24

〔農 業 経 営 研 究 第42巻 第3号,2004〕 研究論文

Inequality, and Agriculture in Rural : Perspective from a Village Study

Md. Taufiqul Islam*, Kenichi Omori**

I Introduction

Bangladesh is one of the most densely populated agricultural nations in the world , numbering 129 million people. The country encompasses an area of 147000 km2 with 834 people per km21 . Agriculture plays a key role in the overall economic performance of Bangladesh , not only in terms of its contribution to the GDP, but also as a major source of foreign exchange earnings , and by providing employment to a large segment of the population, particularly the poor(9) . Although the population is growing at a slower rate than twenty years ago (previously 2.01% and currently 1.8%), the pressure of absolute numbers is on the increase( 1 This , combined with rapid urbanization and a rapid decline in available arable land, means that the agricultural sector has to feed a growing population. This cannot be done without substantial agricultural development. Therefore , such development is indispensable for Bangladesh . Although there are some positive trends in respect to farm productivity and overall economic growth in some areas, the agricultural sector is beset with multifarious problems such as a prevalence of small, marginal or landless farmers, inequality in landholding distribution and , unemployment, slow expansion of irrigation schemes, lack of and low diffusion of modern C2 ), Considering the above, this study conducted a household survey to identify agricultural problems, and to suggest potential areas for improvement in effective agricultural development in survey area. Specifically, the study aims to- 1) Evaluate the impact of education, income and land ownership on agriculture; and 2) Identify inequalities in land and income distribution . This paper is divided into six sections: Section one describes the significance and objectives of the study. Section two discusses the concepts of poverty and inequality . The basic features of the study are presented in section three . Section four contains the method of analysis , data and study materials. Section five presents the results and discussion . Section six summarizes the results and offers conclusions.

* The United Graduate School of Agricultural Scien ce, Tottori University. ** Faculty of Life and Environmental Scienc e, Shimane University. Inequality, Poverty and Agriculture in Rural Bangladesh: Perspective from a Village Study 25

Sources: Based on the references: (BIDS,(2)); (DFID, (8)); (Hye, (15)); (Hug, (16)); (IDB, (18)); (IFAD, (19)); (Rahman, 12211:(Sen_126)): and (Todaro. 128)). Figure 1 Causes of Poverty

II The Concept of Poverty and Inequality

Quantification of poverty largely depends on how it is defined. Although it may be somewhat pedantic, use of definitions helps to avoid confusion and places the subject in perspective. There are various types of definitions of poverty. Generally, poverty refers to forms of economic, social and psychological deprivation occurring among people lacking education and sufficient assets. Accord- ing to Sen (1981), "Poverty is, of course, a matter of deprivation". In Human Development Report, the United Nations classified a Third-World person as poor if, after adjusting for international differences in price levels, the person is trying to live on less than one dollar a day C19).To know what helps to reduce poverty, what works and what does not, poverty has to be defined. requires improved access to productive assets such as land in addition to basic services, income and educatioric8). The poverty is caused by a vast range of factors. Figure 1 summarizes the causes of rural poverty classified into Social, Economic, Political and Environmental. In this study, poverty is defined as the condition of lack of education inequalities in income and land ownership. Poverty and inequality are very closely linked. Inequality is a relevant concept at different levels and needs to be examined within and outside the household, at a local, national and global level. When social groups based on race, gender, or other features are systematically associated with differential reward and privilege, inequality becomes an institutionalized feature of . Social Inequality refers to an unequal distribution of economic (wealth) and/or political (power) and/or cultural goods c 5 )' (29). Present study defined inequality as the inability of specific groups of people to access certain opportunities (such as land, education or employment) available in society that typically should be available to all people equally. To measure inequality, one needs to determine the meaning of the degree of being unequal(26). It has been recognized since Dalton (1920) that a measurement of income or wealth inequality implies some concept of social welfare. Berrebi and Silber (1985) note that inequality indices can be expressed as a income-weighted sum of individual 26 第42巻 第3号(通 巻122号)

"deprivation" coefficients , the differences among the indices depending on the way the deprivation is defined. The present study emphasized education, inequality and poverty with respect to agriculture, which are the key factors for in Bangladesh. Very few studies have been undertaken in this field. Moreover, previous studies were mainly problem-based 2 ), and which lacked developmental direction. Previous studies show that education constitutes the most impor- tant component of any rural development program, particularly in the socio-economic context of Bangladesh. Education is an important factor in creating access to economic resources for rural development and thus by earning more to escape the curse of poverty(18). It is not always clear to rural people that education can help them reduce poverty by increasing human capital and skill so as to enable them to attain meaningful personal development. Education provides wider choices for occupations thereby providing an independent source of income, which helps to reduce income inequality and poverty.

