chi-square tests to ascertain association between critical variables measured by categories of out-grower farmers and independent farmers. The T-tests compared the treatment and control groups on variables of interest. The coefficient of variation (CV) was used to gauge the level of respondents’ disagreement (dissention) in responses while coefficient of consensus (CC) was used to gauge the level of respondents’ agreement (consensus) in responses, applied to the Likert scale and any other ordinal responses. The findings from the study revealed that the out-grower schemes implementation has contributed to a positive change in poverty reduction to smallholder farmers participating in the out-grower scheme. Further, out-grower farmers have improved their knowledge in understanding the operation of the out-grower scheme. Subsequently, the out-grower schemes have benefited the communities. In this regard, the study concluded that the out-grower schemes have been effective in reducing poverty in the rural areas of Zambia. The study recommended that there was need to address the issue of power imbalance between the out-grower farmers and the out-grower firms.
Zambia, like any other developing country is faced with the problem of reducing high rural poverty and household food insecurity. Despite the country sustaining a real economic growth of more than 5% since the year 2005, the majority of Zambians still live in poverty as economic growth has not resulted in uplifting the well-being of the poor. In addition, the exposition of the population to economic reforms market economic liberalisation facilitated by the SAP and unfavourable weather conditions (droughts) has increased peoples vulnerability to poverty. The severity of poverty is more pronounced in rural areas than urban areas thereby necessitating the need to intervene through farmer input support programme to bring the situation under control. The main objective of the dissertation was to assess the effectiveness of FISP on rural poverty reduction through raising income and its effect on household food security. To achieve the above objective, the paper was guided by two specific objectives; (i) to assess the impact of FISP on rural poverty by increasing income of the target population and (ii) to examine the extent to which FISP contributes to household food security on the targeted small-scale farmers in Zambia. Further, the paper tested two hypotheses: (i) FISP has no impact on raising small-scale farmers income and hence rural poverty reduction on the target population and (ii) FISP has a positive impact on household and national food security. The papers main research problem was that despite the government had been spending huge sums of money on FISP with a view to reduce poverty, the high incidence of rural poverty raises questions about the effectiveness of the program to address the problem. The paper combined both desk-top and quantitative studies in the methodological approach. Literature from international development organisations on FISP and a wide range of journals, research papers and articles have been used to guide the discussion, analysis, and drawing of conclusions and recommendations. Further, a field data-set collected by IAPRI in conjunction with the Central Statistical Office on FISP was used to test the above hypotheses. Despite the government implementing various input support programmes (FCP, FISP, FSP and FSPP) to empower small-scale farmers in terms of access to income and improve household food security, the programmes have been marred with a lot of operational challenges. There has been undercoverage of the poor and leakage of the programme to the non-poor. The causes of targeting errors have been partly due to entry requirements (cooperative membership fees, access xii to land) which have acted as an exclusion mechanism for the poor farmers who cannot afford to pay membership fees. In addition, acquisition of entitlements ability to cultivate between 0.5 ha and 5ha to qualify for participation has excluded the poorest of the poor who cannot meet the entitlement requirements. Targeting efficiency has been further weakened by the requirement to pay cash upfront payment before collecting fertiliser which has disadvantaged the genuinely poor who cannot meet the subsidy input cost. Leakage (type II error) has been necessitated by the government assumption that larger farmers are efficient in fertiliser usage and hence maize production than smaller farmers. This has led to disproportionate allocation of fertiliser in favour of larger farmers who reap the benefits of the programme. The paper has also highlighted that FISP has contributed to increase in maize production in Zambia resulting in the country achieving national food self-sufficiency. However, the increase in maize production has not translated into poverty reduction. Rural poverty has remained high at 77.8% despite implementing the programme for more than a decade. The high rural poverty incidence is explained by the fact that increase in maize production is achieved by the less poor with more land, asset base and income On average they sell 1.7 to 15.1 tons of maize to FRA as compared to 135kg sold by small farmers cultivating less than 2 ha of land. In addition, larger farmers receive more subsidised inputs than poor farmers thereby empowering the non-target population of the programme. Political interference has further led to arbitrariness in the selection of programme participants resulting in leakage of fertiliser to commercial outlet where it is sold. Late delivery of inputs has also led to reduction in the yield per hectare as it reduces the maize response rate to fertiliser - fertiliser improves crop performance when applied at the recommended time. The paper concludes that FISP has no impact on raising the income of the target population and thus on rural poverty reduction. However, FISP has a positive impact on national and household food security though undernourishment and food inadequacy has been rising since 2002. The paper recommends the following; (i) government should implement narrow targeting to concentrate the benefits of the program on the poor, (ii) government should put up a deliberate land empowerment policy through resettlement scheme, (iii) government should promote small-scale irrigation to fight seasonal food insecurity and (iv) Ministry of Agriculture should regulate cooperatives and ensures that the membership fees they change are affordable by the poor.
The physical, institutional and policy environment; The determinants and effects of technology adoption; Determinants of other factors influencing technology adoption.
Over the past two decades, the percentage of the world’s population living on less than a dollar a day has been cut in half. How much of that improvement is because of—or in spite of—globalization? While anti-globalization activists mount loud critiques and the media report breathlessly on globalization’s perils and promises, economists have largely remained silent, in part because of an entrenched institutional divide between those who study poverty and those who study trade and finance. Globalization and Poverty bridges that gap, bringing together experts on both international trade and poverty to provide a detailed view of the effects of globalization on the poor in developing nations, answering such questions as: Do lower import tariffs improve the lives of the poor? Has increased financial integration led to more or less poverty? How have the poor fared during various currency crises? Does food aid hurt or help the poor? Poverty, the contributors show here, has been used as a popular and convenient catchphrase by parties on both sides of the globalization debate to further their respective arguments. Globalization and Poverty provides the more nuanced understanding necessary to move that debate beyond the slogans.
Assessing Aid determines that the effectiveness of aid is not decided by the amount received but rather the institutional and policy environment into which it is accepted. It examines how development assistance can be more effective at reducing global poverty and gives five mainrecommendations for making aid more effective: targeting financial aid to poor countries with good policies and strong economic management; providing policy-based aid to demonstrated reformers; using simpler instruments to transfer resources to countries with sound management; focusing projects oncreating and transmitting knowledge and capacity; and rethinking the internal incentives of aid agencies.
A joint FAO and World Bank study which shows how the farming systems approach can be used to identify priorities for the reduction of hunger and poverty in the main farming systems of the six major developing regions of the world.
The World Bank's Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) assesses the conduciveness of a country's policy and institutional framework to poverty reduction, sustainable growth, and the effective use of development assistance.
At the start of each decade the World Development Report focuses on poverty reduction. The World Development Report, now in its twenty-third edition, proposes an empowerment-security-opportunity framework of action to reduce poverty in the first decades of the twenty-first century. It views poverty as a multidimensional phenonmenon arising out of complex interactions between assets, markets, and institutions. This Report shows how the experience of poverty reduction in the last fifteen years has been remarkably diverse and how this experience has provided useful lessons as well as warnings against simplistic universal policies and interventions. It shows how current global trends present extraordinary opportunities for poverty reduction but also cause extraordinary risks, including growing inequality, marginalization, and social explosions. The World Development Report 2000/2001 explores the challenge of managing these risks in order to make the most of the opportunities for poverty reduction.