Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck
Master's Thesis for obtaining the academic degree of Master of Science
Improving the livelihood of the poorest? Profiling the beneficiaries of the EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme in Tanzania.
Benedikt Menardi B.Sc. 01217728
submitted to Ao. Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Ernst Steinicke Department of Geography University of Innsbruck
Innsbruck, September 2020 Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
I. Federal Declaration
I hereby declare on oath with my own signature that I have written the present work independently and have not used any sources or aids other than those indicated. All passages that have been taken literally or in content from the sources given are marked as such.
The present thesis has not yet been submitted in the same or similar form as a master's or Diploma thesis.
04.09.2020 Benedikt Menardi
2
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
II. Acknowledgement
I would first like to thank Ernst Steinicke, Matthias Danninger and Peter Van Erum for their continued support. Their comments, ideas and suggestions have significantly contributed to the thesis. I would also like to thank Friedbert Ottacher, Karin Hartl-Hubmann and Judith Nothdurfter for the interesting interviews. Special thanks to Jasson Rwazo (Missenyi), Stephen Kileo (KADDRO) and Lucy Mbeho (KADDRO), who supported me during my field research. Without their commitment this work would not have been possible. Furthermore, I would like to thank Inga Rodermund for proofreading my thesis. Finally, I must express my very profound gratitude to my parents and to my girlfriend for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout my years of study and writing this thesis.
3
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
VI. Contents
I. Federal Declaration ...... 2
II. Acknowledgement ...... 3
III. List of Figures ...... 7
IV. List of Tables ...... 8
V. Abbreviations ...... 9
VI. Abstract ...... 10
1. Introduction ...... 11
1.1 Hypotheses and General Methodology ...... 11
2. Theoretical Fundamentals ...... 14
2.1 Sustainable Development Goal 1: No Poverty ...... 14
2.2 International Development Cooperation ...... 15
2.2.1 Industrialisation and Modernisation ...... 15
2.2.2 Dependency Theory...... 16
2.2.3 Neoliberalism ...... 17
2.2.4 Post-Development ...... 17
2.2.5 Amartya Sen's Capability Approach ...... 18
2.3 Poverty ...... 18
2.3.1 Definition and Perceptions of Poverty ...... 18
2.3.2 Global Poverty ...... 20
2.3.3 Dimensions and Measurement of Poverty ...... 20
3. Study Area ...... 24
3.1 Tanzania ...... 24
3.2 The Tanzanian Districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa ...... 25
4. The EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme ...... 28
4
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
4.1 Structure and Aim of the Programme ...... 28
4.2 Current State ...... 29
5. Specific Methods of Data Collection and Evaluation ...... 31
5.1 Focus Group Discussion ...... 31
5.2 Homestead Visits ...... 32
5.2.1 Health Dimension ...... 33
5.2.2 Educational Dimension ...... 34
5.2.3 Living Standards Dimension ...... 35
5.2.4 Indicators of Monetary Poverty ...... 36
5.3 Poverty cutoffs ...... 37
5.4 Expert Interviews ...... 38
6. Findings ...... 40
6.1 Local Perception of Poverty ...... 40
6.1.1 Local Perception of Income Situation ...... 41
6.1.2 Local Perception of Water Situation ...... 43
6.1.3 Local Perception of the Nutritional Situation ...... 45
6.1.4 Local Perception of the Housing Situation ...... 47
6.1.5 Local Perception of Sanitary Conditions...... 49
6.2 Multidimensional Poverty Index Measurement ...... 51
6.2.1 Health ...... 51
6.2.2 Education ...... 53
6.2.3 Living Standard ...... 54
6.3 MPI Poverty Cutoffs ...... 58
6.4 Monetary Poverty ...... 59
6.5 Donors Perception of Poverty ...... 60
5
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
6.6 Local Partner's Perception of Poverty and Choosing of Beneficiaries ...... 61
6.6.1 Missenyi ...... 61
6.6.2 Kyerwa ...... 62
7. Synthesis ...... 64
7.1 The Poorest vs. the "Active Poor" and Contribution to SDG 1 ...... 65
7.2 Local Perception of Poverty vs. Multidimensional Poverty Index ...... 66
7.3 Expectations of the Donors ...... 70
8. Conclusion & Recommendations...... 71
9. Literature ...... 73
10. Annex ...... 76
10.1 Questionnaire ...... 76
10.2 Questions for the EEALIP Focus Group Discussions ...... 80
6
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
III. List of Figures
Figure 1: The Districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa...... 27 Figure 2: Flipcharts used for FGDs ...... 32 Figure 3: Indicators mentioned by the beneficiaries in the Focus Group Discussion ...... 40 Figure 4: Perception of Income Situation in Missenyi ...... 41 Figure 5: Perception of Income Situation in Kyerwa ...... 42 Figure 6: Perception of Water Situation in Missenyi ...... 43 Figure 7: Perception of Water Situation in Kyerwa ...... 44 Figure 8: Perception of Nutritional Situation in Missenyi ...... 45 Figure 9: Perception of Nutritional Situation in Kyerwa ...... 46 Figure 10: Perception of Housing Situation in Missenyi ...... 47 Figure 11: Perception of Housing Situation in Kyerwa ...... 48 Figure 12: Perception of Sanitary Conditions in Missenyi ...... 49 Figure 13: Perception of Sanitary Conditions in Kyerwa ...... 50 Figure 14: Improved food variety through different crops ...... 52 Figure 15: A Tip Tap (for hand washing) and a not improved toilet pit ...... 55 Figure 16: Beneficiary's house with water tank to collect water and connection to national grid ..... 56 Figure 17: Different Housing Situations ...... 57 Figure 18: Poverty cutoffs for both the initial and the current state ...... 58 Figure 19: Allocation of Beneficiaries according to Monetary Poverty Line ...... 59 Figure 20: Combined FGD Findings for Local Poverty Perception in Missenyi...... 67 Figure 21: Combined FGD Findings for Local Poverty Perception in Kyerwa ...... 68 Figure 22: MPI Poverty Headcount for Missenyi and Kyerwa ...... 69
7
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
IV. List of Tables
Table 1: MPI Dimensions, Indicators and Weighting ...... 22 Table 2: Explanation of the poverty cutoffs ...... 38
8
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
V. Abbreviations
CPRC Chronic Poverty Research Centre EEALIP EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Program EUREGIO European Region Tyrol – South Tyrol – Trentino FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation FGD Focus Group Discussion HDI Human Development Index HDR Human Development Report KADDRO Kayanga Diocesan Development and Relief Office MADDO Masaka Diocesan Development Organization MDGs Millennium Development Goals MPI Multidimensional Poverty Index OPHI Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative PPP Purchasing Power Parity SDGs Sustainable Development Goals UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Program USD United States Dollar VLSA Village Lending and Savings Associations
9
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
VI. Abstract
The thesis aims to create an exact profile of the beneficiaries of the EEALIP (East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme) by applying a new profile of multidimensional poverty. The beneficiaries are smallholders living and working in the Tanzanian districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa. The visited farmer groups were asked to participate in FGDs (focus group discussions) to explore local perceptions of poverty. Furthermore, beneficiaries were visited on their farms to observe their living conditions and to conduct household surveys based upon the indicators provided by the MPI (Multidimensional Poverty Index) and the Monetary Poverty Line. According to the research results, the beneficiaries' level of poverty has improved since the start of EEALIP. Initially, 50 per cent of the respondents were living in poverty or extreme poverty, while 30 per cent are currently living in poverty or extreme poverty. The results also show that about 25-45 per cent of them are not classified as poor in their current situation. The Master's thesis is interesting for students of human geography as well as for persons working in the field of development cooperation.
Diese Masterarbeit zielt darauf ab, durch die Anwendung eines neuen Profils multidimensionaler Armut ein genaues Profils der Begünstigten des EEALIP (East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme) zu erstellen. Bei den Begünstigten handelt es sich um Kleinbauern, die in den tansanischen Distrikten Missenyi und Kyerwa leben und arbeiten. Die besuchten Bauerngruppen wurden gebeten, an FGD (Fokusgruppendiskussionen) teilzunehmen, um die lokale Wahrnehmung von Armut zu erforschen. Darüber hinaus wurden die Begünstigten auf ihren Bauernhöfen besucht, um die Lebensbedingungen zu beobachten und Haushaltsbefragungen auf Grundlage der Indikatoren des MPI (Multidimensionaler Armutsindex) und der monetären Armutsgrenze durchzuführen. Den Forschungsergebnissen zufolge hat sich das Armutsniveau der Begünstigten seit Beginn des EEALIP verbessert. Ursprünglich lebten 50 % der Befragten in Armut oder extremer Armut, während gegenwärtig 30 % in Armut oder extremer Armut leben. Die Ergebnisse zeigen auch, dass etwa 25- 45 % der Stichprobe in ihrer derzeitigen Situation nicht als arm eingestuft werden. Die Masterarbeit ist sowohl für Studierende der Humangeographie als auch für Personen, die im Bereich der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit tätig sind, interessant.
10
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
1. Introduction
The EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme (EEALIP) is a regional intervention funded by the three provinces under the auspices of EUREGIO (the Autonomous Provinces of Bozen/Bolzano-South Tyrol, the Autonomous Provinces of Trento-Trentino and the Province of Tyrol, together EUREGIO Tyrol-South Tyrol-Trentino) as donors, aiming to sustainably improve the livelihood in a trans-border approach of both smallholders and semi-urban population in five neighbouring districts of Uganda and Tanzania, namely Kyotera, Bukomansimbi, Kalungu (Uganda), Missenyi and Kyerwa (Tanzania). (University of Innsbruck, Deparment of Geographie: 2019, p. 6)
The thesis aims to provide an exact profile of the beneficiaries of the EEALIP, who are smallholders living and working in the Tanzanian districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa, by applying a new profile of multidimensional poverty. Previously selected beneficiaries took part in a combination of qualitative homestead visit interviews and a quantitative survey, providing data that will help to classify their level of poverty. Furthermore, the thesis seeks to examine the process of becoming a beneficiary and investigates the attributes by which the local partner organization selected suitable applicants. Additionally, expert interviews with representatives of the Donors will reveal their expectations towards the criteria the beneficiaries should meet to be part of the programme. To conclude, the latter will be compared to the findings concerning the actual level of poverty established for most of the beneficiaries.
1.1 Hypotheses and General Methodology
To successfully achieve the previously mentioned aim of the thesis through a deductive approach, the processes of data collection, evaluation and interpretation were organised and conducted in a way to either prove or falsify the following three hypotheses, developed upon existing data, experiences from a field trip in February 2019 (University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography: 2019) and relevant literature. In particular, the publication of Jeffrey D. Sachs (End of Poverty. Economic Possibilities for Our Time, 2005) and the work of Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo (Poor Economics: Plädoyer für ein neues Verständnis von Armut, 2019) should be mentioned here. a) The implementing local partners Missenyi and KADDRO have a regulated and structured process of choosing beneficiaries for the EEALIP, which, however, does not consider the
11
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
poverty level measurement according to the MPI (Multidimensional Poverty Index). Therefore, the farmer groups consist of smallholders at different levels of poverty. b) The local smallholders' perception of their own poverty differs from how they are classified according to the "New Global MPI [Multidimensional Poverty Index] 2018: Aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals" (Alkire & Jahan 2018). c) The responsibility for choosing beneficiaries within the EEALIP lies with the implementing partners, Missenyi District and KADDRO. Although the beneficiaries are not scored and selected according to the MPI, the selection meets the expectations of the EUREGIO partners of working with the poorest.
The following general questions have been developed based on literature research and the mid-term evaluation performed in February 2019:
1.) How can poverty be defined? What is the global status of poverty? What progress has been made with international strategies, such as the SDGs, to reduce global poverty?
2.) Can poverty be measured? If yes, what methods exist to do so? Can they be applied to any region in the world?
3.) Is poverty an important concept within the EEALIP? How does the EEALIP contribute to SDG 1?
Additionally, the following specific questions have been developed to focus the research process on the previously mentioned hypotheses:
a1.) How does the local partners Missenyi and KADDRO choose beneficiaries for the EEALIP? Which staff members are responsible? Do they use a regulated system and/or clearly defined indicators?
a2.) Who are the beneficiaries of the EEALIP? Are there any differences among them? Could they possibly be divided into groups such as the MPI 's poverty cutoffs?
a3.) If beneficiaries reach a certain level of wealth, are they being released from the EEALIP?