III Basic Feature and Study Area

Bangladesh, with a humid subtropical monsoon climate, is suitable for the growth and cultivation of a wide variety of tropical and sub-tropical crop species. Over 80 percent of the people live in rural areas, and a major portion of this population is unemployed half of the year(5). Thirty percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) comes from agriculture, which involves 60 percent of the labor force[18J.The country has a total land surface of approximately 35.5 million acres 3 ), of which about 22.4 million acres are used for agricultural purposes 1). Figure 2 demonstrates comparative man -land ratio in some South-Asian countries . Land is the main productive asset in rural areas; it represents both economic and social status. However, the man-land ratio in Bangladesh is acute. A poverty profile by landholding class in rural Bangladesh is given in Table 1. This table also indicates that poverty is correlated with the amount of land a household controls. The study was undertaken in Mohammadpur Village within the Sadar Thana (sub-district) of the

Note: Hectare is a measure of land; lhectare=2.471 acres. Source: Data based on Population Data Sheet in South Asian Countries, ESCAP, 1995 Figure 2 Comparative Man-Land Ratios in some South-Asian Countries Inequality, Poverty and Agriculture in Rural Bangladesh: Perspective from a Village Study 27

Brahmanbaria District. Mohammadpur is a Table 1 Poverty profile by Landholding class

plain land village, appropriate for agricultural

production and other activities. The communi-

cation system in the village is not developed; in

the rainy season it is difficult to move from one

place to another. Some basic data on the village is given in Table 2. This table compares data

between 1991 and 2001. The average household

size is 6 members. Mohamadpur is representa- Note: The method of head count has been adopted to measure tive of the average village in Bangladeshc •k30•l. population falling below the poverty line. The head count method involves the following simple procedure of calcula- Although some government and non-govern- tion, h=q/n ment organizations are working towards the where, h=headcount measure of poverty, q=number of development of Mohammadpur Village 4), it persons falling , and n=total population Source: Data based on Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1994. was found during the household survey that

only 23 percent of farmers had received train- Table 2 Basic Data for Mohammadpur Village

ing and only 27 percent were linked with organi- in 1991 and 2001

zations such as village cooperative society,

BRAC, Samabaya Samity and other informal groups.

IV Materials and Methodology

Source: Thana (Sub-district) Statistic Officer, Brahmanbaria 1 Sources of Data and Research Methods Sadar Thana, Brahmanbaria District, Bangladesh, 2001.

The present study gathered data from multiple sources. Most secondary data were collected from administrative agencies and NGO's in Bangladesh. Various publications, census and study reports were also used. Mohammadpur Village in Bangladesh was selected as a source of primary data. The selection of this village was influenced by a number of factors. There are various types of village in Bangladesh which are usually divided into categories such as plain land, fishery or mountain villages. Over 80 percent of the villages in Bangladesh are located on plain land, and most of the village people are dependent on agriculture for their livelihood•k14•l,•k17•l. This study emphasized a plain land agricultural village, as being an average representative village in Bangladesh. In total, one hundred households were investigated using a prepared questionnaire 5). The questionnaires composed the following sections:

1) Head of household and household characteristics.

2) Occupation and Literacy: Occupation is an activity performed to earn income. A person may

have several occupations; the source of highest income is defined as the main occupation and

all others are secondary. Literacy was defined as the ability to read and write a letter in any

language.

3) Farm size and asset ownership.

4) Income distribution.

The household was taken as the unit of analysis, and heads of the households were the primary 28 第42巻 第3号(通 巻122号) source of information. The households were selected as below. Mohammadpur village has 10 sub -sections with 812households . Every section consists of around 70 to 90households. During the survey, 10households were chosen from each sub-section. For every sub-section we categorized 5 blocks, east, west, north, south and middle. We chose the first two households from every block 6).

