While political dynamics differ greatly from one place to another, rural areas continue to have legitimate grievances. Poverty in rural areas is both more prevalent and more acute than in urban areas - about 80 per cent of the world's extremely poor people live in rural areas.
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 31, Heft 8, S. 1367-1384
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 31, Heft 6, S. 997-1013
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 31, Heft 6, S. 997-1013
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 31, Heft 9, S. 1495-1510
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 31, Heft 9, S. 1495-1510
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 31, Heft 8, S. 1367-1384
Climate variability is a major source of risk to smallholder farmers and pastoralists, particularly in dryland regions. A growing body of evidence links climate-related risk to the extent and the persistence of rural poverty in these environments. Stochastic shocks erode smallholder farmers' long-term livelihood potential through loss of productive assets. The resulting uncertainty impedes progress out of poverty by acting as a disincentive to investment in agriculture – by farmers, rural financial services, value chain institutions and governments. We assess evidence published in the last ten years that a set of production technologies and institutional options for managing risk can stabilize production and incomes, protect assets in the face of shocks, enhance uptake of improved technologies and practices, improve farmer welfare, and contribute to poverty reduction in risk-prone smallholder agricultural systems. Production technologies and practices such as stress-adapted crop germplasm, conservation agriculture, and diversified production systems stabilize agricultural production and incomes and, hence, reduce the adverse impacts of climate-related risk under some circumstances. Institutional interventions such as index-based insurance, adaptive safety nets and climate services play a complementary role in enabling farmers to manage risk, overcome risk-related barriers to adoption of improved technologies and practices, and protect their assets against the impacts of extreme climatic events. While some research documents improvements in household welfare indicators, there is limited evidence that the risk-reduction benefits of the interventions reviewed have benefited significant numbers of chronically poor farmers. We discuss the roles that climate-risk management interventions can play in efforts to reduce rural poverty, and the need for further research on identifying and targeting environments and farming populations where improved climate risk management could accelerate efforts to reduce rural poverty.
Climate variability is a major source of risk to smallholder farmers and pastoralists, particularly in dryland regions. A growing body of evidence links climate-related risk to the extent and the persistence of rural poverty in these environments. Stochastic shocks erode smallholder farmers' long-term livelihood potential through loss of productive assets. The resulting uncertainty impedes progress out of poverty by acting as a disincentive to investment in agriculture – by farmers, rural financial services, value chain institutions and governments. We assess evidence published in the last ten years that a set of production technologies and institutional options for managing risk can stabilize production and incomes, protect assets in the face of shocks, enhance uptake of improved technologies and practices, improve farmer welfare, and contribute to poverty reduction in risk-prone smallholder agricultural systems. Production technologies and practices such as stress-adapted crop germplasm, conservation agriculture, and diversified production systems stabilize agricultural production and incomes and, hence, reduce the adverse impacts of climate-related risk under some circumstances. Institutional interventions such as index-based insurance and social protection through adaptive safety nets play a complementary role in enabling farmers to manage risk, overcome risk-related barriers to adoption of improved technologies and practices, and protect their assets against the impacts of extreme climatic events. While some research documents improvements in household welfare indicators, there is limited evidence that the risk-reduction benefits of the interventions reviewed have enabled significant numbers of very poor farmers to escape poverty. We discuss the roles that climate-risk management interventions can play in efforts to reduce rural poverty, and the need for further research on identifying and targeting environments and farming populations where improved climate risk management could accelerate efforts to reduce rural poverty.
This paper discusses the challenges of rural poverty reduction in Nigeria with Nasarawa State as a focus. It gives a clarification of "rural" and "poverty" as concepts. The paper looks at various poverty reduction strategies by successive governments in Nigeria and agreed that such strategies did not yield the desired results as more than half of the country's population wallows in poverty. Nasarawa State being one of the poorest States in the country with a poverty rate of 66% is faced with challenges militating against rural poverty reduction efforts. Some of these challenges are poor educational system, ethno-communal conflicts, herder-farmer conflicts, corruption as well as unemployment. The paper concludes that for poverty to be effectively tackled in Nigeria there should be effective and workable apparatuses put in place to fight corruption, genuine selection of purposeful leadership to provide good governance that would bring about massive transformation of infrastructural development to grow the economy to generate employment as well as ensuring that there is peace where people can co-exist harmoniously pursuing their economic activities.