12
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
b1.) What is the beneficiaries' perception of poverty? How do they identify poor people? How would they score themselves?
c1.) What are the Donors' expectations towards the beneficiaries of the EEALIP? How would they define poverty?
Considering the general requirements of scientific research and the local conditions of working with smallholders in the field as well as possible distortions due to external translations, the following mix of methods has been chosen. In addition to interviewing experts from both the implementing partner organisations of Missenyi, KADDRO and the European partners, the visited farmer groups were asked to participate in FGDs (Focus Group Discussion) to help gain an impression of the local perception of poverty. Furthermore, randomly chosen beneficiaries were visited on their farms to observe the living conditions and to conduct household surveys based upon the indicators provided by the MPI of the UNDP (United Nations Development Program) and the OPHI (Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative) (Alkire & Jahan., 2018, p. 1). An extensive description of applied methods can be found in chapter 5.
The first section of the thesis deals with the theoretical basics with a primary focus on Sustainable Development Goal 1: End Poverty, international development cooperation, and the definition and perceptions of poverty. The following chapters are devoted to the study area and the aims and structure of the East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme. The following chapter details the methods of data collection. The findings chapter presents the data and results of the research, while the Synthesis chapter discusses the results. The last chapter summarises the most significant results and gives recommendations for the next project phase.
13
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
2. Theoretical Fundamentals
2.1 Sustainable Development Goal 1: No Poverty
More than 700 million people, or 10 per cent of the world's population, still live in extreme poverty and struggling to fulfil their most basic needs like health, education, and access to water and sanitation, to name a few. The world's population living in extreme poverty decreased from 36 per cent in 1990 to 16 per cent in 2010 and 10 per cent in 2015. The majority of people living on less than 1.90 USD a day live in sub-Saharan Africa. Worldwide, the poverty rate in rural areas is 17.2 per cent—more than three times higher than in urban areas. Poverty disproportionately affects children. Close to half (46 per cent) of extremely poor people are children under 14 years of age. (United Nations, 2019, p. 22; (United Nations, n.y.) Ensuring social protection for all children and other vulnerable groups is critical to reduce poverty. Poverty has many dimensions, but its causes include unemployment, social exclusion, and high vulnerability of certain populations groups to disasters, diseases and other phenomena preventing them from being productive. Growing inequality is detrimental to economic growth and undermines social cohesion, increasing political and social tensions and, in some circumstances, driving instability and conflicts. (United Nations, n.y.)
The main target of Sustainable Development Goal 1: End Poverty (United Nations):
• "By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than 1.90 USD a day" • "By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions" • "Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable" • "By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance" • "By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters." (United Nations, n.y.)
14
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
The decline of extreme poverty continues, but the pace has slowed, and the world is not on track to achieving the target of ending poverty by 2030. (United Nations, 2019, p. 22)
2.2 International Development Cooperation
On 20 January 1949, President Harry S. Truman made his inaugural address, which marked the beginning of development cooperation:
We must embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas. More than half the people of the world are living in conditions approaching misery. Their food is inadequate. They are victims of disease. Their economic life is primitive and stagnant. Their poverty is a handicap and a threat both to them and to more prosperous areas. For the first time in history, humanity possesses the knowledge and the skill to relieve the suffering of these people[...]. (Truman, 1949)
2.2.1 Industrialisation and Modernisation
Truman's counter-model to socialism promises modernisation and catch-up development through industrialisation and the rapid expansion of the infrastructure. Motivated by the effectiveness of the Marshall plan and the incipient economic miracle in Germany, the belief in progress was incredibly strong. The Governments and the experts were convinced that the developing countries lacked only two essential requirements: capital and technical know-how. A relevant mentor of the modernisation theory was Whitman Rostow. In his often cited major work The Stages of Economic Growth. A non- Communist Manifesto (Rostow, 1990, p. 4-16) he describes the Rostow model. The economic development of a country proceeds linearly in five stages.
1. The traditional society
This preindustrial society is hierarchically structured, tends to superstition and lives from subsistence economy. There is hardly any innovation and mobility. Everyone has their ancestral place in the family and the social structure. Economic or social advancement is almost impossible.
15
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
2. The preconditions for take-off
In this stage arise new production methods in agriculture and manufacturing industry. Education becomes more important and the governments invest more money in transport, tidings and commodity sectors.
3. The Take-off
Technical innovations lead to a rapid spread of new industries which generate high profits. The demand for labour force and manufactured goods increases. The cities grow and at the same time the agriculture gets commercialised. The society becomes permeable because a social advancement is now possible.
4. The drive to maturity
The fourth stage takes 40 years and is characterised by a high investment rate of 10 to 20 per cent. Industrialisation and division of labour increase the aggregate productivity of the society and enable continuing population growth.
5. The age of mass-consumption
In the last stage the basic needs for nutrition, clothes and home are satisfied resulting in the demand for luxury goods and a higher quality of life.
Rostow's model was the development paradigm of the 1960s and early 1970s. The development projects in this period are characterised by a belief in catch-up development. It was apparent that an important factor was not considered by Rostow: the human being as a central player of development. (Ottacher & Vogel, 2016, p. 20-24)
2.2.2 Dependency Theory
Due to the movement of 1968, there was a break with the prevailing post-war paradigms. In many parts of the world, alternatives to capitalistic economic and social order was being designed. Development work was also affected by this new spirit of the time. For the first time, scientists from Latin America were also taking part in the development debate. They pilloried the industrialized nations and researched the exploitative economic relations. The main statements of the Dependency
16
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Theory are: The economic and power-political centres are located without exception in Europe and the United States. Money, expertise and power congregate there. The developing countries primarily sell raw materials from agriculture and mining industry. For these goods they receive only a small amount of money and they have to spend it immediately on imports and finished products. According to the dependency theorists, raw materials are getting cheaper and cheaper, while the prices of finished products are increasing. The logical conclusion in terms of the dependency theory is that poverty cannot be overcome as long as the exploitative rules in the global market are not changed fundamentally. (Ottacher & Vogel, 2016 p. 24-28)
2.2.3 Neoliberalism
The politics of the 1980s and early 1990s were coined by Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl. All of their policies were based on the teachings of neoliberal economists like Walter Friedman and enabled the triumphal procession of neo-liberalism. The economic growth in developing countries was very low despite credit-financed investments. The state as the central economic player had apparently failed. Therefore, new rules were set up in the Washington Consensus. The Washington Consensus includes economic-political measures which the governments of the developing countries should implement to achieve stability and growth. The painfully structural adjustment programmes led to tough austerity measures in the countries of Latin America, Asia and Africa. Savings were made in all sectors. The impact was dramatic and is still visible today. The 1980s are also called the lost decade. (Ottacher & Vogel, 2016, p. 28-30)
2.2.4 Post-Development
Representatives of the post-development studies reject the whole concept of development. They criticise the entire discourse on development as an instrument of the north's rule over the global south. A key question is the power over the definition and attribution of the notions of developed and underdeveloped. In the understanding of post-development underdevelopment is an invention of the north, which was imposed on the countries of the south. The industrialised countries perceive themselves as developed, and the rest of the world as underdeveloped. According to the post- development theory, development cooperation is only legitimised by the classification of the poor as underdeveloped. The many failed development projects are proof that the concepts of industrial society are not applicable to every society. (Ottacher & Vogel, 2016, p. 31-35)
17
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
2.2.5 Amartya Sen's Capability Approach
Current theories no longer disagree with the explanatory patterns of the major theories, the initial situation of the developing and emerging countries is too different. The Capability Approach by Amartya Sen takes a similar direction. The economics professor is regarded as the father of the Human Development Index (HDI). The HDI is an indicator of prosperity and is made up of life expectancy at birth, average duration of schooling and gross national income per capita. Sen pleads for holistic development. Realisation opportunities for everyone are the real development goal. Individual freedom enables people to help themselves and to influence their environment. According to Sen, five complementary freedoms are the basic prerequisite for the self-realisation of the individual:
• political freedom • economic freedom • social participation • social transparency • social security
Sen's Capability Approach offers a useful alternative to neo liberalism, especially since his theses are supported by the success of the emerging countries (South Korea, Taiwan). (Ottacher & Vogel, 2016, p.36-38)
2.3 Poverty
2.3.1 Definition and Perceptions of Poverty
There are many ways to define and measure poverty. Many countries estimate statistical poverty lines, which define the subsistence level of a particular society. (Stockmann et al., 2016, p. 296) The Development agencies tend to measure poverty based in the income per capita. The World Bank uses the monetary income and the ability to consume as important criteria for identifying poverty. The material narrowing of the concept of poverty has been heavily criticised by new poverty research. The economic theory of poverty is facing particular criticism, because poverty is reduced to income and valued as a "natural state", while wealth is seen as a fruit of individual achievement. It
18
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
was therefore concluded that poverty is essentially self-inflicted. The Capability Approach by Amartya Sen focused on entitlements, opportunities and capabilities at the centre of the discussion of the global poverty phenomenon. According to Sen, development means the reduction or lack of freedom, which limits the freedom of choice and the participation in decisions at different social and political levels. Poverty is therefore primarily but not exclusively a material problem. It is not just about owning, it's also about being. There also is political and cultural poverty, i.e. the exclusion from political and cultural life. People want to be safe from all sorts of risks and have the chance to leading self-determined lives. (Stockmann et al.,2016, S. 298-299) Furthermore we have to differentiate between "relative poverty" and "absolute poverty". Relative poverty shows the circumstances of population groups that live at the base of the wealth and income pyramid compared to the general level of prosperity. Relative poverty is linked to what the others have or can do. Relative poverty is also characterised by a lack of participation in goods that make life worth living. Absolute poverty or extreme poverty identify people who do not have access to essential goods (nutrition, clothes, home) and whose survival in human dignity is at risk. People in this group suffer from multiple and lifelong deprivations: hunger, illiteracy, no access to drinking water or basic health services, social discrimination, physical uncertainty and political exclusion. In everyday language you can also label this group as the "poorest of the poor". (Stockmann et al., 2016, p. 296, 297) Friedbert Ottacher, programme coordinator at Horizont 3000, distinguishes between poverty and misery. "Poverty is something you can deal with and live with. You find a modest way of living and you can survive. Of course, people living in poverty are very vulnerable. If you get sick or something unexpected, like a drought, happens, you have a problem. People who live in misery are extremely vulnerable, suffer from hunger and live from day to day. They include single parents, people with disabilities and ethnic minorities." (Interview with F. Ottacher, 2019) The 2010 Human Development Report (HDR) presented the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI). The MPI is based on the awareness that poverty has many causes and many dimensions (cf. 2.3.3). The number of people living in poverty calculated using the MPI was 1.5 billion people, in the 91 countries examined, which is a significantly higher number as the from the World Bank's one- dimensional count of poor people based on the per capita income. (Stockmann et al., 2016, p. 296- 298) Poverty is the collective reason why people are malnourished, sick, homeless, uneducated and hardly able to help themselves. Poverty is synonymous with underdevelopment when it prevents societies
19
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
and individuals from developing their skills. However, statistics do not illustrate the real existing brutality of poverty, which violates the code of social human rights. (Stockmann et al., 2016, p. 298)
2.3.2 Global Poverty
The proportion of the world population living in extreme poverty has dropped from 36 per cent (1990) to 16 per cent (2010) and further down to 10 per cent (2015), although the pace of progress is slowing down. The rate of extreme poverty for 2018 was 8.6 per cent. In low-income countries and countries affected by conflict and political upheaval, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, extreme poverty remains persistently high. Of the 731 million people who had less than 1.90 USD a day to live on in 2015, 400 million were living in sub-Saharan Africa. This number has risen in recent years and exceeds the total number of poor people in the rest of the world. (United Nations, 2019, p. 22) Social protection programmes absorb the full impact of poverty and can also prevent people from falling into poverty in the first place. There are glaring differences between regions: 92 per cent of children in Europe and North America and 56 per cent in Latin America and the Caribbean are covered by social protection systems, compared with only 13 and 14 per cent respectively in sub- Saharan Africa and East and South-East Asia. (United Nations, 2019, p. 23) In addition, the worldwide number of undernourished people is rising again (784 million in 2015 to 821 million in 2018)(United Nations 2019, S. 5). The figures are also alarming in the field of education - worldwide, 617 million children and young people of primary and early secondary school age (over 55 per cent of the global total) did not have minimum literacy and numeracy skills in 2015. The majority of them is living in sub-Saharan Africa, where in 2015 88 per cent of children of primary and early secondary school age were not able to read and 84 per cent could not calculate. (United Nations, 2019, p. 30) These figures show that the situation is alarming across the globe but particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Clearly much deeper, faster and more ambitious efforts are needed to bring about the social and economic transformation needed to achieve the SDGs. (United Nations, 2019, p. 2)
2.3.3 Dimensions and Measurement of Poverty
The World Bank's Monetary Poverty Line
People living below a poverty line do not have enough money to meet their basic needs with respect to food, clothes and shelter. From 2005 to 2015, the poverty line was defined as 1.25 USD per day. As
20
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
differences in the cost of living across the world are evolving, the global poverty line has to be periodically updated to reflect these changes.
