Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
407426,1995
Pergamon Copyright @ 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. AU rights reserved
0197-397%x $9.50 + 0.00
0197-3975(95)00037-2
CAROLE RAKODI
University of Wales, Cardiff, UK
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
It is now widely acknowledged that Structural Adjustment (SA) policies have had
a particularly adverse effect on many urban people.1 This recognition has led to
an increase in studies of urban poverty, to document these effects and to inform
the policy programmes. This renewed attention has revealed a lag in conceptual
understanding and quantification, with the result that policy formulation tends
to occur in the absence of any rigorous assessment of past programmes and
with limited understanding of the process of impoverishment. This overview
deals with some of the conceptual, methodological and empirical issues raised
by attempts to document the changing extent of urban poverty, explain its
causes, and analyse its characteristics at both city and household levels. Finally,
it provides some feedback on the effectiveness of current attempts to alleviate
poverty.2
408 Carole Rakodi
nature of urban poverty. Furthermore, the arbitrary nature and the composition
of the poverty lines and the way these are politically manipulated is clearly seen
in the Indian context.
Recent studies of the incidence of urban poverty in Malaysia and of the
impact of Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPS) in African countries use
similar approaches (see Box 1). As in the Indian papers, the Malaysian analyses
adopt the government-defined PL without explanation or assessment of how it
is calculated.11 The World Bank even devised a formula by which to arrive at
a PL for countries which did not have adequate data.12 The result was used
in affordability estimates for housing programmes in Zimbabwe, despite the
crude nature of such a calculation in the face of varying household needs and
composition and differing abilities to devote resources to housing and related
services, as revealed by the World Banks own research.13
Half the total urban population in Mopti, Mali was estimated to be poor in 1991
and over half the population in low income urban residential areas in Lilongwe and
Blantyre in Malawi in 1989. 14 In Manila between 31% and 75% of households in 1975
and between 19% and 50% in 1983 were considered to be below a Poverty Line (or
threshold), depending on the assumptions used.15
access to land via men, a more widespread reason for rural poverty is lack of
labour within the household ?a Despite the need for explanations of poverty to
take account of local circumstances, the importance attached to the intensity of
poverty is echoed by analyses of Mozambique and Mopti in Mali. The former
distinguishes between the poor and the destitute (see Schuberts paper in this
issue), and the latter between the very poor and the marginally poor.21
A further problem with analysis of poverty based on household income/
consumption which treats the household as a black box is that it ignores
distribution of food, status, influence in decision making and access to services
within the household. The latter may vary with gender, age and position in
the household, although these variations take different forms in different
situations.22
In Costa Rica a distinction was drawn between the destitute, with incomes less than
the cost of one basic food basket, and the poor, with incomes sufficient for between
one and two basic food baskets. In 1971 13% of households were poor and a further
4% destitute, adjusting for household size and counting two children as the equivalent
to one adult. By 1982 the proportions had increased to 20% and 4%.17
The discussion so far has been concerned with absolute poverty, or the lack
of sufficient income to satisfy basic needs. Parallel with this, however, runs
a concern with relative poverty and inequality. An earlier study of urban
poverty in 10 Andean cities, for example, defined relative poverty as the
bottom two quintiles of households, much as the World Bank was doing in
the 197Os, and attempted to ascertain the determinants of poverty. Musgrove
attempted to separate the effects of household size, family composition and
the employment status of household members on relative poverty. He found
that poverty was associated much more strongly with large household size, low
overall employment rates and high dependency ratios, than with low wages and
unemployment .zs For some families, high dependency occurs only at one stage in
the life cycle, while for others it is a permanent state of affairs. Others have used
definitions of absolute poverty in similar investigations of income differentials.
The main determinants of poverty emerge as labour market differentiation,
human capital inadequacies and dependency ratios within households. The
importance of the labour market for the incidence of urban poverty is very
clear in the literature review in Amis paper in this issue.
In theory, analysis of the incidence of poverty in urban areas should be
easier than in rural areas because of the more widespread receipt of wages and
cash earnings from wage and self employment, respectively. However, many
wage earners are casual or home workers with variable incomes. In addition,
the wages earned by many urban employees are insufficient to support their
families and are supplemented by self employment in the informal sector. In
many places, especially in African cities, the number of wage jobs has declined
and the proportion of household income contributed by wages decreased (see
Box 3).
