From 1 - 10 / 10
  • Mohammad Abdul Malek, Md. Amzad Hossain, Ratnajit Saha and Franz W. Gatzweiler. 2013. Mapping marginality hotspots and agricultural potentials in Bangladesh. Data Sources for creating the map have been: - Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2010 data. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Finance, People's Republic of Bangladesh - Monitoring the situation of children and women: Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2009. Technical report. Available at: http://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/MICS-PP-09v10.pdf - District series of Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics 2010, Dhaka, Bureau of Statistics. Statistics Division, Ministry of Planning, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh

  • Categories      

    This marginality hotspot map of Ethiopia uses the lowest quartile as thresholds for the dimensions of marginality. Again, this map shows how many dimension of marginality - as defined by Gatzweiler et al. (2011) - overlap.

  • Categories      

    The potential of different business approaches to reduce poverty and marginality depends on the characteristics of different regions and people living in these regions. Here, (a) population density, (b) accessibility, e.g. in terms of mobile phone, internet and road connections, as well as (c) the predominant form of livelihood and/or farming systems may be important factors determining market sizes and transaction costs and thus incentives to invest in these markets. This map is an overlay of these different indicators. Greenish colors show irrigated or perennial areas, brownish colors pastoralist, agro-pastoralist and arid areas and reddish colors indicate areas dominated by different other farming patterns. The lighter the color the lower the population and road density. For the classification of population and connectivity values being ‘high’ or ‘low’ the national mean value is used as threshold. Data: Population density: CIESIN (2011) Connectivity: CSA et al. (2008) Farming systems: HarvestChoice (2001)

  • Categories  

    This map is included in a global study on mapping marginality focusing on Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. The Dimensions of Marginality are based on different data sources representing different spheres of life. The dataset used for this approach (Marginality Hotspots) can also be found here: (link to datasett???). Five different dimenstion of marginality were defined and based on their thresholds overlayed to identify those areas where more than only 1 or 2 dimensions occur but several once which make these areas more marginal. With regard to the project MARGIP especially those people are at risk who are marginalized and poor and are thereby lacking possibilities due to missing access to capital and resources but also by being remote. The number of poor are the once we want to make visible. Therefore data by HarvestChoice on Poverty Mass representing the number of people living in poverty were overlayed with dimensions of marginality to give an impression on how many people are living in these spots and are thereby being poor and marginal. See also: http://www.zef.de/fileadmin/webfiles/downloads/zef_wp/wp88.pdf .

  • Categories      

    Overlay of medium, high and very high agricultural potential and yield gaps for Bangladesh. Indicators: Suitability of land area for rainfed crops: FGGD map 6.60, classes: medium to very high Yield Gaps: FAO/IIASA - GAEZ < 0.5 The here presented simple analysis should give insights in potential suitable areas for expecting high yields. Yield gap information for Bangladesh further showed were gaps for production occur. By resampling the statistical data into a raster dataset an overlap with suitability information based on sateliite imagery was possible. The overlay was processed in ArcGIS classifying those areas where yield gaps occur with suitability areas as defined by the dataset cited above. Yield gaps can be found in the southern part of Bangladesh. More intersting are the dark green areas where according to satellite information high potential areas are located but not as many yields are produced. Here, more detailed analysis might be useful.

  • Given that marginality is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, we included a broad set of variables covering ecological, social, and economic dimensions of human well-being in the focus regions. These “marginality dimensions” were based on the “spheres of life” defined in Gatzweiler et al. (2011, 13), including: “Economy”; “Quality of life”; “Landscape design and infrastructure”; “Ecosystems, natural resources, and climate”; “Public domain and institutions”; and “Demography.” For the purpose of this mapping exercise, single indicators were used to represent each of the spheres. Here the spheres “Landscape design, land use, and location” and “Infrastructure” are both captured by the single indicator “accessibility”, and the sphere “Behavior and quality of life” is represented by stunting. For each dimension a cut-off point along a range of indicator values was used to define the threshold below which an area was considered to be marginal. Indicator layers for each of the different dimensions of marginality were overlaid to find the areas where multiple layers of marginality overlap. We defined a ‘marginality hotspot’ as an area in which at least three dimensions of marginality overlapped. The maps were based on national and sub-national data published by the World Bank, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Harvest Choice, and others. Method and results are described in detail in the following publication: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-7061-4_5/fulltext.html