Since October 2015, the new global line has been updated to 1.90 USD per day. The new amount has the same purchasing power as 1.25 USD in 2005 and 1.00 USD in 1985. It is important to note, that the global poverty line is used primarily to track extreme poverty globally, and to measure progress on global goals set by the World Bank, the United Nations, and other development partners. Purchase Power Parity (PPP) allows us to put each country's income and consumption data in globally-comparable terms. The PPP is computed on the basis of price data from across the world, and the responsibility for determining a particular year's PPP rests with the International Comparison Program (ICP), an independent statistical programme with a global office housed within the World Bank's Development Data Group. A country's national poverty line is far more appropriate as the global poverty line for underpinning policy dialogue or targeting programs to reach the poorest. For example, in a middle-income country, where the national poverty line is at 4 USD a day, the global poverty threshold may be less relevant than in a poorer country where the national line is at 1.65 USD or similar. (The World Bank, 2015)
Multidimensional Poverty Index of the United Nations
The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) was co-designed and launched in 2010 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development Report Office (HDRO) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at University of Oxford, and it was first published in 2010 as part of the Twentieth Anniversary of the Human Development Report (HDR). The original MPI (henceforth MPI-O) aligned, insofar as was then possible, with indicators used to track the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It has been published in every Human Development Report (HDR). In 2014 an innovative MPI (henceforth MPI-I) was also developed and published in parallel, in order to explore how to improve the MPI (Kovacevic and Calderon 2014). The advent of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, along with improvements in some survey questions to better reflect SDG indicators, provided an occasion to realign the global MPI and publish a more defined jointly revised global MPI in 2018. Five of the 10 indicators are modified from the original MPI: nutrition, child mortality, years of schooling, housing and asset ownership. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 1)
As summarized in table 1, the MPI uses information from 10 indicators that are categorized in three dimensions: health, education and living standards, and which identify each person as deprived
21
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
depending upon the joint achievements of household members. But not all indicators are weighted equally. Four indicators are weighted with 1/6 and six indicators with 1/18. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 8) The poverty cutoffs are described in detail in chapter 5.5.
Table 1: MPI Dimensions, Indicators and Weighting (Source: Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 9)
There are two characteristics that differentiate the MPI indicators from indicators typically used in other reports and statistics. The first characteristic is that the unit of analysis is the household. The second one is that the MPI considers only the deprivations of the multidimensionally poor. This process is called censoring, since it ignores deprivations of people that do not reach the poverty
22
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
cutoff-people who experience deprivation in some way but are not deprived in one-third of the weighted indicators. These characteristics and their practical consequences are explained here. (Alkire & Santos, 2011, p. 14)
As explained above, the unit of analysis of the MPI is the household. This makes no difference for the living standard indicators, as it is the usual practice elsewhere: a household that does not have improved sanitation is considered deprived and so are all its members. However, for the health and education indicators, using the household as the unit of analysis differs from usual practices. If there is a school-aged child not attending school in the household, all its members are considered deprived in the school attendance indicator, even though they may be beyond school age or be attending school or having completed schooling themselves. There is an implicit assumption of a shared negative effect (called "externality" in economics) within the household as the result of a child not attending school. Conversely, if there is one household member with six years of education, all household members are considered non-deprived in years of schooling, even though not all of them may have the same education background. In that case there is an implicit assumption of a shared positive effect as the result of someone having achieved that level of education. (Alkire & Santos, 2011, p. 14, 15)
23
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
3. Study Area
The EEALIP was visited twice by the author in 2019, once in February as part of a mid-term evaluation together with a group of students from the University of Innsbruck and again in November in the course of the process of collecting data for this thesis. Both field visits lasted 14 days. The following chapter aims to give a short geographic, social and economic overview of Tanzania and of the districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa.
3.1 Tanzania
The East African state of Tanzania has an overall population of 55 million and an area of 945,087 km2. (World Bank, Sep. 2019; WKO, 2020, p. 1) Tanzania lies on the Indian Ocean and borders Kenya and Uganda to the north, Rwanda, Burundi and the DR Congo to the west and Zambia, Malawi and Mozambique to the south. Apart from the coastal regions with the offshore islands of Zanzibar and Pemba, Tanzania is characterised by a mountainous landscape with high plateaus and mountainous regions, which are shaped by the East African Rift System. The East African Rift System has two main branches, one bordering Tanzania only to the west, while the other branch runs through the middle of the country from south to north. Between the two rifts lies the high basin of Unjamwei with Lake Victoria, which is on average 1,200 metres high. The humid mountain slopes are mostly characterised by dense tropical mountain rain forest, which at higher levels turns into cloud forest. At even higher altitudes bush-shrub vegetation and grasslands dominate. (Statistisches Bundesamt, 1989, p. 18) Large parts of Tanzania are covered by the Miombo woodlands which can be found mainly in the northwest and southeast of the country. In the coastal lowlands mangroves thrive in protected bays, lagoons and estuaries. (Hecklau, 1989, p. 90-95) However, Tanzania's vegetation is not only adapted to the ecological conditions. For thousands of years, shepherds and farmers have helped to shape the flora by uprooting, breeding livestock, and cultivating the land. They have suppressed certain plant species and encouraged the spread of others. (Hecklau, 1989, p. 72)
24
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Tanzania has sustained relatively high economic growth over the last decade, averaging 6–7 per cent per annum. While the poverty rate in the country has declined, the absolute number of poor citizens has not because of the high population growth rate.(World Bank, Sep. 2019) About half of the population continues to live below the international poverty line of 1.90 USD per person per day. (World Bank, Nov. 2019)
According to the HDI, Tanzania ranks 159th out of 189 countries worldwide, making it one of the poorest in the world. Current life expectancy for those born in 2018 is 65 years, while the average length of schooling is 6.0 years (UNDP, 2019, p. 2-3). The MPI also classifies a large part of the population (55.4 per cent) as multidimensionally poor (UNDP, 2019, p. 6).
In October 2015, John Pombe Magufuli was elected the fifth president of the United Republic of Tanzania. Magufuli's Fifth-Phase Government has prioritised efforts to clampdown on corruption, improve public administration and manage public resources for improved social outcomes. The Worldwide Governance Indicators show that Tanzania has either deteriorated or been stagnant in all governance indicators between 2012 and 2017 (except for control of corruption). The strongest decline has been noticed in the indicators voice and accountability, in political stability/violence and rule of law. (World Bank, 2019 Sep.)
3.2 The Tanzanian Districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa
Missenyi District is one of eight district councils in the Kagera region. It was established on 1 July 2007 after being separated from Bukoba District. It covers an area of 2,523 km² and is situated on the western shore of Lake Victoria. On the northern side, Missenyi District borders the Republic of Uganda, on the east, Lake Victoria and part of Bukoba District, on the south Bukoba District as well and on the west Karagwe District (cf. figure 1).
The population of Missenyi District has experienced significant population growth in the last decade. The district has a population of 202,632 people, with females accounting for 52 per cent (102,547) and males accounting for 48 per cent (100,085) of the population. The 2012 population of Missenyi District Council is considered as young population, 50.1 per cent of the total population being children under 18 years of age.
25
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Generally Missenyi District experiences enough rainfall for most of the year over two seasons, between October and November (short rains) and between March and May (long rains). The average temperature is 20°C with extremes ranging from 15°C and 28°C. There are three broad categories of soils in Missenyi District Council. Most of these soils have high nutrient contents and are considered suitable for a wide range of food and cash crops and therefore have the potential for profitable cultivation. Commercial agriculture, food crops, forestry and livestock are the main sources of income in the district, engaging 76.1 per cent of residents. (Ministry of Finance and Planning et al., 2015, p. 7-27)
Kyerwa District is one of eight districts comprising the Kagera region. It covers an area of 3,086 km². The District borders the Republic of Uganda to the north and the Republic of Rwanda to the west. The District of Missenyi borders it to the north east while Karagwe District borders it to the east and south (cf. figure 1). According to the 2012 population and housing census, Kyerwa district had a population of 321,026 people, 163,828 of which were female and 157,198 male with average household size of 4.8. (Kyerwa District Council, 2016, p. 10, 11)
About 95.1 per cent of the population in Kyerwa District depends largely on agriculture for subsistence. Small enterprise self-employment (shops, traders, labourers) makes up 4 per cent of the potential workforce and the remaining 0.9 per cent are mainly employed in the public sector. The main source of income is the sale of farm products, especially coffee, banana, beans, livestock and livestock products. (Kyerwa District Council, 2016, p. 11, 12) Kyerwa's economy depends heavily on agriculture, which accounts for more than a quarter of the GDP, provides 85 per cent of exports and employs about 90 per cent of the work force. (Kyerwa District Administration and Local Government, 2017, p. 12)
26
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
0 km 50 km
Figure 1: The Districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa. (Source: author, Basemap ESRI)
People in this region share the same culture, economic activities and weather conditions, and face similar development challenges. The two districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa have a total population of 523,658 inhabitants. About 80 per cent of inhabitants live in rural areas and are very poor, mainly depending on subsistence agriculture for their livelihood. The majority of farmers are smallholders. These farmers lack the investment capital to improve production and develop the agriculture sector. The allocation of resources to the agricultural sector from the national budget of Tanzania and has traditionally been very low compared to the fundamental importance of the sector. The low share of the national budget could be one of the reasons why the growth rate of the agricultural sector has been low over the years. The sector is dominated by poor or aging infrastructures. This has resulted in low household incomes, household food insecurity and nutrition-related diseases in the region (EEALIP, 2017-2019, p. 12). According to the 2019 State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World Report of 2019 the undernourished share of the population in Tanzania was 30.7 per cent. (FAO et al., p. 124)
27
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
4. The EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme
The EEALIP (EUREGIO-East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme) (cf. chapter 1) is a continuation of the EUREGIO trans-border initiatives which were commenced in 2010 in Uganda and Tanzania. The initiative was extended to a 2nd phase in 2014 and once more extended to a 3rd phase in 2017. The renewed three-year programme is being implemented by four local partner organisations, which are (University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography: 2019, p. 6, 9):
• Masaka Diocesan Development Organization (MADDO, Uganda) • Kayanga Diocesan Development and Relief Office (KADDRO, Tanzania) • Kolping Society of Tanzania (KOLPING, Tanzania) • Missenyi District Council (Missenyi, Tanzania)
4.1 Structure and Aim of the Programme
Although separated by a national border between Uganda and Tanzania, the area of the programme is characterised by common requirements and conditions and therefore also common developmental challenges within the East African Community. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the majority of the population are smallholders supplying their households by subsistence farming. Due to inefficient production systems in rural areas and a high vulnerability to external factors such as droughts, people in this area are likely to suffer from poverty and food insecurity. Within the meaning of the Sustainable Development Goals 1 (No Poverty), 2 (Zero Hunger), 3 (Good Health and well-being) and 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), the EEALIP's overall goal is the sustainable improvement of the livelihood (health, income, food security, climate change) of its beneficiaries as well as, by spillover effects, of other residents in the targeted communities. In this sense, the implementing partners provide the participating farmers with both material (seedlings) and information input (trainings focussing on different aspects, such as sustainable agricultural practices, hygiene and sanitation). (University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography, 2019, p. 6); (EEALIP, 2017, p 1-4)
28
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Specifics objectives are as follows (Van Erum, 2017,p. 4):
1. Strengthened capacity of programme partners to implement the programme 2. Improved access for farmers to better markets and financial services 3. Improved agricultural production among households 4. Improved community participation in environmental conservation activities 5. Community use of health and sanitation service in a cleaner environment 6. Improved social services at Mutukula
4.2 Current State
As mentioned earlier, in February 2019 students from the University of Innsbruck evaluated both the achievements and the challenges of the intervention in the context of an interim evaluation in order to identify any adjustments necessary for the upcoming project phase. The following key findings and recommendations were defined:
• The programme is improving the livelihood of its beneficiaries. The various trainings are considered equally important by the smallholders, with sustainable agricultural practices, livestock management and trainings on sanitation and hygiene being the most relevant.