2 Method of Analysis

In this study, the Lorenz curve and methods are used to measure comparative inter-household inequality. The most common geometric definition of Gini coefficient is based on the Lorenz curve. It represent cumulative income share as a function of cumulative population share. If a population share is always exactly equal to a share in overall income then there is a situation of perfect income. Gini coefficient is widely used in econometrics as a standard measure of inter-household inequality in incomeC21. Kendall and Stuart (1966) define the Gini coefficient as one-half the relative mean difference, that is one-half the average value of absolute differences between all pairs of divided by the mean income. Thus,

Where, G is Gini coefficient, n is number of sample,

μ is average income, and yi is individual income. There is no optimal Gini coefficient. A high Gini coefficient (close to 1) indicates an extremely unequal distribution of income. This situation could lead to social instability. A low Gini coefficient (close to 0) implies a highly equal distribution of income. This situation tends to reduce economic incentives in society and lead to slower growth. There is no target Gini coefficient value, however it is prudent to avoid extremely large or small values. To examine a particular source of income, the Gini coefficient decomposition formula is used 7). The Gini decomposition formula was chosen because to the use of Gini-ratios is popular economic analysis. The Gini decomposition formula is shown as follows:

Where, G(Y) equals the Gini coefficient ratio of the total household income, Ykequals the income of the kth source, sk equals the share of the kth type of income, R(Y, Yk) equals the rank of correlation ratio, G(Yk) equals the Gini ratio of the kth income, and PG(Yk) equals the pseudo-Gini ratio of the income inequality. In fact, R( Y, Yk)G(Yk) is equal to the pseudo-Gini ratio, PG( Yk). By using a comparison between PG( Yk) and G( Y), we can assess whether kth type of income is inequity-increasing or inequity-decreauality. The importance of PG( Yk) in overall inequality is weighted by its share in the overall household income. The rank correlation ratio is defined as

Where, r(Y) and r(Yk) denote the ranking of households in terms of Y and Yk respectively.If R(Y, YK)<0, Y rank is higher and Yi is lower. However, if R(Y, Yk)>0, Y and Yk both rank higher.It is clear that R is equal to 1 if r(Y)=r(Yk). Otherwise, R is shown to be lessthan 1.In Inequality, Poverty and Agriculture in Rural Bangladesh: Perspective from a Village Study 29 general, the larger the correlation between Y and Yk, the larger is the R. Moreover, for correct assessment of results, regression analysis techniques are used. Income is a dependent variable, and nine independent variables have chosen considering the field survey.

V Results and Discussions

During the survey in Mohammadpur Village, 100households were investigated. Of these, about 88 percent were headed by a male. Table 3 gives general information about the study area. This table also compares data from the survey area and rural areas of Bangladesh. At both levels, the majority of the population depends on agriculture for its livelihood; small farms predominate in this area

(Figure 3, Table 3). Millions of inhabitants in rural areas depend upon land as their primary means of survival. Their living standards, life activities, social positions and prestige, dreams and aspira- tions are closely linked with ownership and access to land •k18•l,•k19•l. Both in rural Bangladesh in general and in the survey area in particular, around 10 percent of the population is totally landless

(Table 3). That portion of the population that own only the land on which their homestead is located is also classified as landless.

Table 3 General Information of the Study Area and Rural Bangladesh

Sources: 1. Field Survey, 2001; 2. Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh, Bang- ladesh Bureau of Statistics, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2001.

Source: Same as for Table 3 Figure 3 Farm Holding Ratio in Study Area and Rural Bangladesh 30 第42巻 第3号(通 巻122号)

Table 4 Maximum, Minimum and Average Size of In Bangladesh, a large proportion

Landholdings Household (about 65 percent) of the agricultural

land is cultivated by small owner

farmers while about 30 percent is culti-

vated on a tenancy or sharecropping

basis •k3•l,•k16•l. The land tenure system in

the survey area is the same as elsewhere Source: Field Survey, 2001. in rural Bangladesh, with options such as Table 5 Literacy of head of the Household, by level of yearly tenancy and sharecropping. Land- Land ownership lessness, land tenure and ownership are

very important considerations in Bang-

ladesh•k15•l,•k16•l. Descriptive statistics of

landholding in the survey area are given

in Table 4. Considering the Gini coeffi-

cient measurement, this table shows in-

equality in total land controlled, house-

hold land rented and land owned. Inequal- Source: Field Survey, 2001. ity in area of land owned is relatively Table 6 The Maximum, Minimum and Average high. The Gini coefficient measurement Household Income reveals that owing to the rental-land, the

total inequality-ratio is decrease.