As the relative importance of income from self employment has increased,
the difficulties of estimating income generated by small-scale enterprises (SSEs)
have become more significant, although not always recognised.26 Few micro-
entrepreneurs keep accounts, purchases of goods and raw materials as well as
sales are irregular, and household and business accounts are not kept separate,
Poverty Lines or Household Strategies? 411
A survey in 1990 in Kampala found that although 72% of households had at least one
wage income, it accounted on average for only 17% of total income, and had been
overtaken by business incomes (47% of all income, earned by 75% of all households) and
allowances (54% of households, 27% of income). The latter included both traditional
allowances for housing, medical expenses and transport, which strictly form part of
wage income, and new allowances (responsibility, night and food allowances) which
had been introduced as partial compensation for declining real wages. The study also
found that business incomes made up a much larger proportion of total household
incomes, especially for lower income households, than in 1969 and a relatively larger
proportion of the incomes of higher income households, who could get better access
to capital (in part from their wages) and other inputs for their enterprises.25
In Manila, the recession of the early 198Os, which was brought about by external
shocks and internal economic factors, compounded by political turmoil, led to a
dramatic increase in the incidence of poverty. Between mid-1983 and the end of
1984, the proportion of households with incomes insufficient to buy basic food needs
increased from 19% to 45% and those below the poverty line from 39% to 62%. Wage
employment stagnated, unemployment increased and a shift of workers to the informal
sector occurred. Real wages and informal sector earnings fell dramatically:
The contractionary Structural Adjustment policies imposed by the multilateral lending
agencies, while enabling the country to pay part of its foreign debt, were seen by many
as having aggravated the economic crisis, with the heavier burden placed on the poor
(p. 1%).36
The results of SA, of course, do not only affect the poor. Gilbert is correct
to point out that the incomes of middle-class households have often fallen faster
and the costs of access to services increased more dramatically as cost recovery
measures are instituted or private-sector services substituted for those formerly
provided by the public sector .32 However, the effects of impoverishment in
terms of reduced nutrition, more ill-health, reduced access to education and
health care, etc, are greater for those previously below or near the poverty line.
The World Banks categorisation of the urban poor into the newly poor, the
borderline poor pushed into poverty and the chronic poor, represents a partial,
if oversimplified, recognition of the dynamic nature of poverty.33
It is, however, an unsophisticated formulation compared with that which has
been developed over the years in the study of rural poverty. Deprivation,
Chambers suggests, is a product not just of material poverty, but of a set of
interlocking factors, including physical weakness, isolation, vulnerability and
powerlessness .34 Material poverty arises from a lack of assets, inadequate and
unreliable stocks and flows of food and cash, and low returns to labour despite
high participation rates. A household may be physically weak not just because
of lack of food, but also because of a lack of able-bodied adults, which occurs
because of illness, disability, death, migration or the stage of the household life
Poverty Lines or Household Strategies? 413
cycle. Isolation, caused by, for example, physical location or illiteracy, limits
travel, contacts and access to information; it is exacerbated by poverty and
sustains it. Vulnerability and powerlessness are, he suggests, the most neglected
aspects of the deprivation trap. It is the vulnerability of poor households which
prevents them from taking the risks associated with innovation and which is
crucial in the process of impoverishment, while powerlessness weakens their
bargaining position with respect to political rights, access to services and the
law, and the sale of products, assets or labour. Sens conception of poverty as
a lack of entitlements is not dissimilar.
The process of impoverishment (or alternatively of improved well-being),
Chambers sees as a ratchet effect: a range of possible contingencies, especially
if more than one occurs at a time, may force a rural household to sell or mortgage
its main assets, especially land and livestock. The contingencies Chambers
identified in 1983 included social conventions (e.g. bride-wealth, weddings,
funerals), disasters (man-made or natural), physical incapacity (e.g. sickness,
childbearing), unproductive expenditure (e.g. alcohol, expenditure which does
not pay off for reasons of bad luck or bad judgement), or exploitation. By 1989,
he is drawing a critical distinction between risks, shocks and stress.35
Pryer in Khulna, Bangladesh, Harriss and Holland (in this issue) also stress
the crucial role of sickness as a shock in precipitating impoverishment, because
it has both direct costs (of treatment) and indirect costs (of income foregone).37
Yields from the sale of assets by rural households are often below their real
value, because purchasers know that they are distress sales. Decline in assets
is greatest and recovery slowest among those with least assets.