• Participating smallholders have enough output to supply themselves with food but are unable to sell their products at a profitable price. Therefore, no major changes have been observed regarding the income of the farmers.
• Vulnerability to climate change (droughts) and various livestock and crop diseases is high, making these the major external factors that could harm the programme's development.
• The Village Lending and Savings Associations (VLSA) enables most of the farmers to further improve their livelihoods, although the capacities are not yet sufficient to support major investments (e.g. improvements in housing situation).
• The stages of implementation of activities vary within the programme, with Missenyi district being in default due to the delay of further funding caused by problems regarding different challenges on both sides between donors and local partners, financial transfers, the meeting of deadlines and differences in the legal system.
29
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
• Access to the market and market structures need to be improved. Forming cooperatives to collectively add value to the products and sell as a unit is a common approach which should be considered.
• Resilience towards climate change/water shortages could be improved by providing more farmers with support towards financing water harvesting facilities & irrigation practices.
• One of the three EUREGIO provinces acting as the main coordinator for the implementation of the programme and advising the financial reports could help to improve collaboration within the program.
• In order to increase effectiveness and sustainability, the programme needs to decrease the number of specific objectives and focus on smaller variety of activities. In addition, beneficiaries should be taught to be more self-sufficient and independent.
30
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
5. Specific Methods of Data Collection and Evaluation
The general aim of an empirical survey is to provide data that can be used to make reliable and intersubjectively comprehensible statements about reality. The quality of the survey instruments depends on a number of factors. The applied methods were selected on the basis of criteria objectivity, reliability and validity (Häder, 2019, p. 109). The applicability of the planned methods in the study areas was an additional selection criterion.
Data collection in rural areas in Tanzania and interviewing smallholders, who only speak English to a very limited extent, lead to additional challenges that had to be taken into account in the preparation of the field study. For this reason, the questions and answers in the FGDs and homestead visits were translated by a native speaker. For financial reasons it was unfortunately not possible to entrust this task to an independent person outside the EEALIP. The task was therefore assigned to the staff of the local partners Missenyi and KADDRO, who conducted conscientiously. Nevertheless, this fact bears the risk of affecting the objectivity of the data collection process. However, utmost care was taken to minimise this source of error to the best possible extent. In general, the data were collected under difficult conditions (occasional rainfall and limited access to electricity), constituting significant challenges. In addition, the selection of beneficiaries to be visited was organised by the local partners. Ideally, all of these circumstances should have been avoided. Nevertheless, the collected data are appropriate to answer the scientific objectives and hypotheses of my Master's thesis.
5.1 Focus Group Discussion
The focus group discussion provides information that will help understand the local farmers' perception of poverty, how they think poor people are identified and how they would assess their own situation in this context. It was important to compare the results of the FGDs with those of the homestead visits.
The poverty indicators mentioned by the beneficiaries were written down on cards and placed on a poster (cf. figure 2). Subsequently, the indicators were ranked by the beneficiaries in order of importance. In a second step, the simple scoring method was used to score the previously ranked indicators. For this purpose the indicators were transferred to another poster on which the
31
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
beneficiaries rated each individual indicator according to the five categories - extreme poverty, poor people, doing ok, doing good and rich people. This was done for both the initial stage (before programme) and the current situation. The complete concept of the FGDs can be found in the annex (cf. 10.2)
Ten focus group discussions were conducted in total. The number of participants ranged from 7 to 27 persons of mixed gender. Thus, an overall result was visible for each group, but individual differences also became apparent. Of each group, four beneficiaries were randomly chosen for homestead visits.
Figure 2: Flipcharts used for FGDs. (Source: author)
5.2 Homestead Visits
Two men and two women (if possible) were randomly selected from each focus group for the subsequent interviews of the homestead visits. The groups were largely gender mixed, so an overall ratio of almost one-to-one could be established between the genders (21 male and 19 female). A total of 40 households were visited in the two districts, including single up to households of ten persons. The average household size was five and the average age respondents was 39 years.
32
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
The aim of the homestead visits was to obtain data as objectively and structured as possible in order to classify the beneficiaries according to the indicators of the MPI. It was important to examine how the MPI indicators had developed over time. An oral survey in the form of a standardised paper and pencil interview was chosen as a feasible survey method under the given circumstances. In oral interviews, an interviewer usually goes to the home of the person to be interviewed and conducts the interview in person or face-to-face. During the interview, social contact is established between the two persons, which is very important for the success of the interview. The assumption is that this way the target person can be particularly strongly motivated to provide the interviewer with valid and reliable information. As mentioned before, this interview situation could not be created because an interpreter was needed. Standardised interviews are characterised by using a questionnaire, which strongly pre-structures and steers the entire interview situation. The interviewer, who also sticks to certain rules of behaviour during the conversation, transmits the literally pre-formulated questions and thus collects comparable data from numerous target persons. (Häder, 2019, p.201-205)
The interview questions are based on the MPI, which is described in detail in chapter 2.3.3. The interviews with the beneficiaries lasted 20 to 30 minutes each and consisted of 20 questions. The answers were linked to homestead visits and observations which allowed for a review of the respondents' statements. The complete questionnaire can be found in the annex (cf. 10.1). The three dimensions and ten respective indicators will be examined in more detail below.
5.2.1 Health Dimension
The health dimension consists of two − the indicators of nutrition and child mortality, which are the two most difficult indicators to revise.
Nutrition
To measure the nutritional situation of people, all of the anthropometric data that is available for household members is used. In the global MPI 2018, adults above 20 years of age are considered undernourished if their BMI is below 18.5 m/kg². For individuals aged 15 to 19 gender-specific BMI (Body Mass Index) cutoffs from the World Health Organisation are applied. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 10)
33
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
As it was not possible to determine the BMI of every interviewee, it was necessary to find a more feasible way of assessing whether the beneficiaries are undernourished or not. Respondents were therefore asked how many meals they eat every day and what those consist of. On the basis of this information it is not possible to make exact statements about the nutritional situation. Nevertheless, it was possible to determine differences between the respondents. The nutritional situation also seems to have improved due to participation in the development programme.
Child mortality
According to the global MPI 2018, a household is deprived if it is known to have suffered the loss of a child within the previous five years. The index has the advantage of reflecting recent mortality conditions and capturing policies successful in reducing them. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 11) This indicator was included in the questionnaire exactly as specified in the MPI.
5.2.2 Educational Dimension
To reflect the educational level of both adults and school-aged children living in a household, the two indicators of years of schooling and school attendance are considered.
Years of schooling
In the Global MPI 2018, a person is deprived of years of schooling if no household member aged 10 years or older has completed six years of schooling. This indicator changes the number of years of schooling from five to six years and in doing so follows the MPI-I. In 2018, the Global MPI changed the indicator cutoff to six years mainly because primary-level schooling has a duration of six years in more countries than five years, to reflect this convention in setting a higher international standard. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 11, 12)
School attendance
According to Global MPI, a person is deprived if any child in the household is not attending school up to the age at which they should complete eighth grade. This indicator was not changed from the original indicator, and is in line with the mechanism by which the UNESCO uses ages to calculate out- of-school children. (Alkire & Jahan., 2018, p. 12, 13)
34
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
5.2.3 Living Standards Dimension
The living standards dimension consists of six indicators − cooking fuel, sanitation, drinking water, electricity, housing and assets.
Housing
A household is identified as deprived in wall materials if it has no wall or if the wall is made of natural, rudimentary or other unidentified materials. A household is identified as deprived in roofing if it has no roof or if the roof is made of natural, rudimentary or other unidentified materials. A household is identified as deprived in flooring if it the floor is made of natural materials. The Global MPI 2018 considers a household to be deprived in housing if any of the roof, floor or walls use low- quality material. The materials used for construction of housing units (roof, walls and floors) are of significant importance for the quality of life. People in poor-quality or slum-like housing facilities are more likely to experience poorer health, and less favourable education and employment outcomes. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 13, 14) The interviewees were visited at home, which made it possible to assess the condition of the houses.
Assets
The Global MPI 2018 identifies a person as deprived in assets if their household does not own more than one of these items: radio, telephone, television, refrigerator, computer, bicycle, motorcycle or animal cart. And they are not deprived in assets if they own a car or truck. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, S. 14) This indicator was collected through surveys and observations. This made it possible to check the answers of the respondents immediately.
The remaining four indicators of sanitation, drinking water, cooking fuel and electricity are unchanged from the MPI-O specifications. Sanitation and water follow the SDG indicator definitions, which themselves are consistent extensions of the MDG indicator definitions. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 15)
Sanitation
A household is considered to have access to improved sanitation if the household has some type of flush toilet or latrine, or ventilated improved pit or composting toilet, provided that those facilities
35
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
are not shared. If the household does not satisfy these conditions, it is considered deprived in sanitation.
Drinking Water
A household has access to clean drinking water if the water source is any of the following types: piped water, public tap, borehole or pump, protected well, protected spring or rainwater, and it is located within a walking distance of 30 minutes (roundtrip). If it fails to satisfy these conditions, the household is considered deprived in access to water. (Alkire & Santos, 2011, p. 8)
Cooking fuel
A household is considered deprived in cooking fuel if they cook with dung, wood, charcoal or coal.
Electricity
This indicator is defined by whether the household has access to a source of electricity. It is not decisive whether the household has access to solar energy or access to the national grid. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 15)
5.2.4 Indicators of Monetary Poverty
Monetary poverty indicators attempt to empirically capture and quantitatively measure the complex phenomenon of poverty. Traditionally, the primary focus is on economic indicators, especially per capita income, which are regarded as important resources for the realisation of a dignified existence. (Krämer, 2018) However, recent poverty research clearly suggests that such economic indicators must be complemented by quantitative socio-demographic poverty indicators (such as health status, average life expectancy, access to clean water, etc.) as well as by qualitative information (such as social exclusion, etc.). (Krämer, 2018) As the monetary approach is still very common in both science and politics, the questionnaire also asked beneficiaries to estimate their monthly expenditure and savings. The amounts were then added up for the year, broken down to daily figures and divided up among the number of people living in the household. These figures were then converted using the 2018 World Bank Purchasing
36
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Power Parity Conversion Factor for Private Consumption and compared with the international poverty line of 1.9 USD per day. (World Bank, 2018)
5.3 Poverty cutoffs
The global MPI uses the cross-dimensional poverty cutoff of one-third, identifying any person as poor whose weighted deprivations sum up to one-third or more. Two other poverty cutoffs are also used: extreme poverty (percentage of people deprived in at least half of the weighted indicators). and vulnerability (proportion of people deprived in 20 to 33 per cent of weighted indicators). People who are deprived in less than 20 per cent of weighted indicators are classified as OK. (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 8) This results in four categories the beneficiaries were assigned to in this study:
• 0-20% OK = people who are not considered poor • 20-33% Vulnerable = people who are at risk of becoming poor • 33-50% Poor = people who are considered poor • > 50% Extremely Poor = people who live in extreme poverty
The table 2 illustrates how the poverty cutoffs are applied. Household 1 is an example of a vulnerable household. Although the household is affected by poverty in two indicators, it is not considered poor because it is not affected in one-third or more of the indicators. Household 2 in table 2 is deprived in seven indicators. Four of these indicators are rated 1/18 and three are rated 1/6. The sum of each deprivation multiplied by its weight gives a score of 0.722 which means that the household lives in severe poverty, because the household is affected in more than half of the indicators. Household 3 in table 2 is deprived according to five indicators. Four of these indicators are rated 1/18 and one is rated 1/6. The sum of each deprivation multiplied by its weight gives a score of 0.389, which means that the household lives in poverty, because the household is affected according to more than one-third but not more than half of the indicators.
