a mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of ethiopia keetie roelen laura camfield isci...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia
Keetie RoelenLaura Camfield
ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011
![Page 2: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Combining debates on..
• Child poverty
• Longitudinal poverty and poverty dynamics
• Mixed method research
to analyze the situation of children and their households in Ethiopia over time
![Page 3: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
This study
QUAL QUAN QUAL
developing classification analysistaxonomy children and households
![Page 4: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Data
• Young Lives, Ethiopia (rural sites only)• 3 rounds of quan data: 2002, 2006, 2009• Qual data from 8 sites in 2008, 2009
![Page 5: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
This study
QUAL QUAN
developing classification
taxonomy children and households
>> Krishna’s Stages of Progress method
![Page 6: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Stages of Progress method
Source: Krishna, 2005
![Page 7: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Methodological challenges
YL data:
• Consistency across rounds of quantitative data collection• Qualitative information not specific to stages of progress
More fundamentally:
• Application of the qualitative Stages of Progress method to quantitative data
• Analysis of child poverty from a longitudinal perspective
![Page 8: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Indicator deprivation rates
Category Indicator R1 R2 R3Ultra-poor malnourishment 7.4 0.3 0.5
not enrolled in school na 8.1 14.9no animals 18.4 12.8 10no land used for agriculture 9.4 10.1 8.4
unreliable credit 6.5 10.6 7.2Poor insufficient food 24.7 5.1 6
child worked for money 11.4 8.2 5.8 no draught animals/oxen 53.4 31.5 24.7
Nearly no membership of organisations 25.2 7.4 6.8
poor no iron roof 77.5 87.2 47.9 no land irrigated 93 90.2 86.8
![Page 9: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Child poverty rates
category R1 R2 R3
ultra-poor 7 8.6 8.4
poor 49.8 24 17.2
nearly poor 35.6 55.5 41.8
not poor 7.7 12 32.6
![Page 10: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Child poverty dynamics
R2 poverty status
R1 poverty status ultra-poor poor nearpoor non-poor Total
ultra-poor 1.81 2.54 1.99 0.36 6.7
poor 5.62 17.93 23.19 3.08 49.82
nearpoor 0.91 2.9 26.81 5.62 36.23
non-poor 0 0.54 3.44 3.26 7.25
Total 8.33 23.91 55.43 12.32 100
![Page 11: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Child poverty dynamics
R3 poverty status
R2 poverty status ultra-poor poor nearpoor non-poor Total
ultra-poor 3.08 3.08 1.45 0.72 8.33poor 1.09 11.05 7.25 4.53 23.91nearpoor 0.91 5.43 29.53 19.57 55.43non-poor 0.36 0.18 3.62 8.15 12.32Total 5.43 19.75 41.85 32.97 100
![Page 12: A mixed-method taxonomy of child poverty – the case of Ethiopia Keetie Roelen Laura Camfield ISCI Conference, 28 July 2011](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56649efa5503460f94c0bbc2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Conclusion
• Children’s lives in rural Ethiopia have improved from 2002 to 2009
• Persistent rates of ultra-poverty• Important role for livestock
• How to use qualitative methods in a mixed-method setting?• How to deal with the fluidity of child poverty over time?