The reverse of poverty is, therefore, Chambers suggests, not necessarily
wealth, but security: command over adequate assets to be a guard against
contingencies and freedom from debt, both of which are linked to independence
(rather than dependence on a landlord or patron) and self respect (freedom from
subservience and exploitation) .ss He is referring essentially to economic security,
but physical security is also important; Moser emphasises personal safety from
domestic and other violence and notes that these may increase as deprivation
increases tension during periods of economic hardship.39 Beall, in this issue,
stresses the social and economic insecurity which poor households themselves
identify as the defining characteristic of their lives.
Conceptualisation of poverty and deprivation as a set of relationships and
processes, rather than a state, implies recognition that it is both complex and
dynamic and that the poor are not passive. This more sophisticated understanding
has raised methodological issues: not all aspects of these relationships and
processes are quantifiable; people poor by one set of indicators (e.g. income) are
not necessarily poor by another (e.g. welfare indicators such as mortality); while
vulnerability and lack of power and autonomy are hard to measure. Awareness
of the deficiencies in earlier analyses of deprivation and of the importance of
resident participation in decision making to ensure appropriate interventions
which are owned by their intended beneficiaries have both been driven by
and given rise to methodological innovations.40 Recognition that, while the
poor are often deprived of various kinds of entitlements, they are not merely
passive victims of impoverishment has also led to attempts to understand their
responses. Usually, the latter have been conceptualised in terms of household
strategies. Recent conceptual and empirical work on such strategies will be
reviewed in the next section.
HOUSEHOLD STRATEGIES
For some time now, the work of Chambers and others on rural poverty has
revolved around the belief that households aim at sustainable livelihoods.41
414 Carole Rakodi
These comprise, firstly, a portfolio of assets, both tangible (stores of cash and
food, and resources such as physical investments or skills) and intangible (claims
on others and on the government, and access rights, for example, to services).
Households make decisions about how the portfolio is used: for earning, by
disposal, to fulfil kinship obligations and responsibilities, to develop mutual
support networks, by changes to diet, etc. The strategy open to a household
depends both on the portfolio held and on the households capability to find
and make use of livelihood opportunities. The latter, in turn, depends in part
on the households composition. Chambers does not discuss the problems of
defining a household, although other analysts are aware of the complexities.
In addition, it is not clear whether household members available for work and
their skills can best be regarded as assets or capabilities.
The strategies adopted, Chambers suggests, aim to cope with and recover from
stress and shocks, by stinting, hoarding, protecting, depleting or diversifying the
portfolio; to maintain or enhance capability and assets; and to provide sustainable
livelihoods opportunities for the next generation. Faced with shock, stress or
risk, households devise coping strategies to protect their social reproduction
and enable recovery. These may be ineffective if, in the long term, consumption
declines and/or assets are lost permanently, or if successive calls on particular
strategies deplete the natural, social or financial resources on which households
or communities call. Poverty is thus characterised not only by a lack of assets
and inability to accumulate a portfolio of assets, but also by lack of choice with
respect to alternative coping strategies. The poorest, as well as households or
communities caught in a deteriorating situation, may not be able to devise a
coping strategy and will instead seek a survival strategy which will enable them
simply to protect their biological reproduction.
As in rural areas so in urban areas; households seek to mobilise resources and
opportunities and to combine these into a livelihood strategy which is a mix of
labour market involvement, savings, borrowing and investment, productive and
reproductive activities, income, labour and asset pooling and social networking.42
Both material and human resources are available. Access to them by household
members is influenced by their external availability and internal distribution, as
well as by the norms which govern their distribution, while their characteristics
and flows within the household and across its boundaries provide scope for and
constraints on strategies for their deployment.43
Households and individuals adjust this mix of resources according to their own
circumstances (age, life-cycle stage, educational level, tasks) and the changing
context in which they live (see Box 5). The poorest households are likely to aim
at survival while those who have been able to achieve a basic level of security may
be able to engage in more risky but also potentially more profitable economic
enterprises which, if successful, lead to income growth.
Diversification of household income sources has been noted in Mopti, a regional centre
in Mali. While under a fifth of urban workers derived income from more than one
activity, three fifths of households had more than one source of income. In two
thirds of the latter several members of the household worked, while in the remaining
third supplementary income was obtained from renting rooms, out-migration or help
from others. The poorest households were those with a single income source and a
dependency ratio of 5 : 1, or very large households. Economic deterioration has been
accompanied by increased female participation in wage earning, mostly in petty trade
and personal services, postponement of purchase of new clothes and house maintenance,
sales of assets, e.g. livestock, and borrowing, usually from acquaintances or traders.48
Economic activities, then, form the basis of a household strategy, but to them
and overlapping with them can be added migration movements,45 maintenance
of ties with rural areas, urban food production, decisions about access to services
such as education and housing, and family and community social networks.4
Different members of the household may have a different role to play in each
of these and their influence over household decision making may vary from
household to household, over time and between activities.
