Extreme Poverty Research Group (EPRG) 3rd Meeting: Protecting the Gains

May 2nd, 2011 Location: Save the Children UK Conference Room, Gulshan 1, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Preamble The Extreme Poverty Research Group (EPRG) was formed in September 2010 with the objective of developing and disseminating knowledge about the nature of extreme poverty and the effectiveness of measures to address it. Meetings are held quarterly. The first meeting of the EPRG took place in October 2010 with a high number of participants from shiree Scale and Innovation-Fund partners, DFID, and other DFIDfunded extreme poverty programmes. The TORs of the EPRG have since been amended to meet different participant needs. The second meeting of the EPRG took place in January 2011 in which Dr Munir, Director of Hunger and Health at Save the Children UK, took the position of Chair for 2011. Here, findings on defining and targeting the extreme poor were shared, and NGO research ideas endorsed. The third meeting took place on 2nd of May 2011. The morning session saw Zulfiqar Ali from BIDS/Unnayan Shammanay present findings from shiree-funded research on reassessing and revalidating quantitative indicators of extreme poverty, followed by NGO research staff presenting research findings from projects themed around Protecting the Gains. In the afternoon, the group learned about Innovation Fund NGO Change Monitoring System findings and discussed ideas for future research, data protection and ethics. The next meeting is planned for late July/early August 2011. This is a collection of the discussions and which took place and some of the key findings. In the meantime, the research team will be working to further disseminate the findings of research in different formats to relevant audiences, and will continue to develop the EPRG concept. The EPRG will be reviewed on an annual basis and developments will also be posted on the shiree website (http://www.shiree.org/). Contact person: Hannah Marsden, Research Focal Point; email Hannah@shiree.org.

Contents
Morning session 1. Poverty Threshold Analysis Reassessing and Revalidating Quantitative Indicators Zulfiqar Ali (BIDS and Unnayan Shammanay) pp. 4-5 2. 6 Scale-Fund NGO research package presentations: Protecting the Gains 2.1 Introduction Dr Joe Devine, Department of Economics & International Development, Bath University p.6 2.2 Uttaran: Making Productive Use of Khas Land: Experiences of Extreme Poor Households - Sonia Kabir and Korban Ali (Uttaran) pp.6-8 2.3 Save the Children UK: Vulnerabilities and Resilience among Extreme Poor People: South West Coastal Region Prokriti Nokrek and Arafat Alam pp.8-10 2.4 DSK: Eviction and the Challenges of Protecting Gains: A case study of slum dwellers in Dhaka city - Abdul Baten and Mustak Ahmed pp.10-11 2.5 NETZ: Extreme poor adivasis and the problem of accessing safety nets Zakir Hossain pp. 12-13 2.6 Practical Action Bangladesh (PAB): Politics of accessing and retaining access to the sandbars by the extreme poor Areef Khan and Imran Reza pp.13-15 2.7 Care: Social safety nets and the extreme poor learning from a participatory propoor governance approach - Saifuddin Ahmed and Abdul Bari pp.15-16 Afternoon session 3. Emerging Findings from Change Monitoring System and Self-Review Workshops (for Innovation Fund) Jonathan Perry and Christopher Maclay pp.16-17 4. Next round of research ideas all participants pp.18-19 5. Data and ethics p.19 6. Colin Risners closing remarks pp.20-21 Annex 1: Participants pp.21-23


Acronyms and abbreviations BHHs Beneficiary households CLP Chars Livelihood Programme CMS Change Monitoring System BIDS Bangladesh Institute for Development Studies DFID Department for International Development (DFID) (UKAID) EP Extreme poverty FFH Female-headed household FGD Focus group discussion HH Household HIES Household Income and Expenditure Survey IGA Income-generating activity PRCPB - Programme for Research on Chronic Poverty Bangladesh SSNs - Social Safety Nets UP Union Parishad UNO Upazila Nirbahi Officer