Poor people's access to land is impor-

tant in ensuring that they can contribute

to, and benefit from, economic

Source: Field survey, 2001. growth" ). Dorner (1992) assumes that

proper land reform would lead to real development in the agricultural sector and that it would then be the base for development of the industrial sector. Land reform programs usually address the

issues of effective functioning of , tenure security and equity of ownershipc2o).This

can be done in many ways. The policy adopted for land reform in Bangladesh involves productivity

and equity considerations. However, the structure of land administration in Bangladesh contains

systematic weaknesses and dysfunctional properties which are both a major source of land prob-

lems and a major barrier to the pursuit of reform programs •k13•l, •k25•l.

Inequality is harmful for development•k28•l. Table 5 shows the inequality in landholding distribution

in the survey area. There seems to be a positive correlation between land and education. This table

indicates that adult literacy is lower among the landless and poor land owners. During the survey

in Mohammadpur Village, it was observed that people who receive education mostly come from

households of rich land owners with high incomes. Griffin (1984) explains that an unequal distribu-

tion of income in rural areas is almost always associated with an unequal distribution of land, and

therefore argues for radical redistribution of land to gain real development in developing countries

like Bangladesh. Descriptive statistics of household income in the survey area are given in Table 6.

Considering the Gini coefficient measurement, this table also shows inequalities exist in farm, non

-farm and total income . Inequality, Poverty and Agriculture in Rural Bangladesh: Perspective from a Village Study 31

Source: Based on Field Survey, 2001 Source: Based on Field Survey, 2001 Figure 4 Comparative Inequality in Income Figure 5 Comparative Inequality in Land

Table 7 Gini coefficient Decomposition for Household Income

Source: Field Survey, 2001.

Table 8 Major Source of Employment for head of the Household

Note: 1. Agriculture and other indicates that the main occupation is agriculture with a secondary job ; 2. Non-farm and agriculture indicates that the main occupation is non-farm with a secondary job ; 3. Others indicates various non-agricultural occupations such as health worker, painter, carpenter and teacher ; and 4. Read & Write shows the number of literate people and None indicates illiteracy. Source: Field Survey, 2001. The most common definition of the Gini coefficient is in terms of the Lorenz diagram-as the ratio of the area between the Lorenz curve and the line of equality, to the area of the triangle below this line (Figures 4 and 5). A visually appealing way of representing the inequality line for income distribution is obtained by plotting the cumulative share in total income (N) against the cumulative proportion of the population (Y) with incomes not exceeding a given level, for every level of income. Considering the Lorenz curve, Figures 4 and 5 reveal comparative inequalities in income and land ownership. Table 7 presents decomposition of the Gini coefficient that reveals the relative contribu- tions of income components to the total inequality in household income. This table shows that contribution of non-farm income to the total income increases inequity. However, contribution of farm-labor and rental-farm land decreases inequity in the total income. The decreasing contribu- tion of farm labor and rental-farm, and increasing contribution of non-farm income to total 32 第42巻 第3号(通 巻122号)

Table 9 Annual Household Income and Literacy in Survey Area

Note: Literate indicates the number of persons who can read & write Source: Field Survey, 2001