  • Categories  

    Overlaying the number of marginality dimensions with percentage of people living below 1.25$/day. This map is included in a global study on mapping marginality focusing on Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. The Dimensions of Marginality are based on different data sources representing different spheres of life. The poverty dataset used in this study is based on calculations by Harvest Choice. The underlying Marginality map is based on the approach on Marginality Mapping (http://www.zef.de/fileadmin/webfiles/downloads/zef_wp/wp88.pdf). The respective map can be found here: https://daten.zef.de/#/metadata/ae4ae68c-cea3-44e7-8199-1c2ae04abb88

  • Categories    

    Overlapping Marginality Dimensions in Bangladesh. Methodology see also: Graw, V. and C. Ladenburger. 2012. Mapping Marginality Hotspots - Geographical Targeting for Poverty Reduction. (ZEF Working Papers 88). Indicators: Per capita income (HIES 2010, cut-off-point: least 3rd quantile) Under-five child mortality: DHS Survey 2008 (cut-off-point: least 3rd quantile) Accessibility: Nelson 2008; cut-off-point: more than 3 hours distance) Gender: Difference of men and women in eduction; secondary school complete and higher: DHS Survey 2008 (cut-off-point: least 3rd quantile) An overlay was created with the above mentioned indicators based on the respective thresholds. Those areas where most indicators - with low performance - overlap were ranked as those areas experiencing highest marginality.

  • The mapping of the overlap between the marginality hotspots and agricultural potentials shows that there are eight marginal sub-districts in seven districts with highest unused agricultural potentials. These are Rajibpur (Kurigram), Dowarabazar (Sunamgonj), Porsha (Naogaon), Damurhuda (Chuadanga), Hizla (Barisal), Mehendigonj (Barisal), Bauphal (Patuakhali) and Bhandaria (Pirojpur). These areas are mostly in unfavorable agro-ecological Zones (AEZs). An AEZ in Bangladesh is defined broadly. While most of the areas within an unfavorable AEZ are not suitable for crop agriculture, there may still be some areas which are suitable for agriculture. This will become clear if we compare the map of suitability mapping and the map of unfavorable AEZ which suggests that there are some areas within the unfavorable AEZ which are suitable for agriculture (both agro-climatically and agro-edaphically). Among those marginal areas, Patuakhali, Pirojpur and Barisal are in the coastal region, Kurigram is in the Northern Char region, Sunamgong in the Haor region and Naogaon is in the drought prone areas. Only Chuadanga, among these seven districts, is not in agro-ecologically vulnerable region (Appendix B) but in food in-secured region. Another point to note is that four out of these eight sub-districts are adjacent to the Indian border, whereas the other four sub-districts are located in the coastal region. The concentration of marginality and agricultural potentials overlap in the aforementioned areas may be due to their limited connectivity with the main growth centers and ecological vulnerability. These areas are bypassed due to the general perception of AEZs as uniform entities and therefore receive less attention.