37
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Household Weights Indicators 1 2 3 Householdsize 4 7 5 Education No one has completed five years of schooling 0 1 0 1/6=0.167 At least one school-aged child not enrolled in school 0 1 0 1/6=0.167 Health At least one member is malnourished 0 0 1 1/6 = 0.167 One or more children have died 1 1 0 1/6 = 0.167 Living Standard No electricity 0 1 1 1/18=0.056 No access to clean drinking water 0 0 1 1/18=0.056 No access to adequate sanitation 0 1 1 1/18=0.056 Housing materials for roof, walls or floor is inadequate 0 0 0 1/18=0.056 Household uses "dirty" cooking fuel (dung, firewood or charcoal) 1 1 1 1/18=0.056 Household has no car and owns at most one bicycle, motorcycle, radio, refrigerator, telephone or television 0 1 0 1/18=0.056 Score (sum of each deprivation multiplied by its weight 0.222 0.722 0.389 Is the household poor? NO YES YES
Note: 1 indicates deprivation in the indicator; 0 indicates non-deprivation.
Table 2: Explanation of the poverty cutoffs - using hypothetical data (Table based on: Alkire
Jahan, 2011, p. 13)
5.4 Expert Interviews
In expert interviews, respondents are interviewed on the basis of the status attributed to them as experts. The research interest may be more information-related in this case and the statements are taken as factual findings. They can, however, also focus on the reconstruction of expert knowledge. Usually expert interviews are guideline interviews and a more detailed structure with factual questions or stimuli in the sense of focus interviews is generally suggested for them. In terms of the formal requirements of a guideline, this specifically means that questions are defined more narrowly. (Helfferich, 2019, p. 680-682)
Five different expert interviews were conducted for this thesis. The first one with Friedbert Ottacher, representative of the Austria NGO Horizont 3000 primarily served for thematic and methodological reflection in the exploration phase. The other interviews with the members of the local partners Missenyi and KADDRO and a deputy from each of the EUREGIO partners Tyrol and South Tyrol, served to record the views and knowledge of the respective interlocutors.
38
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
The local partners were interviewed with the help of open key questions, whereby information on their structure and method of choosing the beneficiaries and on what is most for them important when choosing a beneficiary could be obtained. In addition, the partners were asked about their opinion of internationally standardised poverty measurements.
39
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
6. Findings
The following chapter presents the data collected and analysed during the author's research visit to Tanzania. First the local perception of poverty will be described from the perspective of the beneficiaries, followed by a presentation of the findings of the FGDs for the two districts of Missenyi and Kyerwa. Furthermore, it shows the findings for each MPI indicator and the categorisation into different poverty cutoffs.
6.1 Local Perception of Poverty
As mentioned in chapter 5.1, focus group discussions were held to get an exact idea of how the beneficiaries identify poor people and how they would score themselves within the previously identified indicators. During the research process, ten of these discussions were held with a total of 140 beneficiaries attending (cf. 5.1).
HEALTH
HOUSINGASSETS
SANITATION
MOBILITY
NO LAND NO NUTRITIONELECTRICITY EDUCATION
WORKING FACILITIESWORKING CLOTHING INCOME
WATER
Figure 3: Indicators mentioned by the beneficiaries in the Focus Group Discussion. (Source: author).
As shown in figure 3, several possible indicators were mentioned in the ten FGDs. In each discussion, indicators were chosen and ranked before the participants were asked to score themselves. The indicators income, water, food, housing and sanitation were picked frequently, ranked high and scored by almost all participants (the indicator of sanitation was not mentioned in only one of the FGDs). Therefore, the following discourses are focusing on these five indicators.
40
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
6.1.1 Local Perception of Income Situation
The indicator of income was rated as the most relevant by the beneficiaries. The reason for this is that the income situation has an influence on many other areas of life (e.g. food or housing). If sufficient money is available, seeds or other food that is not produced by the beneficiaries themselves can be bought. Figure 4 shows the farmers' assessment of the income indicator in Missenyi before they joined the programme, and their current situation.
INCOME SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN MISSENYI
Rich 0
Doing Good 0
Doing OK 0
Poor 17 Poverty Range Poverty
Extremly Poor 48
Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT INCOME SITUATION IN MISSENY
Rich 2
Doing Good 7
Doing OK 23
Poor Poverty Range Poverty 22
Extremly Poor 11
Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 4: Perception of Income Situation in Missenyi. (Source: author)
Comparing the perceptions of income, it becomes clear that the number of the farmers who perceive themselves as extremely poor has decreased from 48 to 11. The large increase in the category of "Doing OK" from 0 to 23 is also remarkable. About half of the farmers still rate themselves as poor or
41
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
even extremely poor. The rest of the farmers are divided into the ranges of "Doing OK" (23), "Doing Good" (7) and "Rich" (2).
The income situation in Kyerwa is quite different from the situation in Missenyi. Figure 5 illustrates the income situation in Kyerwa.
INCOME SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN KYERWA
Rich 0
Doing Good 0
Doing OK 10
Poor 21 Poverty Range Poverty
Extremly Poor 44 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT INCOME SITUATION IN KYERWA
Rich 2
Doing Good 58
Doing OK 11
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 3
Extremly Poor 0 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 5: Perception of Income Situation in Kyerwa. (Source: author)
The number of farmers who were classified as "Extremely Poor" has decreased from 44 to 0, which is a major change. The "Doing Good" category has recorded a significant increase to 58. The difference between Missenyi and Kyerwa is particularly obvious in this category. In Missenyi, only seven farmers currently fall into the category "Doing Good". The reasons for the generally improved income situation were higher crop yields, which meant that less money had to be spent on food. At the same time, income could be increased through cash
42
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
crops. It seems that the interventions (e.g. trainings on agriculture) of the EEALIP are the reason for the positive development, but other factors could also had an influence on this development.
6.1.2 Local Perception of Water Situation
For many beneficiaries the second most important indicator is the availability of water, as this indicator is essential for self-sufficiency and for the cultivation of crops. Without sufficient water the crop yield is reduced, which has a drastic effect on the families' food supply. Not only the mere availability of water is decisive - it must of course be clean water so that there is no risk of infection.
WATER SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN MISSENYI
Rich 0
Doing Good 1
Doing OK 4
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 14
Extremly Poor 46 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT WATER SITUATION IN MISSENYI
Rich 1
Doing Good 2
Doing OK 11
Poor 22 Poverty Range Poverty
Extremly Poor 29 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 6: Perception of Water Situation in Missenyi. (Source: author)
Not quite as clear as in case of the income indicator, there has also been a change in the water indicator. Before the start of the programme, there were 46 beneficiaries who classified themselves
43
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
as "extremely poor", while the current number has decreased to 29. In addition, 22 beneficiaries scored their current situation within the "Poor" range, 11 within the "Doing OK" (11), 2 in the "Doing Good" range and 1 even in the "Rich" range.
Differences between the two regions are also evident in the water category. The fact that none of the farmers in Kyerwa classified themselves as extremely poor before the start of EEALIP is quite surprising (in Missenyi there were 49). Figure 7 illustrates this statement.
WATER SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN KYERWA
Rich 0
Doing Good 2
Doing OK 29
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 44
Extremly Poor 0 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT WATER SITUATION IN KYERWA
Rich 5
Doing Good 47
Doing OK 19
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 6
Extremly Poor 0 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 7: Perception of Water Situation in Kyerwa. (Source: author)
Despite the fact that not a single farmer scored themselves as extremely poor before the programme began, the situation has improved considerably. The number of people classified as poor has decreased significantly from 44 to 6. Significant growth is discernible in the "Doing Good" range (47). The availability of water strongly depends on the dry and rainy seasons. During the rainy season,
44
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
some farmers have the possibility to collect rainwater in water tanks, which helps to ease the situation during the dry season. In the dry season, some of them have to walk very long distances to get water. By building wells, the government has also contributed to improving the situation in some regions. Although there are many other factors influencing this indicator, the EEALIP trainings (such as "Sustainable Agriculture Practices") seem to have helped to improve the availability of water.
6.1.3 Local Perception of the Nutritional Situation
The nutrition or food indicator also plays a crucial role in the beneficiaries' perception of poverty. Increasing food security is of crucial importance for subsistence farmers, as their low income would never be sufficient to feed their families in the event of a crop failure. The fight against malnutrition and hunger is a major focus of the EEALIP.
NUTRITION SITUATION BEFOR THE PROGRAMME IN MISSENYI
Rich 1
Doing Good 3
Doing OK 10
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 32
Extremly Poor 20 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT NUTRITION SITUATION IN MISSENYI
Rich 13
Doing Good 16
Doing OK 11
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 25
Extremly Poor 1 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 8: Perception of Nutritional Situation in Missenyi. (Source: author)
45
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Before EEALIP the intervention of the EEALIP, far more than half of the farmers rated themselves in the ranges of "Extremely Poor" (32) and "Poor" (20). The current situation has improved significantly. The proportion of those who perceive themselves as extremely poor has been greatly reduced. More than half of the respondents see their nutritional situation improved and put themselves in the three ranges of "Doing OK" (11), "Doing Good" (16) and 13 even "Rich".
The nutritional situation in Kyerwa is discussed in the following figure 9.
NUTRITIONAL SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN KYERWA
Rich 0
Doing Good 0
Doing OK 18
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 53
Extremly Poor 2 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT NUTRITIONAL SITUATION IN KYERWA
Rich 6
Doing Good 43
Doing OK 26
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 0
Extremly Poor 0 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 9: Perception of Nutritional Situation in Kyerwa. (Source: author)
The changes in Kyerwa are remarkable. All beneficiaries who had a significant problem with nutrition were able to eliminate this problem to a large extent. In the "Extremely poor" and "Poor" ranges, the number has dropped to 0. Most farmers are now in the "Doing Good" range, to which no one had assigned themselves before the programme started. The EEALIP trainings and workshops seem to have contributed to a significant development in the field of nutrition, which can be considered a
46
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
significant achievement. The trainings include a variety of activities (such as training in sustainable agriculture practices, or supporting farmers by improved crop varieties or post-harvest handling).
6.1.4 Local Perception of the Housing Situation
In addition to the other indicators, housing is an important parameter for beneficiaries in the local perception of poverty. This indicator is strongly linked to the income of the beneficiaries. The farmers who have managed to generate significantly more income have often used this money to improve their homes.
HOUSING SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN MISSENYI
Rich 1
Doing Good 0
Doing OK 5
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 26
Extremly Poor 33 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION IN MISSENYI
Rich 3
Doing Good 4
Doing OK 25
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 26
Extremly Poor 7 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 10: Perception of Housing Situation in Missenyi. (Source: author)
The number of farmers who perceive themselves as extremely poor has decreased, which is a positive outcome. The increase in the "Doing OK" segment from 5 to 25 also is a positive development. Nevertheless, over half of the farmers still describe their housing situation still as poor
47
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
or extremely poor. Despite an increased income, their situation has not improved significantly. The reason for this could be that many have spent their money on school fees or food rather than on their house.
The development of the housing situation in Kyerwa is shown in the 11 below.
HOUSING SITUATION BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN KYERWA
Rich 0
Doing Good 0
Doing OK 17
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 55
Extremly Poor 0 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION IN KYERWA
Rich 0
Doing Good 55
Doing OK 15
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 0
Extremly Poor 0
Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 11: Perception of Housing Situation in Kyerwa. (Source: author)
In Kyerwa we see a clearer improvement compared to Missenyi. However, the initial situation in Kyerwa seems to have been better, because no one perceived perceived themselves as being extremely poor before the EEALIP started. The reduction in the "Poor" range from 55 to 0 is striking. The strong increase in the "Doing Good" range, into which many have apparently switched from the "Poor" range, is also remarkable. Among the reasons for the improved situation are the "Saving Groups" which were mentioned by the beneficiaries very often. Through the Saving Groups the
48
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
beneficiaries were able to get a larger amount of money at once for investments in their houses. Additionally, some have managed to generate more money through cash crops. The EEALIP trainings (such as financial management training) also seem to have a positive effect.