1. Morning session
Poverty Threshold Analysis Reassessing and Revalidating Quantitative Indicators - Zulfiqar Ali (BIDS and Unnayan Shammanay)
The objective of this study was to identify a set of economic indicators and thresholds to quantitatively assess extreme poverty. It first looked at the mean values and household distribution by candidate poverty indicators with HIES data broken down into the bottom 10%, the extreme poor (lower poverty line), the moderate poor (upper poverty line), and non-poor, and then compared these to shiree CMS 1 (baseline of all households) across 18 indicators. Findings indicate that shiree has successfully targeted below the bottom 5% across a number of variables. Findings include: The total non-land asset value of shiree BHHs (at 344 Taka) is significantly lower than the other sources. e.g. HIES bottom 5% (6,614) and HIES bottom 10% (8.805) and PRCPB Bottom 10% (2, 457). For shiree BHHs (CMS 1), HH size is smaller than those in HIES data. shiree: 3.23; Bottom HIES bottom 5%: 5.11; HIES bottom 10%: 5.21; PRCPB (Bottom 10%): 5.6. This raises the question of whether this is because of purposive shiree targeting (e.g. targeting of elderly and FHHs). FHHs make up 33% of shiree CMS 1 but in bottom 5% of HIES: 13%; in HIES bottom 10%: 11%; and in PRCPB Bottom 10%: 5.6. This shows successful targeting of extreme poor FHHs. Probit model for extreme poverty (bottom 10%) indicators: In Slide 7, Y marks significant indicators. Triple YYY marks significant indicators in all three models. This shows that there are 6 important indicators of extreme poverty: HHs size; cultivable land; non-land asset value; access to electricity; access to toilet; HH head occupation. These 6 indicators are a lens through which to select and target interventions to reduce EP successfully, and monitor graduation. 3 of these are public policy variables: HH size/Access to sanitation/Access to electricity (i.e. the government can do more to improve reproductive health facilities and access to electricity and toilets). The other 3 are important HH level variables which EP programmes can work with. Based on analysis, three indicators may be taken into consideration in combination to identify the extreme-poor households as follows. This suggests that there are more extreme poor who are eligible for extreme poverty-focused programmes.

 1. Land ownership (cultivable): 2. Total non-land asset: 3. Employment status: Points from discussions: o The HH size question is complex, and needs to be compared with CMS 3 and urban / rural differences explored. shiree BHHs are not homogeneous because of diverse programmes. shirees working areas are pockets of extreme poverty (purposive targeting) where the density of extreme poverty is much higher. To what extent do the findings reflect this? CLP recently reviewed its selection criteria because of the recommendation that they were missing some extreme poor. These indicators suggest this to be correct. CLPs existing criteria for asset value is 5000. There is scope to test this against the recently developed multi-dimensionality score-cards and child development indicators. Issues of abandonment and households re-grouping when assets are transferred might hold unique implications for the extreme poor. Importance of non-MFI involvement needs to be considered. Room for other indicators e.g. selling labour in advance or selling of assets. There is also the need for regionally specific indicators e.g. in the Barind Tract, almost 60% Adivasis dont have any land and are residing on that of others. There are practical policy implications arising from this which need to be explored by the government, other programmes, donors and NGOs. If it is true that shiree BHHs are really the bottom 2-3%, it holds implications for the logframe and the time periods of interventions. The issue of household size has implications social care and welfare. Not more than .50 acre1 Not more than Taka 20,000; and At best wage labourer

o o

Note that several of those present felt that this threshold, and that for asset values, are too high.
1

2. 6 Scale-Fund NGO research package presentations: Protecting the Gains 2.1 Introduction by Dr Joe Devine, Department of Economics & International Development, Bath University.
The research topics identified by NGOs in December 2010 and January 2011 all fell within the theme of protecting the gains which refers to how gains made through project involvement need to be sustained (e.g. protected from market forces or a tidal surge). Dr Joe Devine made three main points: 1) How can we protect the gains from certain threats? 2) Assets are not contextless and 3) Quite often we know what works for the poor, but not why it works or why something doesnt work. The NGO research staffs presentations here are preliminary analyses to be developed into working papers and other outputs.