Table 10 Households With Secondary Occupation

Source: Field Survey, 2001 household income attest to the fact that inequality is associated with land distribution. Table 8 shows the major source of employment for working members in the survey area. The data indicate that 78 percent of householders are involved in agriculture as a main occupation and only 22 percent have a secondary job. On the other hand, 22 percent of households are involved in non-agricultural activity as a main occupation and 12 percent have a secondary job. Both agricul- tural and non-agricultural households show that most of the literate persons have secondary occupation (Table 8). Table 9 presents household income and level of education in the survey area, and also reveals the inequalities in household income. This table indicates that most of the literate persons come from household with higher annual incomes. The households with secondary occupation, literacy and their levels of income are given in Table 10. A total of 34 households are involved in a secondary occupation. Of these, 22 households are involved in agriculture as a main job with a secondary occupation and 12 households are engaged in activities other than farming as a main occupation with another secondary job (Table 8). Both show that most of the literate persons come from households with secondary occupations and higher annual incomes (Table 10). Householders reported that nowadays people are trying to migrate from farm to non-farm work, although non-farm activities are not readily available in village areas. Non -farm householders have relatively high annual income (Table 10) and wages . Whereas farm wages average only 1.5 US$ per-day, non-farm wages average 2 US$. Rural people prefer non-farm work because it is not seasonal. Therefore, the non-farm sector can play an important role for the rural poor in Bangladesh villages like Mohammadpur by generating new sources of employment and acting in a supporting role to agriculture. Inequality, Poverty and Agriculture in Rural Bangladesh: Perspective from a Village Study 33

Table 11 Regression Coefficient

Note: * indicates household dummy, where 1) 0 indicates literacy and 1 shows illiteracy; 2) 0 indicates age between 18 to 44 years, and 1 shows 45 and above; 3) 0 indicates male and 1 is female; 4) 0 indicates married, and 1 is others; 5) 0 indicates farm, and 1 is non-farm; 6) 0 indicates without secondary occupation, and 1 shows the opposite. **indicates significant , where P<0.001 Source: Field Survey, 2001.

Lastly, in this study, multiple regression analysis was used to assess the results. A computed regression summary is given in Table 11. This table shows a broad regression summary, where income is a dependent variable, and nine independent variables have been chosen after considering the field survey data. The coefficient and t-value reveal that in the survey area, literacy, households with secondary occupations, and land ownership have significant role in overall income 8 ). However, independent variables such as age, gender, marital status and household-size do not seem to exert any significant impact on income.

VI Concluding Remarks

From the household level analysis in the survey area, the incidence of poverty was closely associated with illiteracy and inequality. The present study shows that 28 percent of households in the survey area are living on less than 2 US$ a day, and 16 percent of the households are landless, which in the context of rural Bangladesh, indicates absolute poverty 9 ). Most of the illiterate persons come from households of poor land owners with limited income. Study shows that education has a tremendous effect on secondary occupation and raising household income. This study also indicates that inequality is associated with land and income distribution. The rate of poverty and inequality reduction is positively correlated with the rate of agricultural development (16),119).As is well known, agricultural development implies not only increasing produc- tivity but also equality in land and income, modernization of farms, literacy and employment opportunities. Therefore, to reduce poverty and inequality, the position of poor farmers must be strengthened through literacy programs, land reforms, agricultural support services and income generating programs. To improve the present situation in the survey area, the following recommen- dations are made: 34 第42巻 第3号(通 巻122号)

First, Accelerate literacy programs: education is the key to ensuring social and economic progress. The present study shows that people who receive education mostly come from households with rich land owners and high annual incomes. Although primary education is free, in the face of , parents divert their children from schooling to farming or to their own occupation for which no formal education is needed. The World Development Report 2000 indicated that attendance in school involves both actual costs and the lost opportunity costs of the children's contribution to the household work or income. In essence, poverty is the main cause of children dropping out of school •k18•l. In recent years, Bangladesh has adopted various education strategies aimed mainly at educating children. Several NGO's are also playing an active role in the develop- ment process of educating the population of Bangladesh. However, there are still many challenges to overcome for Bangladesh to attain an acceptable standard of education and literacy.

With the help of education, both formal and non-formal, people can be empowered to become active partners in development. The present study shows that education has a tremendous effect on secondary occupation. The non-farm sector can play an important role for the rural poor by generating new sources of income and acting in a supporting role to agriculture. Therefore, the non -farm sector should be enlarged to provide employment opportunities for the poor farmers and groups.