6.1.5 Local Perception of Sanitary Conditions
Sanitary conditions are also considered a decisive factor by the farmers. Sanitary conditions include access to a flush toilet or latrine and the presence of soap and water for washing hands. The sanitary conditions have a direct influence on the beneficiaries' health. As a consequence, the farmers are less frequently ill, which has a positive effect on other areas of life. The following figure 12 shows the positive developments in the sanitation sector in Missenyi.
SANITARY CONDITIONS BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN MISSENYI
Rich 0
Doing Good 0
Doing OK 5
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 17
Extremly Poor 35 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT SANITARY CONDITIONS IN MISSENYI
Rich 7
Doing Good 7
Doing OK 28
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 15
Extremly Poor 0 Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 12: Perception of Sanitary Conditions in Missenyi. (Source: author)
49
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Before the beneficiaries became part of the project, 52 farmers evaluated their sanitary conditions as poor or extremely poor, which is over 90 per cent. The current situation is completely different. Almost half (28) evaluate their current sanitary conditions as "Doing OK", 7 as "Doing Good" and 7 as "Rich". The sanitary conditions in Kyerwa have also improved considerably. Figure 13 illustrates the positive developments.
SANITARY CONDITIONS BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN KYERWA
Rich 0
Doing Good 1
Doing OK 22
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 29
Extremly Poor 24 Headcount Beneficiaries
CURRENT SANITARY CONDITIONS IN KYERWA
Rich 6
Doing Good 55
Doing OK 15
Poor
Poverty Range Poverty 0
Extremly Poor 0
Headcount Beneficiaries
Figure 13: Perception of Sanitary Conditions in Kyerwa. (Source: author)
In the period before the programme, the majority of farmers in Kyerwa also placed themselves in the lower two categories of "Poor" and "Extremely Poor", making those two categories drop to 0. The absolute majority of beneficiaries rate their current sanitary conditions as "Doing Good" (55). The EEALIP has a special focus on improving sanitary conditions, which is why a positive development in this area was hoped for. The various trainings on sanitation and hygiene seem to have contributed to
50
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
this development. In these trainings the beneficiaries were also taught how to build a tip-tap (a simple construction for hand washing) or a dry-rack to dry their dishes.
6.2 Multidimensional Poverty Index Measurement
As described in the other chapters (cf. 5.3 and 2.3.3), this study used the MPI to determine whether the beneficiaries of the EEALIP are considered as poor. Four different poverty cut-offs (cf. 5.5) were applied to distinguish the poverty levels of the beneficiaries. In addition, the data gives a rough overview of the development of livelihood for the 40 households visited (24 in Missenyi and 16 in Kyerwa). The following chapter presents the data collected for the three dimensions health, education and living standards, always describing the initial (before implementing the EEALIP) and the current state.
6.2.1 Health
The health dimension consists of the two indicators of nutritional situation and child mortality of the beneficiaries. During the preparations for the research work in Tanzania, it already became clear that it is not possible to follow the MPI guidelines (BMI of each interviewee). Nevertheless, the methods chosen provide sufficient evidence to identify whether the beneficiaries were/are deprived or not, as the following results show.
Nutrition
As mentioned in chapter 5.4.1, this indicator focuses on the number of meals a household took or take per day for several reasons. After no additional data, like the Body-Mass-Index (BMI), on the nutritional situation are available, the existing data do not provide an extensive level of information on the nutritional conditions, especially for the initial state of the beneficiaries. But, thanks to the homestead visits and the additional observations it was still possible to evaluate and classify the beneficiaries.
51
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
In the initial state, 12 out of 40 beneficiaries were rated as deprived in nutrition. This means that the majority of beneficiaries were not deprived when they joined the programme. Currently, only one of them is regarded as deprived, which means that the number of people affected in the nutrition indicator has been significantly reduced for both regions (Missenyi, Kyerwa). These figures also confirm the subjective perception of the beneficiaries gained in the FGDs described in chapter 6.1.3. The applied method of counting meals per day has expected weaknesses, as the improvement in food variety mentioned by many beneficiaries are not covered.
Figure 14: Improved food variety through different crops. (Source: author)
In summary, it can be said that close to one-third of the interviewed households had to be classified as deprived (based on the number of meals per day) before joining the programme and that this figure has been greatly reduced. Based on the beneficiaries' statements on the improved food variety and security, the general nutritional situation seems to have primarily improved.
Child mortality
Concerns about the question regarding child mortality being too personal and ethically unacceptable were not confirmed and this indicator could be collected without any problems. In the five years
52
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
before they were part of the programme, 6 out of 40 beneficiaries suffered the loss of a child. No child deaths have been recorded since the date of membership in the programme. In personal interviews with the beneficiaries, some mentioned that the situation had changed for them, mainly due to the improved food variety and security. Other beneficiaries named the health care system, which had been improved by the government, as the reason for the positive development. Thanks to the improved food variety and security, the EEALIP also seems to have a positive influence on this indicator.
6.2.2 Education
To measure the educational attainment of adults and children, the two indicators years of schooling and school attendance were used. Many beneficiaries mentioned that in this dimension the government is of course crucial when it comes to improving education. In Tanzania, access to primary school education is free of charge, beside payments for books and the school uniform, which can already be an barrier for the parents to send the child to school. However, Tanzania has a fairly high primary school enrolment rate. Nevertheless, it must be pointed out that the enrolment rate does not say anything about the quality of education. The two indicators used (years of schooling and school attendance) also only measure school attendance and not the quality of educational institutions. The EEALIP does not focus on the issue of education.
Years of schooling
As the average age of the 40 beneficiaries interviewed was 37, it is not surprising that the EEALIP had no noticeable impact on this indicator. In the initial and the current state, one out of the 40 visited households were classified as deprived. This means that those households had no household member aged ten years or older that has completed primary school - which corresponds to seven years of schooling in Tanzania.
School attendance
A similar pictures emerges if we look at the school attendance indicator. As with the years of schooling indicator, one household is considered to be affected in the initial state and the current
53
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
state. It should also be mentioned that two out of the three children of this deprived household are attending school, and only one has dropped out. When asking for reasons why the child is not attending school, the beneficiary said that the child has started to work. In summary, it is necessary to reiterate the strong concerns regarding the quality of education, which are not covered by the aforementioned two indicators. Looking at the access to primary education, the situation in Tanzania seems to be quite good. During the FGDs, the beneficiaries also gave the impression that the government has improved the situation in recent years.
6.2.3 Living Standard
The third dimension of living standard compromise the six indicators of cooking fuel, sanitation, drinking water, electricity, housing and assets. The homestead visits made it possible to verify and objectively evaluate the statements of the beneficiaries directly on site through inspections, which was very helpful for generating accurate and reliable data. The development of the individual indicators is precisely described in the following chapter.
Cooking fuel
In the initial state, all 40 beneficiaries used firewood to cook their food. In the current situation hardly anything has changed, and only one beneficiary has managed to switch to gas. Another four farmers sometimes use gas for cooking in addition to firewood, but firewood is still the most widely used cooking fuel among the beneficiaries. Nevertheless, the EEALIP has managed to improve efficiency through training on energy-saving stoves. These energy-saving stoves enable the farmers to reduce their consumption of firewood.
Sanitation
The programme has helped to improve sanitary conditions, but not to the extent that the perception of the beneficiaries suggested (cf. chapter 6.1.5). In the initial state, 24 of the beneficiaries were classified as deprived, in the current situation, 18 are still classified as deprived. The majority of the currently deprived beneficiaries are from Missenyi (13), the rest come from Kyerwa (5). One reason for this could be that although many beneficiaries have an improved sealable toilet, they have to
54
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
share it with other households and are therefore considered to be affected according to the MPI. Other effective interventions of the EEALIP are the implementation of dry racks and tip taps.
Figure 15: A Tip Tap (for hand washing) and a not improved toilet pit.(Source: author)
Drinking Water
Before the Programme 28 of the beneficiaries were classified as deprived, and 21 still are deprived in the current situation in the water indicator. Access to safe drinking water is vital, and the fact that half of the beneficiaries are still suffering from water scarcity is alarming. By building wells, the government has contributed to improving the situation in some regions, but many beneficiaries have to walk very long distances to get drinking water. During the rainy season, some beneficiaries have the possibility to collect rainwater in water tanks, which helps to ease their situation in this time. (cf. figure 16).
55
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Figure 16: Beneficiary's house with water tank to collect water and connection to national grid. (Source: author).
Electricity
In the electricity indicator 21 beneficiaries were deprived in the initial state, while 19 beneficiaries had access to electricity. In the current state, 26 beneficiaries have access to electricity in their household. Most beneficiaries with access to electricity use solar panels. One reason for the improved situation are the "savings groups" implemented by EEALIP, which enable the beneficiaries to receive sufficient money to purchase solar panels. The houses of some beneficiaries are even connected to the national power grid, especially in Kyerwa (cf. figure 16 above: Beneficiary's house with connection to national grid).
Housing
The simple classification of the MPI with respect to the building materials used does not reflect the in some cases enormous differences between the beneficiaries in the housing category. There are also partly significant differences between the beneficiaries classified as deprived. This became very clear
56
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
during the homestead visits. In the initial state, 25 of the beneficiaries were classified as deprived, in the current situation 23 still are classified as deprived. Figure 16 shows examples of the accommodations visited.
Figure 17: Different Housing Situations. (Source: author)
Assets
The assets indicator includes items that are not necessarily essential for survival but which symbolise a certain standard of living (e.g. radio, TV, mobile phone or a motorbike). In the initial state, 23 of the beneficiaries were classified as deprived, in the current situation 19 still are classified as deprived. The reason for this seems to be that any additional income is spent on other more important areas such as food, housing or school books and school uniforms.
57
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
6.3 MPI Poverty Cutoffs
Based on the classifications generated using the MPI indicators mentioned in the previous chapter 6.2, the following allocation of poverty cutoffs was done for the 40 visited households for both the initial and the current state.
Initial State Current State
5% 17% 27% 25% 45%
33% 23% 25%
OK Vulnerable Poor Extrem Poor
Figure 18: Poverty cutoffs for both the initial and the current state. (Source: author)
The Global MPI uses the cross-dimensional poverty cutoff of one-third, identifying any person as poor whose weighted deprivations sum to one-third or more. Two other poverty cutoffs are also used: severe poverty (the percentage of people deprived in at least half of the weighted indicators) and vulnerability (the proportion of people deprived in 20 to 33 per cent of weighted indicators). (Alkire & Jahan, 2018, p. 8) People who are deprived in less than 20 per cent of weighted indicators are classified as OK. The poverty cutoff is described in more detail in chapter 5.5. A particularly positive aspect is the increase in the number of beneficiaries classified as "OK" in the current situation, which has risen from 27 per cent in the initial state to 45 per cent. The reduction of the extremely poor from 17 to 5 per cent is also striking. The significance of these percentages with only 40 respondents must however be seen rather critically.
58
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
6.4 Monetary Poverty
According to the information provided by the beneficiaries, the members of 8 of the 34 (6 beneficiaries could not provide information) households visited had more than 1.9 USD per day (PPP), 15 had an income of 1.0-1.9 USD per day and 11 had less than 1.0 USD per day. In this respect, 8 of the households do not qualify as poor in terms of monetary poverty (cf. 2.3.3). As many of the beneficiaries could not remember their financial situation before the programme only the current status was considered for the analysis.
When comparing these results with those of the MPI poverty cut-offs, it is striking that 2 of those 8 poor households are to be classified as vulnerable. In return, however, 3 of the households classified as OK on the basis of the MPI also have an income of less than 1.0 USD per day and would therefore be classified as poor according to the concept of monetary poverty. As mentioned in chapter 5.5, these results show that a monetary poverty indicator is hardly able to reflect the reality of poverty in all its complexity. In order to do justice to this complexity, the monetary approach must be complemented by other indicators, like those contained in the MPI (health, education and living standards).