2.2 Uttaran: Making Productive Use of Khas Land: Experiences of Extreme Poor Households - Sonia Kabir and Korban Ali
It is widely understood that khas land can be an important source of livelihood. The government has recognised this. But the extreme poors ability to retain and make the best productive use of khas land rests on several internal and external factors. Uttaran is transferring land on a temporary and permanent basis combined with IGA transfers. Based on FGDs and in-depths interviews with successful and nonsuccessful HHs on a range of different lands (1. Paddy central 2. Shrimp remote 3. Shrimp central 4. Paddy & shrimp central 5. Paddy & shrimp remote 6. Paddy remote) and with UNOs; UPs; Uttaran Bhumi Committees; Uttaran IGA Officers; and Agricultural Officers, the researchers made the following arguments (based on supporting evidence): o Though khas land is considered an important source of livelihood for extreme poor people, generating and protecting gains of sustainable livelihoods with low quality, under sized and land situated in difficult locations is challenging. The strength and functionality of the extra-household relationships and networks that households build up, are key to ensure better productive use of the land. The more non-functional or exploitative these relationships, the less successful the households become. Khas land is an important source of livelihood but FHHs are not as capable as being successful as their male counterparts. This is due to the fact that the networking with the outside world in relation to production and selling decisions is still dominated by men. Women therefore shy away or are shied 6

 away from these contacts. This impacts negatively on their ability to make better use of their asset.

Uttaran working area in Satkhira, Khulna Implications for the Project: IGA assistance and land transfers need to be harmonized (ambitious but difficult). The project must explore the possibility of developing the khas lands (where it is necessary) for higher productivity. The crop loan scheme of the government can be explored in this regard. Field level staff who are directly involved with assessing the needs of the households should be trained up in income generating activities especially fish cultivation and agriculture so that they can assist the households in deciding the right IGAs. The project should provide more focus on the IGA trainings and make them demonstration based (especially for women). This would encourage households to change their existing low production generating practices to get the highest return from whatever they are investing in the land. FHHs should be given more attention in this regard. The project must encourage khas land receiver households to access the facility of crop loan provided by formal banks. This would ensure access to capital for the households for continued production.

Points from discussions: o IGA assistance should follow as early as possible after BHH selection.

 o Uttarans motivational group approach and local campaigning forms an important part of the land transfer process. 23% of BHHs have already received land (4,000 BHHs from last year). It is a continuous process. Permanent access takes more time. There is potential to develop the research by comparing those who have not yet received khas land but are receiving IGAs with those with land and IGAs. How to reconcile that FHHs are facing large difficulties in using land in the context where some NGOs (e.g. SCUK) are giving more assets to women. There may also be a link between the importance of the quality of relationships and FHHs. The researchers recommendations to the project are to strengthen the role of females in group and organisation activities; Make training structures more demonstration-based so they can see IGAs are cost effective; More linking with other agriculture departments; Linking with para vets and change agents for future sustainability for increased access to information. Uttarans criterion goes lower than the government they need to be commended for this. The role of disaster and shocks to successful and unsuccessful cases could be considered. There is an issue of sustainability after the project given that so much land is occupied by rich and influential people. Most BHHs are already in possession of land at selection. Uttaran is working with lawyers on this.

2.3 Save the Children UK: Vulnerabilities and Resilience among Extreme Poor People: South West Coastal Region Prokriti Nokrek and Arafat Alam
Extreme poor households in the South-west are continually living with and overcoming natural and man-made hazards, including cyclone Sidr, Aila, tidal surges and frequent flash flooding. There are a higher proportion of extreme poor in ecologically fragile areas. The shiree-funded SCUK project is working in this area. In 2010 (post intervention) - a tidal surge hit the area and affected EP BHH households. The aim of this research is to explore the livelihood dynamics of the extreme poor in the vulnerable areas. The methodology includes FGDs, key informant interviews and in-depth interviews in two unions Koyra Sadar and Nishanbaria.

 The specific questions are: Impacts of disasters on EP livelihoods; Strategies adopted by EP to cope with disasters; Strategies adopted to make livelihoods more sustainable in the face of future disasters. The impacts on physical, human, social, natural and financial capital, and the different responses of households, communities and NGOs and other actors, and resilience strategies of households in response were shared. The financial costs to assets were calculated and crab fattening business and fish culture were the most affected ones (all washed away). Households had insufficient capital to restart their businesses (vegetable and white fish culture). The research concludes that livelihood options, which are not dependant on seasonal dynamics are more resilient than others, due to their nature (ring slab and instruments) (see for details). Also, FHHs are getting less and irregular cash/profit from poultry, duck and goat rearing. More diversified IGAs and more women-specific interventions for the year round are needed.