Rural food production is an important element in the strategies of urban
households in many parts of Africa, although its availability depends on rights
to land and other support systems based on family relationships, as well as
migration histories (see Box 6). Urban agriculture is also significant where
households can obtain access to land around their houses or elsewhere in the
urban area for cultivation or raising livestock (Box 7). While rural agriculture
may yield a surplus for sale, urban agriculture is generally purely for subsistence.
In Kenya nearly 90% of industrial workers in 1984 had access to farmland, however,
small in area, and left their wives and families to live permanently in the rural areas.
Tostensen estimated that only 50% of the costs of household subsistence were met by
wages on average.48
In Dakar in Senegal, all poor households are engaged in both urban and periurban
cultivation. Women grow vegetables in the urban area and rice on the urban fringe,
while men produce groundnuts for sale. Poor households with access to land prefer to
use it for subsistence and income-earning purposes, as the returns (in kind and cash)
from this activity exceed those potentially available from market selling, the most likely
alternative.49
In Quito, Ecuador, 79% of the population had. access to water supply in 1979, but this
had fallen to 60% by 1988 and the supply, whether piped or supplied by tanker, was
often irregular. In Jakarta, while only about 12% of households have neither a piped
water connection nor access to a private well for at least some uses, in the poorest
wealth quintile, this percentage increases to 31%. Household refuse should, on payment
of a monthly fee, be collected by neighbourhood cleaning officers to a local collection
point. Although the Sanitation Department suggests a scale in which fees increase with
the wealth of the neighbourhood, in practice, there was little difference, with the poorest
quintile of households paying on average almost five times the lowest suggested charge
and the wealthiest quintile less than one third of the highest suggested charge. A similar
study in Accra showed that poor households get the least water, with the most effort,
at the highest price, and with the greatest risk of contamination. The proportion of
households using pit latrines, often shared with more than 10 other households, is
greatest in the lowest wealth quartile. The likelihood that food cooked at home or
purchased from vendors is contaminated by flies, etc is also, like other environmental
hazards, greatest for households in the lowest income quartile.52
In the Alagados squatter settlement on the salt marshes of Salvador in Brazil in 1973,
support was sought from kin or patrons. A third of poor households had relationships
with patrons (political leaders or employers), which gave them access to bureaucratic
favours in return for political support, loans and preferential treatment at work in
return for labour and loyalty, and food, clothing, money and household goods in
return for domestic labour. Relations with kin involved reciprocal obligations, while
residents were also assisted by the religious groups to which they belonged.53
In Mexico City there has been both increased female labour force participation, mostly
in the informal sector, and intensification of domestic work, including shopping for
cheaper food, more mending as clothes purchases are deferred and more cleaning as
dwellings become more crowded.60
Views and findings on whether or not this alters womens position in the
household vary. The entry of daughters into the labour force, for example, has
a different impact on household access to resources in Java, Indonesia, from
Malaysia, which is more patriarchal and where daughters have less autonomy
and control over their earnings. 59 Blumberg concludes, from reviews of empirical
studies, that a range of changes are associated with increased participation by
women in income generating activities, including the allocation of an increased
proportion of household resources to domestic expenditure, improved levels
of nutrition, the investment of a larger proportion of resources in exchange
and sharing networks, and a greater say by women in household decision
making, including their own fertility. 61 Beneria, on the other hand, found that
in Mexico City the crisis had not changed previous inequalities in income pooling
and intra-household distribution of resources .6* Relative bargaining power may
also vary from culture to culture, and these variations can alter the balance
between co-operation and conflict in household decision making, and influence
418 Carole Rakodi
noted that achieving accurate targeting is often very difficult. Delivery, especially
co-ordination of food assistance with related services and avoiding corruption in
the allocation of benefits, may also be problematic, and can often be improved
by involving members of the community. However, such programmes are rarely
sufficient to compensate for the decline in real incomes which has been suffered
by the poor or to reach the whole needy population.68 Severance payments and
labour-intensive public works programmes, for example in Ghana and Bolivia,
were also evaluated. It was concluded that, again with accurate targeting, these
may provide temporary relief, but that they are ineffective as a means of
enhancing employment and income-generating potential in the longer term.