Secondly, various data show that land ownership has a significant role in overall income. Land dominates the life of almost every person in the survey area. However, 60 percent of the households in the survey area belong to small farms and 16 percent have no farm holdings. Access to land is deeply important in rural Bangladesh, where the incidence of poverty is highly correlated with lack of access to landc31). In order to have an in-depth understanding of the present system of land management in Bangladesh, the historical background must be taken into account. The first land reform programs under the Presidential Order of 1972 did not fare well. This order directed that surplus land recovered from landowners owing more than 33.3 acres would be distributed among the landless and near landless. Only 54,409 acres were surrendered, of which 31,250 acres were taken possession by 1976. As in the past, the quality of land surrendered was very poor and the lands surrendered were highly fragmented, making redistribution very difficult. Even when the landless

or the near landless were given lands for settlement, they could not occupy the land as it was

already under the unauthorized occupation of rich and powerful farmersc25. As regards the 1984

land reform measures, no figures are available. Since Bangladesh's independence in 1971, all the governments of Bangladesh have introduced some sort of land reform programs, at least on paper.

However, in most cases land turned over for this purpose has ended up in the hands of rich

landowners, as a result of corruption and an unwieldy bureaucracy C31, (34. Given the history of past reform measures, the outlook of land reforms in Bangladesh is not bright. Therefore, a proper land

reform is essential for a largely agricultural nation like Bangladesh.

Land reform usually entails a redistribution of the rights of ownership or use of land away from

large landowners in favor of cultivators with very limited or no landholdings[29) . It can take many forms such as the transfer of ownership to tenants who already work the land to create family

farms (as is done in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan), transfer of land from large estates to small farms (in Mexico), rural cooperatives (in Cuba), or the transfer of land ownership or control directly

or indirectly to the people who actually work the land as paid laborers . The experience of many Inequality, Poverty and Agriculture in Rural Bangladesh: Perspective from a Village Study 35

countries shows the crucial role of land reform in providing not only a source of income, security and status for the non-land owning rural poor, but also as a foundation for broader rural develop- ment•k24•l. To reduce inequality in land ownership, it is necessary to redistribute of the rights of ownership. It can be done by the transfer of ownership to tenants who have very limited or no landholdings.

Notes

1) This poverty line is commonly used for international comparisons. At this line, a person obtain a 'global consumption bundle' worth US$ 1 per person per day in constant purchasing power of 1993(33). 2) Generally, a problem-based study that mainly focuses on inquiry. The inquiry approach helps to identify the problems. However, it doesn't provide a meaningful direction for solving those problems. 3) Acre is a measure of land; 1 acre=4000 Sq. meters. 4) The organizations operating in this village are: Thana Central Cooperative Association (TCCA), Family Planning and Health Care Organization, Mohila Cooperative Society, BRAC and other organiza- tions. Significantly, out of 12 , only four are well known to Mohammadpur Village. 5) The household is usually defined as a group of people who 'eat from the same pot' and live in the same residential unit. 6) We chose the first two households we reached when starting at the farthest edge of each block. 7) The Gini coefficient decomposition formula is followed the following references: ・Subramanian , S. (2002): Measunment of Inequality and Poverty, Oxford University Press, New Delhi,

pp.85-105; and ・Jonna P . Estudillo and Keijiro Otsuka (2000): Income distribution in rice-growing villages during the

post-green Revolution periods: the PhilipPine case, 1985 and 1998, ELSEVIER, Journal of Agricultural

Economics 25, pp.71-84.

8) Literacy also used as slope dummy of secondary occupation. However, literacy does not seem to exert

any significance.

9) Absolute poverty is a level of poverty at which certain minimum standards for example for income,

nutrition and shelter•c•ccannot be met. There is no absolute standard that defines absolute poverty : the

level of income necessary for these minimum standards is often referred to as the poverty line, which

various countries and individuals define differently•k18•l, •k29•l.

References

〔1〕 Bangladesh Bureau of Statistic (2001): Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh, Statistic Division, Ministry of Planning, Dhaka. 〔2〕 BIDS (2001). Bangladesh Human Development Report 2000, Dhaka, pp.19-123.

〔3〕 BRDB (1995): Integrated Farming Systems for Rural Poor, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.2-10. 〔4〕 Berrebi and Silber (1985): Income, Wealth and the Economic Well-being of Farm Households, Economic Research Service, USDA. 〔5〕 CIRDAP (1998): Increased Household Income and Rural Women in Asia (Impact on Status and A etivitiod Rennrt of Research Meeting. Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia. pp.4-92.