  • Categories  

    The present research analyzes the role that the private sector can play in reducing poverty and marginality in Ethiopia by providing improved agricultural inputs to marginalized poor farmers. Two important insights motivate the present research: one is the rise of various innovative business approaches in the last years that aim at reducing poverty or contributing to the solution to other societal problems. These innovative business approaches add social returns to a firm’s bottom line and thus provide additional reasons for companies to invest in agricultural markets in poor countries like Ethiopia apart from pure profit seeking. The other insight motivating this research is that the very poorest have long not benefitted from poverty reduction efforts. In that context, marginality has been identified as a root cause of poverty and its persistence. Marginality helps to explain why certain groups are left behind while other parts of a society prosper. Thus, the concept of marginality is presented and applied to the context of Ethiopia. Using Geographic Information System (GIS) software, a marginality map of Ethiopia is created by overlaying seven indicators capturing different aspects of marginality. Results show that marginality is a severe and widespread problem in Ethiopia with more than 40 million people being severely marginalized. Marginality hotspots are found in Amhara and SNNP. Interestingly, marginality hotspots are not correlated with agro-ecological zones and are ethnically more homogeneous than non-hotspot areas. Furthermore, areas posing specific business opportunities and challenges are identified based on information on population density, quality of road and mobile phone connection and farming systems. This area classification reveals that companies catering to the marginalized poor need to go the ‘last mile’ within areas exhibiting special business challenges and opportunities rather than investing in separated areas. After having identified and located the marginalized poor in Ethiopia, survey data that is representative for the most marginalized in the country is analyzed concerning purchasing behavior and needs expressed by the marginalized poor. Using descriptive statistics it can be shown that the amount of cash the marginalized poor have at hand varies considerably across regions but not very much within regions. The marginalized poor have in common that they spend a high percentage of their expenditures on food (around 70%), followed by commodities such as kerosene and clothes. The three most bought products are salt, kerosene and soap. This translates into considerable market sizes of these products. The survey also shows that the marginalized poor have diversified needs. While most of them name higher-order food products like dairy products or meat as most urgent unsatisfied needs, agricultural items, including livestock, as well as housing and commodities like clothing are also mentioned frequently. That people mention agricultural inputs as one of their most urgent unsatisfied needs can be explained by the fact that productivity of smallholder farmers is very low in Ethiopia and improved agricultural inputs are in short supply. Thus, an institutional analysis of the seed, fertilizer and agro-chemical markets is carried out to understand the frictions on these markets and to assess possibilities for the private sector to contribute to the reduction of poverty and marginality through adequate investments. Analyzing more than 60 expert interviews carried out in Ethiopia, it turns out that the market for seeds of major crops is highly regulated by the government, with institutions favoring public companies. Based on a de facto monopoly on breeder seed, Ethiopian seed companies depend on the government for most of their operations, including price setting. One implication of this system is that all seed is distributed via one channel, which leads to a lack of traceability of the seed and, as a result, lacking accountability for seed producers. Moreover, it causes a lack of agro-dealers as seed distribution is exclusively carried out by cooperatives and cooperative unions on behalf of the government. Thus, cooperatives and Development Agents spend much of their time on demand assessments and seed distribution although they actually have other tasks. The only exceptions from the strict government control are international seed companies that produce their own varieties. Institutions favoring public organizations have led to a situation, in which fertilizer importation and distribution is completely under government control, with no private companies being active on this market. The markets for fruit and vegetable seeds and agro-chemicals, however, are less regulated. A multitude of small private firms engages in import and distribution. Nevertheless, there is a shortage also for these products that is mainly caused by a lack of access to finance. Due to the absence of an agro-dealer network in the country, the availability of fruit and vegetable seeds and agro-chemicals is very limited outside urban centers as small traders do not have the capacity to invest in marketing infrastructure. To motivate private companies to invest in agricultural markets and to cater to the marginalized poor, several institutional changes are necessary. For seed companies, access to breeder seed, the assignment of more land and the availability of plant breeders are crucial elements. Especially access to breeder seed implies the ability for companies to determine full-fledged firm strategies, including price determination and marketing strategies. For fertilizer companies, a fair tendering process and the abolishment of import quantity prescriptions are of major importance. Such well-designed market liberalization efforts are likely to result in the creation of an agro-dealer network as a positive externality that would also benefit traders of fruit and vegetable seeds and agro-chemicals. For all companies, access to finance at reasonable cost, especially with lower collateral requirements, is essential to expand operations. While companies can be expected to push for changes, the current system and the self-conception of the Ethiopian government require the government to be in the lead in the efforts for changes. Successful role models, support by other stakeholders and successes with investment incentive schemes in other sectors in Ethiopia could encourage the government to gradually liberalize the market. If institutional changes are enacted to partly liberalize the market, it needs to be ensured that the marginalized poor, who currently benefit from the government’s equity approach, are included in the value chains even if companies do not operate with innovative business approaches. However, as the poor constitute a very large share of the market, Ethiopia may even be a leading example for companies in how to apply business models catering to the poor as companies are forced to adjust to this target group if they want to develop the largest part of the market.