In addition, not all those made redundant may qualify for severance payments;
retraining schemes are often limited in size and do not impart skills which
give access to income earning opportunities; and labour intensive public works
programmes, although they may provide short-term income to the poor, often
exclude women and rarely impart much in the way of skills training.
General policy
A general policy framework, as well as legal and physical context which is
favourable to the activities that enable poor residents to cope is needed, including
the revision of unrealistic standards and elimination of discrimination against
informal economic activities.
Of crucial significance is access to wage employment in the formal sector
and therefore the economic policy context. Wages paid in this sector generate
demand not just for its own products, but also for informal-sector goods and
services. In the NICs increased formal-sector activity is creating large numbers
of waged, if poorly paid and insecure jobs. The case of Jamaica shows, however,
that such an outcome may be insufficient to improve welfare. In addition, it
seems likely in many countries that formal-sector employment will not start to
increase again after the losses which typically accompany the first few years of
adjustment, especially if government support is not forthcoming. In Zimbabwe,
for example, Stoneman argues convincingly that rapid formal-sector job creation
is unlikely to occur in a future open economy without government intervention.76
In Kampala, Bigsten and Kayizzi-Mugerwa consider that . . . the residue
sector has become a source of livelihood and public sector employment a
means to a successful business rather than a significant source of income for
many households. However, they view a slimmed down but relatively well paid
formal sector as a crucial economic aim, as does Chilowa in Malawi.77 Rodgers
agrees that the design of macro-economic policy has an immediate effect on
poverty, in particular through increased open unemployment and real wage
decreases. The implications of this include the need for direct promotion of
employment through public works and other means. He recognises the limits
to the ability of the informal sector to absorb increasing numbers and argues
the need for policy to widen access to activities of greater potential, although
he recognises the difficulty of doing so when such access is often controlled by
larger scale producers, or particular ethnic or family groups.78
Although laws which entitle residents to services and other rights are often
not enforced, because they threaten vested interests, they can have a role in
safeguarding entitlements to safe workplaces and living environments, social
WJ 1eH-c
422 Carole Rakodi
CONCLUSION
NOTES
1. I. Seralgeldin, Poverty, Adjustment and Growth in Africa (World Bank, Washington, DC, 1989);
H. Ribe, S. Carvalho, R. Liebenthal, P. Nicholas and E. Zuckerman, How Adjusrmenr Programmes
can Help rhe Poor: the World Banks Experience, DP 71 (World Bank, Waihington, Dtf, 1990);
E. Jesperson, External Shocks, Adiustment Policies and Economic and Social Performance. in
G.A. -&rnia, R. van der Hoeven -and T. Mkandawire (eds), Africas Recovery in rhe 19&s:
from Stagnation and Adjusrmenr to Human Development (St. Martins Press, New York, NY,
1992), pp. P-90; World Bank, Urban Policy and Economic Development: an Agenda for rhe 1990s
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 1992); C.O.N. Moser, A.J. Herbert and R.E. Makonnen, Urban
Poverty Lines or Household Strategies? 423
Poverty in the Context of Structural Adjustment: Recent Evidence and Policy Responses, TWU DP 4,
(World Bank, Urban Development Division, Washington, DC, 1993); A. Gilbert, Third World
Cities: Poverty, Employment, Gender Roles and the Environment during a time of Restructuring,
Urban Studies 31, 415 (1994) pp. 605-633.
2. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the International Seminar on Gender, Urbanisation
and Environment, organised-by Research Committee 43 on Housing and the Built Environment of
the International Sociological Association in Nairobi, 13-16 June 1994, in conjunction with Mazingira
Institute and the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements. I am grateful for Philip Amis
comments and help in abbreviating the original for publication.
3. See Moser et al. (1993), note 1, pp. 9-11 for a review of other ways of measuring urban poverty. A
PL can be supplemented by an estimate of the value of possessions grouped into perhaps six classes
and even combined into a composite index with income group, as has been done, for example, for
Mopti in Mali, see E.J.A. Harts-Broekhuis and A.A. de Jong, Subsistence and Survival in the Sahel
(Universiteit Utrecht, Faculteit Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen, Utrecht).