〔6〕 Chrystal and Richard (1997): Economic for Business and Management, Oxford University Press, London, pp.421-426.

〔7〕 Dalton, H. (1920): The Measurement of Inequality of Incomes, Economic Journal 30.

〔8〕 DFID (2003): Better Livelihoods for Poor People: The Role of Land Policy, Discussion Draft, Rural Livelihood Section, London.

〔9〕 Dorner, P. (1992): Latin American Land Reforms in Theory and Practice (A retrospective analysis), 36 第42巻 第3号(通 巻122号)

University of Wisonsin Press, Madison. 〔10〕 Faruqee, R. (1995): Bangladesh Agriculture in the 21" Century, Rural Developmental Sector, World Bank, Dhaka, Chapter 1, part 1. 〔11〕 FAO (1999): How to Promote Farmer's Participation in Agricultural and Rural Development for Sustained , Fourth Session, Tokyo, pp.83-93. 〔12〕 Griffin, K. (1984): Rural Poverty in Asia (analysis and policy alternatives), BIDS, Dhaka. 〔13〕 Hossain Z. Rahman (1995). Rethinking Land Reform in Bangladesh, Rural Developmental Sector, World Bank, Dhaka, Chapter 4, part 1. 〔14〕 Hossain, Mahabub and Rita Afsar (1988): Credit for Women's Involvement in Economic Acitivities in Rural Bangladesh, BIDS, Dhaka. 〔15〕 Hye Abdul Hasnat (1996): Rural , University Press Limited , Dhaka, Bang- ladesh, pp.17-80. 〔16〕 Huq, Rahman and Gordon R.C (2000): Agricultural Development in Bangladesh, The University Press Limited, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.3-94. 〔17〕 Hossain M. (1991): Agriculture in Bangladesh: Performance , Problems and Prospects, The University Press Limited, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.105-397. 〔18〕 IDB (2001): Workshop on Priorities and Strategies in Rural Poverty Reduction , Tokyo-Shimane, Japan. Session One and Two. 〔19〕 IFAD (2001): Rural Poverty Report, Oxford University Press, International Fund For Agricultural Development, New York, pp.15-79. 〔20〕 Jasper N. Mwenda (2001): Spatial Information in Land Tennure Reform with Spetial Reference to Kenya, International Conference on Spatial Information for Sustainable Development , Nairobi, Kenya. 〔21〕 Kendal, M.G and A. Stuart (1966): The Advanced Theory of Statistics, London , Vol.1, Distribution Theory, 2nd ed. 〔22〕 Rahman, Md. Motiur PK. (1995): Poverty Issues in Rural Bangladesh , Dhaka, pp.133-135. 〔23〕 Ramanathan, Ramu (2002): Introductory Econometrics with Applications, Fifth Edition , University of California. San Diego,_ USA pp.133-189.

〔24〕 Roy L. Prosterman and Tim Hanstad (2003): Land Reform in the 21st Century (New Challenges , New Responses), Rural Development Institute , Washington, pp.1-25. 〔25〕 Siddiqui, K. (1991): Land Reform in Bangladesh, Center for Social Studies, Dhaka . 〔26〕 Subramanian, S. (2002): Measurement of Inequality and Poverty , Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp.81-105. 〔27〕 Sen, A. (1981): Poverty and Famines (an essay on entitlement and deprivation) , Oxford University press, Oxford. 〔28〕 Torsten P. and Guido T. (1994): The American Economic Review, New York , Volume 84, Issue 3. 〔29〕 Todaro Michael P. (2000): , 7th edition, Addison Wesley Longman, New York, pp.148-395. 〔30〕 Thana Statistical Officer (2001): Personal Communication , Brahmonbaria Sadar Thana, Brahmon- baria District, Bangladesh. 〔31〕 T. Hussain (1995): Land Rights in Bangladesh (Problems of Management) , University Press Limited, Dhaka, pp.14-108. 〔32〕 Ullah, Mahbub (1996): Land, Livelihood and change in Rural Bangladesh , University Press Limited, Dhaka, pp.1-68. 〔33〕 World Bank (2001): World Development Report 2000 , Washington DC.

(2004”N10ŒŽ17“úŽó—•)