Wider policy lessons: o Provision of appropriately designed transitional shelters, which could meet minimum standards and resistant to cyclone and tidal surge. o Stop making holes within the embankment. o Safe drinking water for coastal people (by installing water treatment and desalination plant). o Education provision for children of EP households.

Points from discussions: o Findings point to the importance of additional interventions. o Question of feasibility of a permanent response? Whose responsibility? Government, NGOs? Importance of health-related shocks included water-borne and skin-related diseases. Households have loaned money to cover such costs. 9

 Programmatically, SCUK has a referral scheme to help people with medication and operations. o We need to reflect on which IGAs are most appropriate for EP HHs. Is asking for more diversification potentially more risky? SCUK is using Household MicroPlans to decide based on their local conditions, finding that situations are different from one upazila to another depending on vulnerabilities. Need to consider the time frames of how long it takes for HHs to re-build livelihoods back to what they were. Issue of traumatisation and psychological impacts. Where is there need and is there a programme response? Children were very affected in the last tidal surge. Most schools closed or children needed boats to go to school. The Department of social welfare is tracking children who are left alone after disasters. Because many other projects are working there, effective linking with other NGOS and government is crucial.

2.4 DSK: Eviction and the Challenges of Protecting Gains: A case study of slum dwellers in Dhaka city - Abdul Baten and Mustak Ahmed
Eviction has been identified as a major challenge facing the DSK Dhaka project. E.g. 119 targeted extreme poor households were evicted from Korail and Sottola slum, leading field staff to re-select households. Evictions are often unexpected and have far reaching implications, potentially threatening to the development initiatives and gains encouraged by the project. This research project aimed to explore the impact (causes and consequences) of evictions for slum dwellers livelihoods, and in particular to: o o o o To understand the dynamics of evictions; To assess the immediate losses and long term consequences of evictions; To explore the coping strategies of evictees; To consider alternative policy related recommendations.

It has applied mixed methods including case studies, in-depth-interviews and key informant interviews with BHHs who have returned to the programme; BHHs who have not returned to the programme; non-BHH tenants; Non-beneficiaries 10

 households who are involved in similar IGAs promoted by DSK-shiree; house owners; community leaders and service providers. Major arguments: Eviction has disrupted livelihood options; Re-settlement has been un-certain; Gains have been lost. Immediate losses to slum dwellers include: houses/shelters; household assets; shops; destroyed latrines and water supply systems; gas and electricity supply systems; theft of assets; harassment from law enforcement agencies. Estimated financial losses: Extreme poor households (12,000-20,000); Poor households (10,000-80,-000); Shop owners (12,000-150,000); House owners (200,000-500,000). Losses to service providers: DSK watsan project; DSK shiree project; UPPR; BRAC health and delivery centre; RIC. Consequences: changes of ownership/patterns of land; savings and loans money is used towards immediate losses; salaries cut/job losses; businesses closed (loss of income); outstanding sales on credit; shifting and re-shifting costs; cost of reconstruction of houses; loss of social connections; internal conflicts; internal and external litigations. Coping strategies: living in tents and temporary accommodation; most facing the continued threat of eviction; borrowing to re-build houses; financial support taken from families and employers. Threats of further eviction: DoH constructed a boundary wall around evicted areas and conducted a land survey; Letters of eviction already sent to community leaders (but not HHs). Immediate needs: shelter and safe security; rebuilding of sewage system; financial support to re-establish. Recommendations: Evictions and rehabilitation; Immediate livelihoods support for evictees; Strengthen slum-based organisations. 11

 Points from discussions: o How possible is an organised migration system? Can certain zones of Dhaka be developed to serve others? Slums a result of push-pull effect. Owners do not share information about the threat of eviction because tenants would leave. What are the suggestions for planned eviction? Two types government owned land and private negotiations with compensation given. This kind of negotiation is possible although it is still hard to ensure proper rehabilitation.