4. S. Guhan and B. Harriss, Introduction, in B. Harriss, S. Guhan and R.H. Cassen (eds), Poverty
in India: Research and Policy (Oxford University Press, Bombay, 1992) pp. l-24.
5. International Labour Office, Rural Poverty: Trends and Explanations, in Poverty and Landlessness
in Asia (ILO, Geneva, 1977), pp. 7-37.
6. A. Sen, Levels of Poverty: Policy and Change, WP 401, (World Bank, Washington, DC, 1980); see
also P. Cutler, The Measurement of Poverty: a Review of Attempts to Quantify the Poor, with
Special Reference to India, World Development 12, 11112pp. 1119-1130, and J. Ko, Studying Urban
Poverty in Sarawak: some Methodological Issues and Problems, in M.Y.Hj. Johari (ed.), Urban
Poverty in Malaysia (Institute for Development Studies (Sabah), Kota Kinabalu, 1991), pp. 59-93
on urban poverty in Sarawak.
7. SD. Tendulkar, Economic Growth and Poverty, in Harriss et al. (eds), (1992), see note 4,
pp. 27-57 (p. 32).
8. R. Mohan and P. Thottan, The Regional Spread of Urbanization, Industrialization and Urban
Poverty, in Harriss et al. (eds), (1992) see note 4, pp. 76-141.
9. B.S. Minhas, S.M. Kansal and L.R. Jain, The Incidence of Urban Poverty in States (1970-l to
1983), in Harriss et al. (eds), (1992), see note 4, pp. 142-170.
10. D. Mehta, Community-based Programme of Urban Poverty Alleviation in India, Paper to the
Regional Workshop on Community-based Programmes for Urban Poverty Alleviation, Kuala Lumpur,
1994.
11. Johari (ed.), (1991), see note 6. It is, however, interesting that in a survey of Malay Reserve Areas
in Kuala Lumpur, respondents average estimate of what the minimum household income should
be to live above subsistence was close to the updated official poverty line, allowing for the higher
urban cost of living, 0. Rani and A.M. Salleh, Malays in the Reserve Areas of Kuala Lumpur:
How Poor are They?, in Johari (ed.), (1991) see note 6, pp. 111-150.
12. Per Capita GNP x 0.35 x 1.25 x average household size; East Africa Projects Department, Water
Supply and Development Division, World Bank, Zimbabwe Urban Sector Review (World Bank,
Nairobi, 1985).
13. R. Mohan, M.V. Wagner and J. Garcia, Measuring Urban Malnutrition and Poverty, WP 447,
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 1981); J.R. Follain and E. Jimenez, World Bank Water Supply and
Urban Development Department The Demand for Housing Characteristics in Developing Countries
DP WUDD 43, (World Bank, Washington, DC, 1983).
14. E.J.A. Harts-Broekhuis and A.A. de Jong, W. Chilowa, Food Insecurity and Coping Strategies
Among the Low Income Urban Households in Malawi, R1991:4, (Chr Michelsen Institute, Bergen,
1991).
15. R.P. Alonzo, Trends in Poverty and Labour Market Outcomes in the Metro Manila Area, in
G. Rodgers (ed.), Urban Poverty and the Labour Market: Access to Jobs and Incomes in Asian and
Latin American Cities (International Labour Office, Geneva, 1989), pp. 173-200.
16. M. Lipton, Labor and Poverty, WP 616 (World Bank, Washington, DC, 1983).
17. M. Pollack, Poverty and the Labour Market in Costa Rica, in Rodgers (ed.), (1989), see note 15,
pp. 65-80 (p. 70).
18. S.L. Barraclough, An End to Hunger: the Social Origins of Food Strategies (ZedAJNRISD, London,
1991).
19. B.I. Logan, Overpopulation and Poverty in Africa: Rethinking the Traditional Relationship, TESG
82, 1 (1991) pp. 40-57.
20. Barraclough (1991), see note 18; A. Duncan and J. Howell, Assessing the Impact of Structural
Adjustment, in A. Duncan and J. Howell (eds) Structural Adjustment and the African Farmer (James
CurreylOverseas Development Institute, London, 1992) pp. 1-13.
21. Harts-Broekhuis (1993) see note 3; see also V. Jamal and J. Weeks, Africa Misunderstood or
Whatever Happened to the Rural-Urban Gap? (Macmillan, Basingstoke, 1993). Thirty per cent of
urban wage earners in Kenya had incomes below the food poverty line in 1990 and half below the
full PL, compared to 7% below the food PL in 1973.
