Eric LAMPERTZAnita SOLOMON
Noor AL SHOALARomina RODRIGUEZ POSE
Mariana INFANTEShahana DASTIDAR
structure• Mission scope• Definition of Poverty• Research Topics• Methodology• Introduction to Fieldwork• Pre-trip expectations that matched reality• Key Findings from Fieldwork• Recommendations - Areas for future
research and institutional adjustment
mission scope• urban / rural context in Mbarara
• poverty reduction and reversal thereof
• recommendations “for making adjustments in these areas to achieve a positive contribution to sustained poverty reduction”(Fieldtrip TOR)
definition of povertyA lack of the means to satisfy basic
material and social needs, as well as a feeling of powerlessness
(MFPED, 2000 & 2002 as cited in CPRC report, 2005: 16)
Powerlessness in the sense of insecurity, helplessness against corruption in public service delivery, general exploitation by service providers, vulnerability to natural and economic shocks, and isolation from the larger society.
(Okidi and Kempaka as cited in CPRC report, 2005: 16)
mission approachpoverty as defined by the poor themselves
research topicsQ1: What do the poor in Mbarara perceive as
poverty? What do they consider as factors that drive them into poverty, or “carriers” that keep them in poverty?
Q2: What is the direct impact of policy initiatives like ‘decentralisation’ and ‘good governance’ on the poor in Mbarara?
Q3: Do statistics reflect reality?
framework of analysis
framework for research
What do the poor in Mbarara perceive as poverty? What do they consider as factors that can drive them into poverty, or carriers that keep them in poverty?
What are the direct impacts of policy initiatives like decentralisation and good governance on the poor in Mbarara?
Do statistics reflect reality?
Broad research topics SL Component
Livelihood assets,
Livelihood strategies,
Vulnerability
Transformingstructures and processes
Livelihood assets, Livelihood outcomes
T
1
3
2
mbarara
sites visited
kashanyarazi (urban cell)
Focus Group Discussionin Local Church
Interviews with two families
rwanyamahembe (rural)Interview with Local
Leaders
Group Discussion in village (landless farm worker families)
Interview in village (land-owning farmer family)
bwizibwera (rural)Focus group discussion in
Primary Health Centre
Interview with Fabric-seller, Vegetable-seller & Traditional Healer at Weekly Market
research questionstopics discussed/ questions asked during group discussions and interviews
expectation ~ ground reality
physical capital• condition of services
(roads, schools, hospitals)
• under-developed electricity distribution -reliance on fuel wood for cooking etc.
• lack of water and sanitation infrastructure
social capitalhigh prevalence of social
networks and informal safety nets (e.g. family, neighbourhood)
expectation ~ ground reality
natural capital• fertile soils• favourable but
unstable weather conditions
• high reliance on subsistence farming
expectation ~ ground reality
financial capital• existence of
microfinance sector• low usage of
financial services• strong tendency for
self-help (e.g. revolving savings funds)
expectation ~ ground reality
Transforming structures & processes• general reduction in poverty• prevalence of corruption• traditionally large families• strong gender bias• alcoholism
expectation ~ ground reality
key findingsThe PEAP is part of policies within the SL framework. As the main
policy for poverty eradication, our findings show that:
PEAP•Positive Macroeconomic Indicators•Low inflation•Economic growth•Low fiscal deficit
•Declining poverty rate, except for 2002 figures •“Blip” due to statistical error/ coffee prices•Statistics vs. Reality?
Effect of PEAPor
Increased Stability and Security in the region
key findings
Decentralization•Access to services•Education•Participation
Decentralization of corruption?•Faith in local leaders
Governance
key findings
Large Families
Povertywhat is leading to ..? how to get out ..?
Education
•Burden of many children
•Cost of Education
•Division of Assets
High Value
Acknowledgement of Family Planning Methods
• Religious
• Cultural
• Implementation problems
?
key findings
Micro-credit
Povertywhat is leading to ..? how to get out ..?
Initial Capital
More Problems than Benefits•Terms unfavourable•Loss of Assets•Broken Family Bonds•Evictions•Prison
New loan to repay the previous one
Micro-credit as answer to poverty
•Lack of understanding •Used to pay non- recoverable expenses (school cost, medical bills, weddings, etc)•Creditors: Banks, MFI, Individual money-lenders
?
•High expectations from income-generating activities
•Sustainable?
key findings
Savings & Credit
key findings
Advantages: Food security, access to land and property, majority of Ugandans live in rural areas
Problems: agriculture depends on climate conditions (vulnerability), large families means great division of the land, soil is being depleted, no technological advance in agriculture to increase yields.
Livelihood Strategies Agriculture
key findings
Creation of Small Enterprises:generation of a stable income and reduction of agriculture-dependence vulnerability
Problems: licenses (corruption), still dependant on the agricultural economy, common goal means more competition
Livelihood Strategies Small Enterprises
poverty in mbararainsecurity & impermanence
future research
institutional adjustment
• vulnerability & support systems• poverty reduction - PEAP vs. stability/ security• statistics vs. reality• decentralisation (participation vs. corruption)• cultural values – education & family planning• credit (disease or cure)• agriculture (subsistence/primary good/value-addition)• small enterprises (sustainability)
Special Acknowledgements
Ms. Immaculate Tumuhumbise(Mbarara University of Science & Technology)
Ms. Sarah N. Ssenwanyana(Economic Policy Research Centre, Makarere University)
Ms. Julie Crespin(ACTOGETHER UGANDA, Kampala)