2.5 NETZ: Extreme poor adivasis and the problem of accessing safety nets Zakir Hossain
Access to safety-net support is marginal to BHHs under the AMADER project. This research has investigated the problems that adivasis face in accessing safety nets and the underlying factors for this exclusion. Adivasis constitute more than 70 percent of beneficiaries in AMADER project. 2.63% of HHs have access to SSNs (NETZ baseline survey). SSNs reduce the risk of asset loss especially in lean seasons (see tracking studies). Based on case studies, FGDs and key informant interviews in two unions in Sapahar with recipients and non-recipients of safety nets, findings of this research so far include: Factors in successful access to SSNs: Stronger links with affluent (adivasi and non adivasi) neighbours, connected well with formal political structure; But access to SSNs is seen as a new form of patron-client relationship; direct connection with Ward Commissioner of selection committee; market access - those receiving SSNs are usually well connected with local market operators. Therefore, they have more information. Utilization of SSNs contributes to livelihood success during the lean period: Money lending decreased; employment increased; food consumption smoothed; savings increased (although advance selling of labour is still happening). Non-recipient reasons for low access: Information gaps (public announcements are made either in the mosques or bazaars so many adivasis do not hear); partisan information circulation; and selection meetings locations - non-adivasi paras. Knowledge of SSNs is low and there are distinct political challenges (weak political participation of EP adivasis) and experiences of cultural labeling (e.g. Muslims preferred; adivasis seen as drunk; more common for adivasi women to work hence seen as not needing support). 12

 Reflections for solutions: o o o o o Survey to know the exact number of adivasis; Needs assessments before distribution of allocation; Inclusion of adivasis in Selection Committees; Non-partisan selection committee; Selection validation by community.

Points from discussions: O Ashrai (NETZ partner NGO) is raising these issues in group meetings and trying to encourage and empower BHHS to visit unions so this becomes a habit. Access to SSNs is an issue across shiree, but is made more difficult from being adivasi (by the discrimination experienced). We need to recognise horizontal and vertical inequalities. Room to explore advocacy with local and national MPs. presented to the APPG. Question of improving the targeting of government. Issue of age recording. No SSNs in urban areas. This could be

O O O

2.6 Practical Action Bangladesh (PAB): Politics of accessing and retaining access to the sandbars by the extreme poor Areef Khan and Imran Reza
This study aimed to document the process of successfully negotiating access to sandbars for groups of extreme poor people for agricultural use. Since project year 1, pumpkin production has proved profitable, and in response, in year 2 local land owners have become more interested and have started demanding a profit in return for access to sandbars during the second year negotiation process. How can longer term access be ensured and potential losses avoided? Based on FGDs, KIIs and case studies with a variety of stakeholders, the findings map the access process

13

 in the first and second year (in presentation) and quantifies the change in contract arrangements. Some other observations include: Some landowners are reluctant to give their land and as a result EP members are needing to cultivate in more distant/remote locations or have divided the pits in different parts of the sandbars. This is resulting in more complex irrigation and crop management and higher costs. This is creating conflict among the members of the same group to use the inputs, particularly irrigation pumps. Beneficiaries have lost significant portions of profits for sharing the pumpkins with landowners. This is a critical factor for future access processes. The involvement of a large number of women household members in pumpkin cultivation when their male members migrate to other areas has substantially minimized opportunity costs and not deprived households of extra incomes from migration.

Recommendations: o Need to establish an input support mechanism for EP HHs so that they can easily access support (both private and Government). Need to enhance the horizontal relationship as well as vertical relationship as EP households are politically and socially marginalized and insecure. Future access negotiation needs more cohesion, fellow feelings and confidence among EP members (a collective identity would enhance their status in the society which is very important to deal and win in the politics of access to sandbars).