CURRENT MONETARY POVERTY HEADCOUNT
23,5% 32,5%
44%
Over 1.9USD 1.0 to 1.9 USD Less than 1.0 USD
Figure 19: Allocation of Beneficiaries according to Monetary Poverty Line. (Source: author)
59
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
6.5 Donors Perception of Poverty
Important research aspects are the perception of poverty, and the objectives, approaches and expectations of the donors to the EEALIP. Therefore, two members of the donor side were interviewed. Expert interviews were conducted with Karin Hartl-Hubmann (Technical Officer for Development Cooperation of the Province of Tyrol) and with Judith Notdurfter (Director of the Office for External Relations of the Province of South Tyrol). In their capacities they are constantly involved in the approval of project applications, which is why their expertise is very interesting for this study.
In general, it can be said that the EUREGIO development cooperation adopts the definition of poverty of the UN. It is therefore a mainly monetary definition of poverty, as described in chapter 2.3.3. The Director added that for her poverty also meant a lack of equal opportunities. Both interviewees confirmed that definitions of poverty were not a decisive factor in the allocation of projects and the financing of development cooperation within the EUREGIO.
According to Judith Notdurfter, the development cooperation of the province of South Tyrol has actually focused on the poorest regions of the world from the start, although the selection process is hard to track because it started so many years ago. From the beginning, South Tyrol took on many projects from the missionaries in Africa. They generally prefer to maintain and expand existing partnerships. The currently supported projects are located in the poorest countries of the world even though this is not a basic requirement for funding.
According to the Technical Officer, the same applies to the development cooperation of the state of Tyrol. The financing of the projects is based too little on data, facts and scientific findings. The applicant is ultimately more important than the type of measure or its usefulness; in addition, it is not important which measures or target groups the projects are implemented for. The decisions to support specific projects are more likely to be taken on the basis of existing structures. According to Karin Hartl-Hubmann, the donor (state of Tyrol) should pay greater attention to the effectiveness of projects, which is related to the selection of the beneficiaries.
Based on the statements made by the interviewees, there seem to be no precise expectations towards the EEALIP. For example the selection of beneficiaries falls within the responsibility of the respective partners. The goal of development cooperation is, of course, to help poorer countries, but
60
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
currently there is no target-oriented selection process based on scientific findings. When asked about the evaluation of the financed projects, the interviewees said that all projects were evaluated but the factors examined varied from project to project. The most important factors were the needs analysis and the sustainability of the projects.
6.6 Local Partner's Perception of Poverty and Choosing of Beneficiaries
Important research aspects include the perception of poverty and the process of selecting the EEALIP beneficiaries from the partner organisations Missenyi and KADDRO. For, this reason three members of staff each from Missenyi and KADDRO participated in two expert interviews, as described in chapter 5.3.
6.6.1 Missenyi
The staff in Missenyi contacts the local authority of the village. The local authorities have the necessary information and knowledge about the farmers in their villages and can suggest households eligible for the EEALIP. Potential beneficiaries are then selected in cooperation with the staff in Missenyi. In the selection process, data and information provided by the village council are also analysed to identify poor farmers and households in need. However poverty is not the only criterion, candidates must also be ready and eager to change their lives. The local partner try to find "active poor" participants who are eager to learn and to work. According to the staff in Missenyi, time and resources are wasted if these aspects are not considered.
For the purpose of selecting the EEALIP beneficiaries, the objectives of the EEALIP were combined with the "Opportunities and Obstacles to Development" (O&OD) approach of the government. The O&OD is an intensive planning process with the aim to achieve bottom-up planning, with communities making key decisions about their own development themselves. The O&OD splits up people into groups according to their poverty level, which helps to find suitable beneficiaries.
Missenyi tries to work with existing groups, but in some villages new groups have to be formed as the existing ones do not work, because it is difficult to set a new direction in existing groups. However, these groups are not formed by the local partners but rather left to the farmers themselves after providing them with training on the importance and administration of such groups.
61
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
At the beginning of the project, workshops are held to test the willingness and seriousness of the groups. This is an attempt to filter out people who do not fit into the programme because they are only interested in money. These people are dismissed as they would jeopardise the achievement of the objectives of the EEALIP. Some groups also draw up a kind of constitution, which means that anyone who violates the established rules can be excluded from the group. It must also be mentioned, that it is generally not always easy to find people who want to participate in a programme. The reasons for this are a certain scepticism of the local population towards interventions such as the EEALIP.
In the opinion of the Missenyi staff, people suffering from serious diseases like HIV or mental illness are considered poor in particular. Children whose parents have died also belong to the poorest in the population. These groups of people are additionally disadvantaged, which makes it even more difficult for them to overcome poverty. Where possible, a focus is placed on this group, but the main focus of the programme is not on these additionally disadvantaged people.
6.6.2 Kyerwa
In a first step, the local partners contact the local authorities (the district chairman of Kyerwa) and present the focus of the project. The chancellor then recommends a region to the local partners where they can find people suitable for the project. The district administration has the necessary data that indicates where there is a great need for a project. The local partners are provided with a list of all villages eligible for the programme. The district officials guide the local partners, but it is up to KADDRO to decide who will be involved in the project. After this important pre-selection, the local authorities of the respective villages are contacted. In a joint effort with the authorities of the villages, the families in need are then selected for the programme and the farmers' groups are formed. One criterion in the selection process for the EEALIP is that the households only work in the agricultural sector and have no other form of employment or business. The farmers should own a house and some land to practice and apply what they have learned from the EEALIP trainings. Furthermore, the beneficiaries must be available and remain in the village so they can be contacted at any time. Otherwise, problems might occur during meetings, interactions and the implementation of the activities. The reason why KADDRO creates new groups is that the existing groups already have a purpose and it is difficult to set a new direction for them. The beneficiaries should focus on the characteristics of the EEALIP (sustainable agriculture, natural
62
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
resource management, sanitation and hygiene). Another important criterion is the distance between the groups and the farmers. A short distance makes it easier for the farmers to meet and exchange information. According to the local partner KADDRO, almost everyone living in rural areas in Kyerwa is poor and under the poverty line. Thus, the EEALIP certainly contributes to the reduction of poverty and does not miss its target. In the opinion of the local partners it is unlikely that people who are too wealthy will be involved in the project. According to the partners, it is difficult to find the "poorest of the poor" because they show no interest in becoming part of a development programme. Those mainly includes people who have no resources at all (no land, no farm animals). These people do not even appear when the EEALIP is presented to the farmers. The efficient use of funds is also a reason why the poorest who are not willing to change their lives cannot be helped. Working with the poorest is sometimes very hard and, according to the partners, a waste of energy and resources.
63
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
7. Synthesis
Based on the results of the field visits and the expert interviews, the three central hypotheses of this Master's thesis were examined and, if necessary, falsified. For reasons of clarity, the three theses are mentioned again here. The hypotheses, each of which will be discussed in an individual subchapter below, are:
a) The implementing local partners Missenyi and KADDRO have a regulated and structured process of choosing beneficiaries for the EEALIP, which, however, does not consider the poverty level measurement according to the MPI (Multidimensional Poverty Index). Therefore, the farmer groups consist of smallholders at different levels of poverty.
b) The local smallholders' perception of their own poverty differs from how they are classified according to the "New Global MPI [Multidimensional Poverty Index] 2018: Aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals" (Alkire & Jahan 2018).
c) The responsibility for choosing beneficiaries within the EEALIP lies with the implementing partners, Missenyi und KADDRO. Although the beneficiaries are not scored and selected according to the MPI, the selection meets the expectations of the EUREGIO partners of working with the poorest.
The respective research questions to which the data collection and evaluation were aligned can be found in chapter 1.2. It is important to once again draw attention to the special challenges which occurred during data collection, such as the predetermined selection of beneficiaries by the local partners Missenyi and KADDRO and language barriers (cf. chapter 5).
Particularly with regard to the evaluation of the selection of beneficiaries by the local partners Missenyi and KADDRO, it should be noted that during the field visits it was only possible to accurately determine the current poverty level of the smallholders, whereas the observation of past poverty levels is somewhat less accurate due to the data situation.
64
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
However, thanks to the comparison with the baseline study by Peter Van Erum (2015) and considering the progress the beneficiaries have made due to the offered trainings, the falsification could be minimised to a level that meets the general scientific requirements.
7.1 The Poorest vs. the "Active Poor" and Contribution to SDG 1
As described in chapter 6.6, the local partner organisations Missenyi and KADDRO have a regulated and structured process of choosing the beneficiaries to be included in the EEALIP. The employees follow a certain sequence of phases for pre-selection. Nevertheless, the selection procedures of Missenyi and KADDRO are not identical. Both of them have developed their own criteria and guidelines for this purpose and do not adhere to internationally recognised and scientifically developed concepts such as the MPI or the World Bank's Monetary Poverty Line.
As the analysis has shown, there are several households among the beneficiaries which cannot be classified as poor depending on the measurement system used. In the current state, 18 of the 40 visited households are to be classified as "OK" according to the MPI with deprivation in less than 20 per cent of measured indicators. In the initial state this figure was down to 11 households, which equals 27.5 per cent of the beneficiaries. Looking at the assessment based on the Monetary Poverty Line of 1.9 USD per day, 8 households are not classified as poor in their current state, which equals 23 per cent.
Based on the SDGs, or more specifically SDG 1 and its associated goals (cf. Chapter 2.1), the people who are to be classified in the MPI cutoffs "Extreme Poverty", "Poor" and "Vulnerable" are the ones who are considered eligible. The beneficiaries living on less than 1.9 USD a day are also considered eligible for the EEALIP. According to the Global MPI 2019 (cf. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, 2019, p. 1), 55.4 per cent of the Tanzanian population are classified as multidimensionally poor.
These figures show that a large part of the Tanzania population is considered eligible for development cooperation measures to reduce poverty (such as the EEALIP) and thus contribute to achieve SDG 1. Even though the selection of beneficiaries by the local partners Missenyi and KADDRO is therefore considered appropriate to a large extent, it is nonetheless surprising that over 25 per cent of the beneficiaries belong to an apparently better-off minority of smallholders compared to
65
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
national standards. It is noticeable that the majority of this better-off minority of smallholders comes from Kyerwa (8 beneficiaries), while only 3 are from Missenyi.
What became clear during the interviews with the local partners is that there are certain criteria by which the beneficiaries are selected. Of course poverty plays a role, although it is not clear how the level of people's poverty is measured. Another important factor seems to be the motivation and will of the farmers to change something in their lives. According to the partners, it is important that everyone in the group be eager, proactive and innovative. The local partners like to use the term "active poor" for those farmers.
Based on the statements of the local partners, the beneficiaries selected for the EEALIP seem to be at different poverty levels. The local partners have noticed that a group of beneficiaries who are at different poverty levels is likely to show better results in reducing poverty in a community than a group consisting only of the poorest members. The local partners mentioned that through the stakeholders the poorer members can be convinced of the usefulness of development intervention. As long as the poorest are included the selection can be considered suitable. Hence, the data collected for this thesis confirm the first hypothesis.
7.2 Local Perception of Poverty vs. Multidimensional Poverty Index
This chapter will compare the results of chapters 6.1 and 6.2, and take a closer look at the results between the local perception of poverty and the poverty measurement based on the MPI. For the purpose of this study, the collection of data on the local perception of poverty was primarily intended as a method of controlling and comparing the MPI-based poverty measurement and the monetary approach. The beneficiaries largely chose indicators similar to those used by the MPI. However, a comparison between perceived and measured poverty, i.e. the results of the FGDs and the homestead visits, is only possible to a limited extent as the methodologies used differ considerably. Nevertheless, a general positive trend in the perception of the beneficiaries' own situation was also reflected in the MPI-based poverty measurement.
