An Empirical Assessment of Households Livelihood Vulnerability: The Case of Rural Ghana

Baffoe, Gideon; Matsuda, Hirotaka

doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1796-9

Cited by 34 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis of livelihood strategies revealed that livelihood diversification was a common phenomenon among rural households in the study area and that households were rarely dependent on one source of livelihood for a living, and these results were consistent with the findings of other scholars [43]. This diversification occurred mainly because of the release of a large number of laborers from agriculture and forestry land after the implementation of the policy of returning farmland to forestry in the upper reaches of the Min River, China; thus, to maintain their livelihoods, these laborers had to seek new means of survival.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Livelihood diversification is crucial for reducing vulnerability and building sustainable livelihood for rural households. A diversified household stands a better chance of surviving than an undiversified one, such as during exposure to major climatic events [43][44][45]. Pure agricultural rural households and agricultural dominant rural households mainly obtained economic income by planting fruits and raising a small amount of poultry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sensitivity of Rural Households’ Livelihood Strategies to Livelihood Capital in Poor Mountainous Areas: An Empirical Analysis in the Upper Reaches of the Min River, China

Wang

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exploring the sensitivity of rural households’ livelihood strategies to livelihood capital is of great significance for improving rural households’ livelihood levels. This paper selects 23 livelihood capital measurement indicators and conducts an in-depth survey of rural households. In addition, the entropy method and a weighted comprehensive model are used to explore the basic characteristics of rural households’ livelihood capital in the upper reaches of the Min River, China, in 2017. Furthermore, econometric models are used to analyze the sensitivity of rural households’ livelihood strategies to livelihood capital. As indicated from the research, the livelihood capital levels of different types of rural households in the study area are not equivalent. The types of rural households with different livelihood strategies can be ordered in terms of quantity as follows: non-agricultural type > non-agricultural dominant type > agricultural dominant type > pure agricultural type. Livelihood strategies have different sensitivities to different livelihood capital measurement indicators. Among these indicators, cash income, the number of relatives and friends available for financial assistance, and the number of civil servants have positive effects on the livelihood strategy selection of non-agricultural dominant rural households and non-agricultural rural households. However, the average age of laborers, area of cultivated land and gardens, number of livestock and poultry, and present value of production tools have negative effects. These evaluation results can provide a scientific decision-making basis for the formulation of poverty alleviation policies by relevant government departments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity of Rural Households’ Livelihood Strategies to Livelihood Capital in Poor Mountainous Areas: An Empirical Analysis in the Upper Reaches of the Min River, China

Wang

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the Department for International Development's (DFID) in the UK, rural families acquire resources from their natural, physical, social, financial, and human capitals to survive and develop under natural and social adversity (Colombo et al 2018). Compared to urban families, who have more wealth and more access to public services, rural families are more vulnerable under adversity because of uncertainty in the natural resources that are intrinsic to an agricultural economy (Baffoe and Matsuda, 2018). First, even though the majority of rural families are involved in migration, agriculture is still their major source of livelihood (Liu and Xu 2016).…”

Section: Impacts Of Sustainable Livelihoods On Rural Families In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Status of Family Resilience: Effects of Sustainable Livelihoods in Rural China

Yang

Feldman

2020

Soc Indic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Family resilience is the capacity of a family to mitigate adversity using its resources, structure, and internal connections. In rural China, where sustainable livelihoods are changing rapidly because of urbanization and migration, it is not clear how family resilience interacts with sustainability of livelihoods. This study of rural Chinese families classifies individual’s perceived family resilience and discusses how sustainable livelihoods influence this classification. A multilevel survey of rural families reveals three categories of perceived resilience in families: perceived optimistic families, perceived cooperative families, and perceived pessimistic families. Sustainable livelihoods, including natural, social, financial, and human capitals, have significant impacts on this classification of perceived family resilience. We conclude that rural families in China vary in their levels of family resilience, and the more physical and financial capital they have, the more internal cooperation there is within families. The more natural and traditional social capital families have, the less internal cooperation there is within families. The more human resources families have, the more resilience they have.

show abstract

“…The diversification of household livelihood strategies may result from both deliberate choices and involuntary responses to the crisis [54,55]. Heterogeneity among household livelihood strategies often exists even in a small region [56,57]. Our study reveals that herders in the Xilinhot City region of Inner Mongolia adopts primarily five household livelihood strategies ( Figure 2).…”

Section: The Differences Of Household Livelihood Strategies and Influmentioning

confidence: 80%

Different Household Livelihood Strategies and Influencing Factors in the Inner Mongolian Grassland

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Household livelihood strategies affect grassland ecosystem services and the herder’s well-being. Understanding different household livelihood strategies and influencing factors is crucial for sustainable development in pastoral areas. We surveyed 241 households in the typical grassland region of Inner Mongolia to classify the different types of household livelihood strategies using income-based cluster analysis and to identify the major influencing factors of household livelihood strategies with partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Our study has several findings. First, according to household income sources, there are five types of household livelihood strategies in this region, including breeding only small livestock (S), breeding mainly small livestock (SL), breeding mainly large livestock (LS), breeding only large livestock (L), and not breeding livestock (N), with the S strategy as the most dominant household livelihood strategy in this region. Second, among the five types of household livelihood strategies, the LS strategy had the highest household income (323,200 Chinese yuans) while the N strategy had the lowest household income (68,540 Chinese yuans). Third, among the five types of livelihood capitals, manufactured capital and natural capital had more substantial influences on household livelihood strategies. Manufactured capital directly influenced household livelihood strategies, while natural capital affected household livelihood strategies either directly or indirectly through manufactured capital. Our results suggest that the LS strategy would be the most economically profitable among the five household livelihood strategies in the typical grassland region of Inner Mongolia.

show abstract

An Empirical Assessment of Households Livelihood Vulnerability: The Case of Rural Ghana

Cited by 34 publications

References 40 publications

Sensitivity of Rural Households’ Livelihood Strategies to Livelihood Capital in Poor Mountainous Areas: An Empirical Analysis in the Upper Reaches of the Min River, China

Sensitivity of Rural Households’ Livelihood Strategies to Livelihood Capital in Poor Mountainous Areas: An Empirical Analysis in the Upper Reaches of the Min River, China

The Status of Family Resilience: Effects of Sustainable Livelihoods in Rural China

Different Household Livelihood Strategies and Influencing Factors in the Inner Mongolian Grassland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About