22. L. Beneria, The Mexican Debt Crisis: Restructuring the Economy and the Household, in L. Beneria
and S. Feldman (eds), Unequal Burden: Economic Crises, Persistent Poverty and Womens Work
(Westview, Boulder, CO, 1992) pp. 83-104; Guhan and Harriss (1992), see note 4; see also
B. Agarwal, Rural Women, Poverty and Natural Resources: Sustenance, Sustainability and Struggle
for Change, in Harriss et al. (eds), (1992), see note 4, pp. 390-432.
23. P. Musgrove, Determinants of Urban Household Consumption in Latin America: a Summary of
Evidence from the ECIEL Surveys, Economic Development and Cultural Change 26, 2 (1978)
424 Carole Rakodi
pp. 441-t65; P. Musgrove, Household Size and Composition, Employment and Poverty in Urban
Latin America, Economic Development and Cultural Change 28,2 (1980), pp. 249-260.
24. See also G. Rodgers, Introduction: Trends in Urban Poverty and Labour Market Access, in
Rodgers (ed.), (1989) see note 17, pp. l-34; P. Bardhan, Poverty and Employment Characteristics
of Urban Households in West Bengal, India: An Analysis of the Results of the National Sample
Survey, 1977-78, in Rodgers (ed.), (1989), see note 17, pp. 201-216; J. Harriss, Urban Poverty
and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Cities 6, 3 (1989), pp. 186-194; N. Yahaya, A Profile of the
Urban Poor in Malaysia, Journal of Contemporary Asia 21, 2 (1991), pp. 212-221; H-D. Evers,
Urban Poverty and Labour Supply Strategies in Jakarta, in Rodgers (ed.), (1989) see note 17,
pp. 145-172; J. Jatoba Urban Poverty, Labour Markets and Regional Differentiation in Brazil, in
Rodgers (ed.), (1989), see note 17, pp. 35-64.
25. A. Bigsten and S. Kayizzi-Mugerwa, Adaption and Distress in the Urban Economy: a Study of
Kampala Households, World Development 20, 10 (1992) pp. 1423-1441; see also A.M. Tripp, The
Impact of Crisis and Economic Reform on Women in Urban Tanzania, in Beneria and Feldman
(eds), (1992) see note 22, pp. 159-180.
26. Bigsten and Jay&i-Mugerwa (1992) see note 25, appear to have no reservations about their data on
earnings from self employment, although Chilowa (1991), see note 14, recognises the difficulties.
27. Harriss (1989) see note 24. A study in Java in 1979 asked respondent households to define minimum
basic needs, which were then costed and adjusted for household size and structure, see Evers (1989)
see note 24.
28. R. Chambers, Poverty in India: Concepts, Research and Reality, in Harriss et al. (eds), (1992)
see note 4, pp. 301-332.
29. R. Chambers, Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory, DP 311 (Institute of Development
Studies, Brighton, 1992).
30. J. Iliffe, The African Poor: a History (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987).
31. D. Woodward, Debt, Adjustment and Poverty in Developing Countries, Vol. I: National and
International Dimensions of Debt and Adjustment in Developing Countries (Pinter, London, 1992).
32. Gilbert, (1994) see note 1, p. 607; see also Jamal and Weeks (1993) note 21.
33. Moser et al. (1993), see note 1.
34. R. Chambers, Vulnerability, Coping and Policy, IDS Bulletin 20, 2 (1989) pp. l-7.
35. R. Chambers (1989), see note 34; R. Chambers, Rural Development: Putting the Last First (Longman,
Harlow , 1983).
36. R.P. Alonzo, Trends in Poverty and Labour Market Outcomes in the Metro-Manila Area, in
G. Rodgers (ed.), (1989) see note 17, pp. 173-200.
37. J. Pryer, When Breadwinners Fall III: Preliminary Findings from a Case Study in Bangladesh, IDS
Bulletin 29, 2 (1989) pp. 49-57; B. Harriss, Rural Poverty in India - microlevel evidence, in
Harriss et al. (eds), (1992), see note 4, pp. 333-389.
38. Chambers (1992) see note 40; see also A. Duncan and J. Howell, Assessing the Impact of Structural
Adjustment, in Duncan and Howell (eds.), (1992), see note 20, pp. 1-13. Evers (1989), see note 24,
argues that insecurity of access to income and resources is as crucial a defining characteristic of urban
poverty as low incomes.
