Suchergebnisse

Preliminary Materials /Noris Mudege -- 1 Knowledge, Resettlement And Farming /Noris Mudege -- 2 Investigating Knowledge /Noris Mudege -- 3 The Research Context /Noris Mudege -- 4 Farmers' Knowledge And Sustainable Innovation: Experiments And Observation /Noris Mudege -- 5 Magic, Witchcraft, Religion And Knowledge /Noris Mudege -- 6 Field Days: Knowledge Dissemination And Entertainment /Noris Mudege -- 7 Knowledge And Practice: Men, Women And Children /Noris Mudege -- 8 Conclusion /Noris Mudege -- References /Noris Mudege -- Index /Noris Mudege.

"This paper discusses how perceptions of personal security can impact on school enrolment and attendance. It mainly focuses on threats to physical harm, crime, community and domestic violence. These security fears can include insecurity that children suffer from as they go to school, maybe through the use of unsafe routes; insecurity that children feel at school; and the insecurity they suffer from in their homes. Although poverty is an indicator of insecurity, this paper does not focus solely on poverty as it is well covered elsewhere in the literature. The paper relies on qualitative data collected in Korogocho and Viwandani slum areas in Nairobi, Kenya between October and November 2004. The paper analyses data from individual interviews and focus group interviews and focuses on the narrative of slum dwellers on how insecurity impacts on educational attainment. The conclusion in this paper is that insecure neighbourhoods may have a negative impact on schooling. As a result policies that address insecurity in slum neighbourhoods can also improve school attendance and performance." (author's abstract)

This paper discusses how perceptions of personal security can impact on school enrolment and attendance. It mainly focuses on threats of physical harm, crime, and community and domestic violence. These security fears can include insecurity that children suffer from as they go to school, maybe through the use of unsafe routes; insecurity that children feel at school; and the insecurity they suffer from in their homes. Although poverty can be a source and/or an indicator of insecurity, this paper does not focus solely on poverty as it is well covered elsewhere in the literature. The paper relies on qualitative data collected in Korogocho and Viwandani slum areas in Nairobi, Kenya between October and November 2004. The paper analyses data from individual interviews and focus group interviews and focuses on the narrative of slum dwellers on how insecurity impacts on educational attainment. The conclusion in this paper is that insecure neighbourhoods may have a negative impact on schooling. As a result policies that address insecurity in slum neighbourhoods can also improve school attendance and performance. Adapted from the source document.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine household characteristics and schooling decisions in terms of enrollment and type of school in an urban setting in Nairobi.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses a cross‐sectional data set collected in 2005. The sample comprises 7,475 primary school‐aged children. A probit model was estimated to show what influences decisions at household level.FindingsAnalysis shows that different household and individual attributes motivate different decisions. A considerable proportion (40 per cent) of children from the poorest quintile attends non‐public schools compared to 34 per cent from the richest quintile. The findings reveal that better‐off households are more represented in the free primary education (FPE) programme. The predicted probability of a decision to attend a public school for a primary school‐age child increases as the household wealth increases.Practical implicationsThe paper concludes that poorer households are least attending and may be excluded from free public schools.Originality/valueThe paper demystifies the notion that introduction of FPE in developing countries is a pro‐poor policy.

This study is part of a larger effort to explore the impact of agricultural research on poverty reduction. It examines the diffusion and impact of hybrid maize in selected resettlement areas of rural Zimbabwe, paying particular attention to varieties made widely available from the mid-1990s onwards. While "Zimbabwe's Green Revolution" of the early 1980s was characterized by the widespread adoption of hybrid maize varieties and significant increases in yields, the subsequent diffusion of newer varieties occurred more slowly and had a more modest impact. Several factors account for this. Government now plays a much-reduced role and one that increasingly focuses on "better farmers." Private-sector institutions that have entered the maize sector operate mainly in areas of high agricultural potential. Consequently, "adoption" partly reflects "choice" but also the (sometimes) limited physical availability of varieties. A further factor is the nature of the technology being introduced. Newer varieties are bred to meet the evolving needs of commercial farmers, but these new needs -- most notably improved disease resistance -- are not shared by the farmers in our survey and are not associated with significantly higher yields where use of fertilizers is limited. A further consideration is that information is disseminated via multiple channels and in a fragmentary fashion in an environment where tolerance of dissent is limited, the behavior of neighbors is viewed suspiciously and some actors involved in dissemination (such as extension workers) are increasingly viewed with mistrust. The presumption that farmers "learn from each other" is less applicable in circumstances such as these. Our case studies indicate links between the production of maize in excess of subsistence needs, the accumulation of assets such as livestock and tools, payment of school fees, and the acquisition of inputs such as fertilizer and labor for the subsequent cropping season. This coincides with the views of farmers who see high-yielding varieties of maize as an influential factor in raising livelihood above the level of poverty that prevailed when they first moved into the area. However, new varieties appear to have increased incomes only marginally. When we control for farmer characteristics and the endogeneity of adoption, use of these new varieties increases crop incomes only by about 10 percent; a 10-percent increase in maize income is associated with an increase in livestock holdings ranging from 4 to 12 percent. However, these modest impacts result in an improved ability to deal with vulnerability. Hybrids do raise productivity in maize production. Higher income from maize, and from other crops, leads to investment in livestock. And livestock holdings are an important means through which child health is protected when drought occurs. All such changes are associated with an improvement in well-being and a reduction in poverty ; Non-PR ; IFPRI1; GRP26 ; FCND