Poverty in Bangladesh: A Profile

Though different measurement techniques provide somewhat different data about the level and incidence of poverty, the general picture of poverty in Bangladesh is indeed critical (Khan, A.R 1990; Ravalli on, 1990; BIDS, 1993). In an assessment of statistics on poverty based on human development indicators, UN Human Development Report points out that 86% of the people of Bangladesh live below the poverty line (UNDP, 1993).Measurement of poverty in most studies have been based on the head-count ratio. This measure takes into consideration the concept of minimum consumption bundle2. The following table provides a summary of poverty trend of the last two decades. Though there has been a little long-term improvement in poverty situation, depending on the economic and environmental conditions, large fluctuations prevailed in the incidence of Poverty over time.

Most of the controversies concerning poverty and poverty related policy originate from difference in, what is perceived to be the major determinants and causes of poverty. What causes poverty in a typical third world country like Bangladesh? In fact there is no single cause of poverty; the plight of some poor could be due to several factors, each contributing to some degree of observed poverty. It is therefore very important to identify the Extent of the situation to which each of these factors contributes to observed poverty. Failure to isolate the real Causes of poverty may result in institutional and policy interventions that do not alleviate poverty rather could actually aggravate the cause to increase poverty. A comprehensive study undertaken by Hossain and Sen (1992) Attempted to identify the determinant of incomes of poor and non-poor households in rural Bangladesh. Based on The regression models, Sen and Hossain noted that:

1. The size of land-owned by the household is the most important determinant of rural income, but the

Elasticity of rural income is low in regard to land-ownership.

2. The adoption of new technology contributes significantly to the increase of rural incomes.

3. The contribution of labor to household incomes is high. The contribution of a female worker

Is about 60 percent lower than that of an average male worker, implying that female workers

Are employed in lower productive activities and /or are paid lower than agricultural workers.

4. Higher education contributes significantly to the increase of rural incomes. However, the

Effect of higher education on income is greater for households engaged in non-farm activities

Than for farm households.

5. The adoption of new agricultural technology increase income for both groups of household,

But the effect is greater for the poor households than for the non-poor.

6. In poor households, the income of the female workers is 52 percent lower than the income of

The male workers. But the incomes of workers engaged in non-farm activities is 13 percent

Higher than that of the average agricultural worker.

Sen and Hossain therefore argued that an important part of poverty alleviation strategy should be to identify and

Emphasize elements of growth policy, which are likely to have the strongest and most immediate favorable

Impact on rural poverty. They also noted that the development of rural infrastructure would positively affect the

Level of rural poverty; in fact, its poverty alleviation effect would be even greater than the impact of new

Agricultural technology. More access to non-agricultural employment would extend the scope for income mobility

For land-poor households in rural Bangladesh.