14

Father and son at PAB working site in Rangpur

Points from discussions: o o Problem of share cropping (not politics). Government-owned land. When land emerges it should be re-owned but this practice is rarely followed. Ownership is not properly recorded. Relevance to IC Sunamganj and other projects facing this problem. Need to strengthen group formation for further negotiation. Protecting the gain requires a sustainable agreement (formal or informal) with land owners which is very unlikely to involve free access (even if the land was previously barren).

o o o

2.7 Care: Social safety nets and the extreme poor learning from a participatory pro-poor governance approach - Saifuddin Ahmed and Abdul Bari
SETU has developed a multidimensional model of pathways out of extreme poverty, addressing the inequitable power relations causing poverty. It aims to broaden and deepen citizens influence in the decisions that affect their lives, seeing this as a right (and hence an end in itself) and also as a key strategy for graduating people out of conditions of extreme poverty and chronic vulnerability. This research aims to see potentials of pro-poor inclusive governance model facilitated by SETU: a) in building relationships between local government and extremely poor citizens; b) in targeting of extremely poor in government's safety net programs and other development processes in working unions. The research has explored the changes in extremely poor households access to governments safety net programs over the course of 15

 SETU interventions in last two years, the role of different actors, including natural leaders, UP councils and communities in achieving these changes. It has used FGDs, KIIs and case studies in 2 unions of SETUs working area. Findings include: Social Safety Net are an important strategy for addressing chronic poverty and insecurity, argued by some to help the poor to build assets and enhance incomes especially in hunger prone areas in the north-west. Evidence of strengthening the citizenship of extreme poor: UPs are using the extreme poor lists prepared by Natural Leaders (NLs) and Para Unnayan Committees (PUCs) for setting the priority in delivering safety nets and social protection entitlements. Natural Leaders are representing the extreme poor in the UP level decision making forums. Natural Leaders and project participants help UPs in collecting regular tax, opening their opportunities to work with UP. Project participants intend to participate in next UP election. Holes in SSNs: UP initiatives and budgets are more focused of enhancing economic benefits. This is important but to protect livelihood gains, respondents highlighted need to focus on; Crisis and indebtedness (money lenders etc.) Health, especially chronic illness. Education. Resilience and dealing with hunger: Increase of wage allows households to cope with the price hike and reduce the demand on safety nets. A combination of traditional and contemporary practices is partially protecting extreme poor from advance labor selling and dependency on money lenders during hunger. But: Migration still exists. Some households still experience hunger albeit it for reduced period of time. 16

Afternoon session
3. Emerging Findings from Change Monitoring System and Self-Review Workshops (for Innovation Fund) Jonathan Perry and Christopher Maclay
The CMS 4 (participatory group exercises) and 5 (in-depth interviews) methodologies were developed last year for the shiree-funded Innovation Fund NGO projects (currently 17 partners). They were designed to be low-cost and allow for a quick identification of issues and challenges. They feed into quarterly change reports which are then followed by self-review workshops. They highlight shared experiences, and flag up issues across Innovation-Fund NGO projects. 4 main findings from November/December 2010: 1. Incomes have not yet increased sufficiently to significantly change the income sources of BHHs to graduate them from extreme poverty. This raises questions of BHH interest and the effectiveness of single asset interventions. 2. Safety nets are not being distributed to BHHs across the portfolio, although there are promising signs from service providers in some projects. In some cases, UPs are withdrawing support. 3. Illness is seen by BHHs as the most significant hindrance to success with the project. 4. Physically incapable and dependant poor are struggling to make the most of projects. Other shared experiences were continued use of informal loans and experiences of natural disaster. There were however noticeable improvements in nutrition.

Reoccurring themes in March 2011: Illness: safety nets; dependant poor. New Developments: More accounts of increasing incomes; asset diversification; consumption of produce (e.g. crops or milk from cows) is reducing expenditures

17

 Points from discussions: o HHs are vulnerable when they havent yet made an income from IGAs and when a SSN withdrawn. This is a typical example of a poverty trap. Issue of using the term dependant poor all EP are to some extent dependant. The term currently refers to when a HH head struggles with labour intensive work. Is there any evidence of which HHs are more likely to suffer from illness? FHHs are taking on more burden in managing IGAs is this impacting their health? Shows need for holistic programmes. A BRAC study showed that the EP spend most of their money on health needs. SCUK have developed a health guideline and identified acute illness or conditions with clear guidance for communities and what can be done at local government centres. The supply side is not ready or accessible for the demand. Issue of food diversity whether this translates to improved nutrition is another issue.