66
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
PERCEPTION OF POVERTY BEFORE THE PROGRAMME IN MISSENYI CURRENT SITUATION IN MISSENYI
0 2 0 7 Income 0 Income 23 17 22 48 11
0 1 1 2 Water 4 Water 11 14 22 46 29
1 13 3 16 Food 10 Food 11 32 25 20 1
1 3 0 4 Housing 5 Housing 25 26 26 33 7 7 0 7 0 Sanitation 28 Sanitation 5 15 17 0 35
Figure 20: Combined FGD Findings for Local Poverty Perception in Missenyi (Source: Author)
67
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
PERCEPTION OF POVERTY BEFORE THE
PROGRAMME IN KYERWA CURRENT SITUATION IN KYERWA
0 2 0 58 Income 10 Income 11 21 3 44 0
0 5 2 47 Water 29 Water 19 44 6 0 0
0 6 0 43 Food 18 Food 26 53 0 2 0
0 0 0 55 Housing 17 Housing 15 55 0 0 0
0 6 Sanitatio 1 55 22 Sanitation 15 n 29 0 24 0
Figure 21: Combined FGD Findings for Local Poverty Perception in Kyerwa (Source: Author)
In both the Missenyi and Kyerwa regions, there has been an improvement in all five indicators (cf. figure 20 and 22). The changes are particularly marked among beneficiaries from Kyerwa. None of the beneficiaries from Kyerwa consider themselves to be extremely poor in their current situation.
The results of the MPI also show an improvement in the living situation of the beneficiaries. It is striking that 13 of the beneficiaries currently classified as "OK" are from Kyerwa and only 5 from Missenyi (cf. figure 22).
68
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
MPI POVERTY HEADCOUNT BEFORE THE PROGRAMME CURRENT SITUATION
OK 11 OK 18
Vulnerable 9 Vulnerable 10
Poor 13 Poor 10
Extreme Extreme 7 2 Poor Poor
Extreme Poor Poor Vulnerable OK
Figure 22: MPI Poverty Headcount for Missenyi and Kyerwa. (Source: author)
However, there are also differences between the results of the FGDs (cf. 6.1) and the MPI (cf. 6.2). A good example of this is the housing indicator. While in the perception of many beneficiaries the housing situation has improved, this is hardly reflected in the MPI data. According to the MPI data, only two beneficiaries have managed to improve their housing situation. The reason for these different results seems to be that based on the MPI criteria a household is rated deprived if the material used for at least one of the three building parts of roof, walls and floor is inadequate (natural or rudimentary material). As a result, not all improvements to the houses mentioned by the beneficiaries are considered in the MPI data, as many houses are still rated as affected according to the MPI despite the improvements. The nutrition indicator, which was applied in a scaled-down form, as mentioned in Chapter 5.4.1, also is an example of the differences between the perceptions of the beneficiaries and the results of the MPI. The improvement of food variety was not comprehensively recorded by the MPI. The FGDs and the interviews showed how important food diversity is for the beneficiaries. This means that the farmers are no longer dependent on the harvest yield of one or just a few of their crops, which increases food security and means that their nutrition is no longer as unbalanced as before.
69
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
These examples show that one single index, in this study the MPI, cannot capture all parameters of poverty. The author considers it all the more important that, in addition to the MPI, FGDs with the beneficiaries and homestead visits were carried out for the study. In summary, it can be said that the indicators used in the MPI were chosen in a very practical way, as the beneficiaries themselves would also measure poverty with almost identical indicators. The second hypothesis could only be partially confirmed based on the current data.
7.3 Expectations of the Donors
As the interviews with the representatives of the EUREGIO partners showed, the donors do not follow any strict rules or guidelines regarding the distribution of projects and consequently the selection of beneficiaries. All interviewees confirmed that the selection process is left entirely to the local partners in the area, in this case the staff of Missenyi and KADDRO.
This gives those responsible a certain amount of flexibility and thus allows for a selection that is not carried out stringently in the light of the international agenda for poverty reduction, as the findings have shown. Thus, the third hypothesis cannot be fully confirmed either, as donors do not necessarily expect their partners to work with the poorest of the poor.
70
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
8. Conclusion & Recommendations
Lastly, the overarching research question of this Master's thesis must be answered as to whether the EEALIP works with the poorest of the poor and thus fulfils the goals of SDG 1 "No Poverty".– the answer is: only partially. As the findings of this study have revealed, before the programme about 20- 25 per cent of the beneficiaries were not classified as poor according to the MPI and the Monetary Poverty Line of 1.9 USD per day. This figure has increased to about 45 per cent in the current situation, of course partly due to the progress made through the EEALIP trainings and activities. Though the real question of whether this allocation of beneficiaries can still be considered suitable remains.
The answer is yes. It makes sense to include beneficiaries with different poverty levels in a development programme. By including local stakeholders and respected community members, the acceptance of interventions increases, even if some of these stakeholders are not classified as poor according to the criteria mentioned above. In other development programmes the local partners have made the experience that a group of beneficiaries who are at different poverty levels showed better results in reducing poverty in a community than a group consisting only of the poorest members.
The circumstances described in chapters 6.6 and 7.1 lead to the fact that development cooperation is in fact leaving some people behind. On the one hand because the poorest of the poor are difficult to reach and on the other hand because certain basic conditions have to be met for inclusion in the EEALIP. A further factor is the non-standardised requirements towards the beneficiaries, which allow for a selection that is not SDG-compliant. At this point, the donor institutions are required to standardise the selection of beneficiaries.
Based on the findings of this Master's thesis and the conviction that also the living conditions of the poorest of the poor must be improved in order to achieve a sustainable improvement in the global poverty situation in the future - even though this may lead to slower progress in development cooperation - the following recommendations are given for the fourth phase of the EEALIP:
71
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
• The local partners Missenyi and KADDRO should be familiarised with the exact objectives and goals of the SDGs, at least regarding the focus of their project work with SDG 1 "No Poverty", SDG 2 "Zero Hunger" and SDG 6 "Clean Water and Sanitation".
• The selection of beneficiaries should be standardised by the institutions of the EUREGIO donor countries in order to ensure that the appropriate persons are included in the programme. This would make it possible to reduce the number of people not suitable for the programme (e.g. too many wealthy people). The standardised selection procedure should be included in the guidelines and evaluation.
• It is strongly recommended to pay more attention to the problem of water shortage as it is the basis for all other programme interventions. Promoting better access to water tanks or irrigation, for example, could help the beneficiaries to support their agricultural activities.
72
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
9. Literature
Alkire Sabina and Jahan Selim (2018). The New Global MPI 2018: Aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals', HDRO Occasional Paper, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
Alkire Sabina and Santos Maria Emma (2011): TRAININGMATERIAL FOR PRODUCING NATIONAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORTS. OPHI Research. Oxford.
Banerjee Abhijit and Esther Duflo (2019): Poor Economics. Plädoyer für ein neues Verständnis von Armut. Munich. Pantheon.
EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme (EEALIP) (2017-2019): Narrative Proposal. Europregion EUREGIO.
EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme (EEALIP) (2017): Log Frame - East Africa Livelihood Improvement Programme.
FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO (2019): The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2019. Safeguarding against economic slowdowns and downturns. Rome. Online: http://www.fao.org/3/ca5162en/ca5162en.pdf [29.04.2020].
Häder Michael (2019): Empirische Sozialforschung. Eine Einführung. 4. Auflage. Wiesbaden.
Hecklau Hans (1989): Ostafrika. (Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda). Darmstadt. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Helfferich Cornelia (2019): Leitfaden- und Experteninterviews. In: Baur N., Blasius J. Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden.
Krämer Hagen (2018): Armutsindikatoren. Online: https://wirtschaftslexikon.gabler.de/definition/armutsindikatoren-29328/version-252938 [28.04.2020].
Kovacevic, Milorad and Cecilia Calderon, M. (2014): HDRO's Multidimensional Poverty Index: 2014 Specifications. UNDP Human Development Report Office Occasional Paper.
Kyerwa District Council (2016): COUNCIL FIVE YEARS STRATEGIC PLAN 2016/2017 - 2020/2021. Kyerwa.
73
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Kyerwa District Administration and Local Government (2017): Kyerwa District Investment Profile 2017. Kyerwa.
Ministry of Finance and Planning, National Bureau of Statistics, Missenyi District Council (2017): Socio - Economic Profile, 2015. Kagera.
Ottacher Friedbert and Vogel Thomas (2016 ): Entwicklungszusammenarbeit im Umbruch. Bilanz- Kritik-Perspektiven. Frankfurt a. M.
Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (2019): “Tanzania Country Briefing”, Multidimensional Poverty Index Data Bank. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, University of Oxford. Online: https://ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/CB_TZA_2019_2.pdf [23.05.2020].
Rostow W. W. (1960): The stages of economic growth. A non-Communist Manifesto. Cambridge [England], University Press. Online: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78- 03062A001100030001-6.pdf [13.08.2020].
Sachs Jeffrey David (2005): The End of Poverty. Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York. Penguin Press.
Statistisches Bundesamt (1989): Länderbericht Tansania 1989. Stuttgart.
Stockmann Reinhard, Menzel Ulrich, Nuscheler Franz (2016): Entwicklungspolitik. Theorien- Probleme-Strategien. Berlin.
The World Bank (2015): FQA: Global Poverty Line Update. Online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/brief/global-poverty-line-faq [20.02.2020].
The World Bank (2018): PPP conversion factor, private consumption (LCU per international $)- Tanzania. Online: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PRVT.PP?locations=TZ [28.04.2020].
The World Bank (2019 Sep.): Tanzania Overview. Online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/tanzania/overview [27.04.2020].
The World Bank (2019 Nov): Tanzania's Path to Poverty Reduction and Pro-Poor Growth. Online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/tanzania/publication/tanzanias-path-to-poverty-reduction- and-pro-poor-growth [27.04.2020].
74
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
Truman, Harry S. (1949): Inaugural Address of Harry S. Truman. Online: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/truman.asp [10.02.2020].
UNDP (2019): Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century. Briefing note for countries on the 2019 Human Development Report. Tanzania (United Republic of). Online: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/TZA.pdf [12.04.2020].
United Nations. (n.y.): Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere. Online: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/poverty/ [09.03.2020].
United Nations (2019): Ziele für eine Nachhaltige Entwicklung. Bericht 2019. Online: https://www.un.org/Depts/german/pdf/SDG%20Bericht%20aktuell.pdf [04.05.2020].
University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography (2019): Evaluation for EEALIP EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Improvement Program.
Van Erum Peter (2017): EUREGIO East Africa Livelihood Security Programme. Baseline Survey Report.
Wirtschaftskammer Österreich (WKO) (2020): Länderprofil Tansania. Online: https://www.oefse.at/fileadmin/content/Downloads/Publikationen/Laenderinfos/tansania.pdf [30.07.2020].
75
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
10. Annex
10.1 Questionnaire
Homestead visit interview - farmer group
Group: Region: Date:
1. Name, Age, Household Members (Adults and Children) ______2. Living Standards
2.1 What kind of burning material do you use for cooking (to heat the oven)? ______
2.2 Do you have a sanitation facility? Do you share it with other households? ______
2.3 Where do you get your drinking water from? How long does this take you? ______
2.4 Do you have access to electricity in your household? ______
2.5 Did the program change any of the previous four aspects? ______
76
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
______
2.6 Check the Material of the house (Interviewer) ______
2.7 Check for Assets (Interviewer) ______
3. Education
3.1 How many household members are 10 years or older? How many of these have attended at least 6 years of schooling (primary school)? ______
3.2 Do all your children attend school? How many of them finished or are going to finish grade 8? ______
3.3 Did the program change anything about this situation? (F.e. more income to pay school fees?) ______
4. Health
4.1 Did your household lose any child within the last five years? ______
77
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
4.2 How many meals per day does your household take? What kind of food? ______
4.3 Did the program change anything about this situation? ______
5. Monetary Poverty
5.1 Do you have an idea of how much money you're spending per month? [food, school fees, …] ______
5.2 Are you able to save some money? ______
5.3 Did the program change your financial situation? ______
78
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
______
6. Choosing of Beneficiaries
6.1 When did you join the program? ______
6.2 How did you join the program and your farmer group? ______
6.3 Can anybody join your farmer group? ______
Notes:
______
79
Improving the livelihood of the poorest Benedikt Menardi Master's Thesis University of Innsbruck, Department of Geography
10.2 Questions for the EEALIP Focus Group Discussions
The following questions shall provide information that will help understand the local farmers' perception of poverty by collecting and clarifying indicators for "poor" people. Furthermore, famers will be asked to score themselves within the previously identified indicators.
80