39. C.O.N. Moser, Urban Social Policy and Poverty Reduction, TWURD WP 10, (World Bank,
Washington, DC, 1993); Moser et al. (1993) see note 1.
40. Chambers, (1992), see note 29. Surprisingly, although space use and seasonal diagramming are
mentioned by Chambers, time-use data is not; see L.S. Grossman, Collecting Time-use Data in
Third World Rural Communities, Professional Geographer 34, 4 (1984) pp. 444-454.
41. Chambers (1989) see note 34; R. Chambers and G. Conway, Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical
Concepts for the 2Ist Century, DP 296 (Institute for Development Studies, Brighton, 1992).
42. C.A. Grown and J. Sebstad, Introduction: Toward a Wider Perspective on Womens Employment,
World Development 17, 7 (1989), pp. 937-952.
43. J. Brannen and G. Wilson, Introduction, in J. Brannen and G. Wilson (eds), Give and Take in
Families: Studies in Resource Distribution (Allen and Unwin, London, 1987) pp. 1-17; K. Young,
Household Resource Management, in L. Ostergaard (ed.), Gender and Development: a Practical
Guide (Belhaven, London, 1992) pp. 135-164; see also R.R. Wilk, Decision Making and Resource
Flows Within the Household: Beyond the Black Box, in R.R. Wilk (ed.), The Household Economy:
Reconsidering the Domestic Mode of Production (Westview, Boulder, CO, 1989), pp. 23-52.
44. C. Rakodi, Womens Work or Household Strategies?, Environment and Urbanisation 3, 2 (1991)
pp. 39-45.
45. 0. Stark, The Migration of Labour (Basil Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, 1991); S. Feldman, Crises,
Poverty and Gender Inequality: Current Themes and Issues, in Beneria and Feldman (eds), (1992),
see note 22, pp. l-25; B. Holcomb and T.Y. Rothenberg, Womens Work and the Urban Household
Economy in Developing Countries, in M. Turshen and B. Holcomb (eds), Womens Lives and Public
Policy: the International Experience (Greenwood, Westport, CT, 1993), pp. 51-68. In Costa Rica,
for example, seasonal male out-migration from towns occurs because of the lack of emolovment
opportunities, see S. Chant, Women and Poverty in Urban Latin America: Mexican and -Costa
Rican Exneriences. in F. Meer (ed.). Urban Povertv in the 1990s: the Resnonses of Urban
Women (UNESCO and International Social Science Council, Paris, 1994) pp. 87-i15 and S. Chant,
Gender, Migration and Urban Development in Costa Rica: the Case of Guanacaste, Geoforum
22, 3, pp. 237-253.
46. C. Rakodi, Household Strategies and the Urban Poor: Coping with Structural Adjustment in Gweru,
Zimbabwe Papers in Planning Research 149, (University of Wales, Department of City and Regional
Planning, Cardiff, 1994). F. Meer, Women and Poverty in the 1990s: the Responses of Urban Women
in South Africa, in Meer (ed.), (1994), see note 45, pp. 13-38.
Poverty Lines or Household Strategies? 425
H. Afshar (ed.), Women, Development and Survival in the Third World (Longman, London, 1991),
pp. 239-256.
74. Mehta (1994), see note 10.
75. A. Cotton and R. Franceys, Services for Shelter: Infrastructure for Urban Low-income Housing
(Liverpool University Press, Liverpool, 1991); A. Hasan, A Case Study of the Urban Basic Services
Programme in Sukkur, Sindh Province, Pakistan, paper presented to the Regional Workshop on
Community-based Programmes for Urban Poverty Alleviation, Kuala Lumpur, 1994.
76. C. Stoneman, The World Bank: some Lessons for South Africa, Review of African Political
Economy No. 58 (1993), pp. 87-98.
77. Bigsten and Kay&i-Mugerwa (1992), see note 25; Chilowa (1991), see note 26.
78. Rodgers (1989), see note 24; see also Gilbert (1994) note 1; and Jamal and Weeks (1993) see note
21.
79. See, for example, N. Othman and Chuah Mei Lin, Law, Justice and the Poor, in Johari (ed.),
(1991), see note 6, pp. 3-50; V. Dhagamwar, The Disadvantaged and the Law, in Harriss et al.
(eds), (1992), see note 4, pp. 433-448; D. Elson, Public Action, Poverty and Development: a Gender
Aware Analysis, University of Manchester, Department of Economics, n.d. (mimeo); Jatoba (1989),
see note 24.