|
Abstract
This paper presents interim findings from an ongoing
longitudinal study into poverty dynamics and life trajectories
in rural Bangladesh. The study integrates a quantitative
panel survey of 1787 core households with a sub-sample
of approximately 300 qualitative life history interviews
with the aim of exploring the dynamics of poverty and
the main drivers of change in people’s lives.
In this paper, we report on the lessons we have learned
in integrating the two qualitative and quantitative
approaches, present some interim findings based on the
data collected in two of the study sites (involving
907 households and 74 life history interviews), and
discuss initial implications for policy aimed at reducing
poverty and protecting the poorest. We draw particular
attention to the importance of shocks and other intermittent
events, and the associated ‘lumpy’ expenditure
patterns (involving the costs, inter alia, of medical
treatment, dowries and weddings, or court cases), which
have long-term impacts on people’s life trajectories.
Because of the periodic ‘one off’ nature
of these events, the serious impacts which such ‘lumpy’
expenditures have on poor people’s lives tend
to be missed in many household surveys. Crises associated
with the division of households and other family disputes
(which are often associated with land or dowries) are
also very important sources of decline, even for richer
households. As a consequence, many of the life trajectories
we observed resemble either upward or downward ‘saw
tooth’ patterns, rather than the smooth process
of accumulation or sharp declines that are hypothesised
by standard quantitative models. While it is sometimes
difficult to reconcile qualitative and quantitative
findings, we believe that a fully integrated and sequenced
approach to the study of poverty dynamics helps to compensate
for the blind spots of any single approach, and strengthens
the overall research process. The process of understanding
differences provides many opportunities for mutual learning,
together with cross checking and triangulation of findings,
and helps to create a deeper understanding of the opportunities
and challenges that poor people face as they struggle
to improve their lives.
|
