Rural Income Generating Activities: A Cross Country Comparison

Abstract

This paper uses a newly constructed cross country database composed of comparable variables and aggregates from household surveys to examine the full range of income generating activities carried out by rural households in order to determine: 1) the relative importance of the gamut of income generating activities in general and across wealth categories; 2), the relative importance of diversification versus specialization at the household level; and 3) the influence of rural income generating activities on poverty and inequality. Analysis of the RIGA cross country dataset paints a clear picture of multiple activities across rural space and diversification across rural households. This is true across countries in all four continents, though less so in the African countries included in the dataset. For most countries the largest share of income stems from off farm activities, and the largest share of households have diversified sources of income. Diversification, not specialization, is the norm, although most countries show significant levels of household specialization in non-agricultural activities as well. Nevertheless, agricultural based sources of income remain critically important for rural livelihoods in all countries, both in terms of the overall share of agriculture in rural incomes as well as the large share of households that still specialize in agricultural sources of income. 1 The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the institutions with which they are affiliated. We would like to acknowledge Marika Krausova for her excellent work in helping build the RIGA database and Genny Bonomi and Karen Hudlet for research assistance. We would like to thank Karen Macours, Alain de Janvry, Elisabeth Sadoulet, Derek Byerlee and Gustavo Anriquez for constructive comments on the text and data, as well as other numerous researchers for helping us check the data. We would also like to thank participants at workshops at the FAO in Rome and Santiago, the IAAE meetings in Brisbane and the AES meetings in Reading, for comments and discussion.

Drought and Civil War in Sub‐Saharan Africa

“…These climatic anomalies might have disastrous consequences for countries with a scarce fresh water supply and economies that depend on the local agriculture. Given that agricultural activities account for between 60% and 100% of the income of the poorest African households (Davis et al ., ) and that these households often have no access to safe water, sub‐Saharan Africa is one of the regions most adversely affected by climate change in the world. One of the possible consequences of climate change is an increase in conflicts.…”

Livelihood Diversification: A Streatagy for Rural Income Enhancement

“…Similar findings were reported by John and Wobst (2006) who stated that in rural Tanzania non-farm activities contributing more than farming activities to the household income. Davis et al (2007) also mentioned that…”

“…Rural households in the developing countries specialized in non-farm activities for livelihood because of fragmentation and low productivity of land. This results in switching of people from the farm sources of income to non-farm activities for secure and sustainable livelihood Davis et al (2007). Data presented in Table 3 shows the number of households and their average income before and after diversification and changes of average income from farm and non-farm sources.…”

Investing back home Return migration and business ownership in Albania1

“…We also account for the amount of land area owned by a household to indicate the household's involvement in agriculture. We hypothesize that land area will be inversely related to a household's likelihood of engaging in self‐employment in the non‐farm business sector (Azzarri et al ., 2006; Davis et al ., 2006).…”