o o

o o

4. Next round of research ideas all participants

Care: not yet decided; importance of identifying regional resilient models. NETZ: 1) What strategies the elderly and disabled BHHs are taking to survive and compare this to other groups. 2) Health and hygiene of adivasis related to their vulnerabilities and IGAs what do they do to manage their illness and health problems? DSK: private sector involvement and extreme poor in urban slums. PAB: 1) Marketable options for pumpkins (and other sandbar crops). Food processing and storage. 2) Effectiveness of multiple versus single inputs. 18

 Uttaran: 1) Sustainable livelihood through khas water bodies - Case of fisher folk. 2) A model for sustainable livelihoods for disabled and aged BHHs. 3) Sustainable livelihood through khas land - can land ownership really make a difference? SCUK: 1. Identifying and exploring the sustainable livelihood options for physically and mentally challenged people. 2. Migration and impacts on women-headed households. Aid Comilla: Market Linkages and value chains. Plan Bangladesh: to discuss. SCUS: Experiences of extreme poverty in adolescence; participatory photography monitoring. IC: Sub-groups of EP; What the poor themselves want. Points from discussions: o o o o Scope to make research more strategic? Need for continuity from study to study. Scope to expand information on extreme poverty on website. Action needed is to add to these preliminary ideas then come up with a consolidated list. EPRG participants and other stakeholders can be asked to prioritise even though the final decision on use of the core Scale Fund research resources (principally the time of the ROs/RAs) will rest with the employing NGOs. There is scope for joint research and for the participation of others (e.g. other DFID funded EP programmes).

5. Data and ethics The data and ethics policy has now been finalised. Hannah to follow up a NETZ query.

19

 6. Colin Risners closing remarks Coiln Risner (shiree CEO) concluded the day with the following points: o shiree are targeting the bottom 3-4% which shows a great success on behalf of partner-NGOs, while this holds challenges in terms of graduation and shirees overall mandate to lift a million out of extreme poverty (i.e we are clearly NOT addressing people who are just below the poverty line, however this line is defined, therefore to lift them sustainably above the line is a great challenge). This needs to be fed back to DFID. The presentations raised questions about effectively addressing gender issues within projects. Perhaps there is insufficient mainstreaming of gender going beyond simple consideration of the proportion of female beneficiaries across the programme. The multidimensional impacts of disasters is clear from the research findings social, political and institutional impacts that go beyond simple economic loss (e.g there may actually be an influx of funds in the short-term due to relief measures but can this be translated into sustainable economic recovery for families - that may have become fragmented). The EPRG is an evolving project. It is strong but we need to make it more strategic and focused continue to look at the process. We welcome continuing feedback via Hannah@shiree.org. Congratulations and well done to the research team. The process so far has been a big challenge involving lots of work, intensive training and workshops. The sustainable graduation problem obviously remains it is not something that can be solved but will require continuing research effort and enhancement of interventions and new ideas and measures. More raw data will hopefully be available in the working papers so readers can do some of their own analysis. A sustainable deal is not always a cheap deal, also the timing of the agreement seems crucial e.g. in the case of working with PAB, could a deal have made at the beginning, before landlords realised the value of the asset, have been more beneficial for beneficiaries? (in that instance PAB had better market information regarding the potential value of the land once the pumpkins were produced all can see the value).

20

 o The above (PAB example) is one of several areas where the timing of actions seems crucial to the success of the graduation model this sequencing issue could be made more explicit in the presentation of results. Need to open up the below the 10% threshold to understand the internal dynamics within the extreme poor population. This is in essence the task of the EPRG.

Scope to combine quantitative and qualitative sources and draw on wide research tools.

Activities in May: writing working papers; designing next Phase 2 research; tracking studies. The next EPRG meeting is planned for the end of July or early August 2011.

Annex 1: Participants
Participant NGO project staff Md. Abdul Baten DSK Coordinator Research Mustak Ahmed DSK Research Associate Munir Ahmed Save the Children UK Director of Hunger and Health 01720106797 baten@dskbangladesh.org 01818498424 mustak@dskbangladesh.org 01746252337 Munir@savethechildren-bd.org Organisation & Role Contact

Muzaffar Ahmed

Save the Children UK Project Director

muzaffar@savethechildren-bd.org

Prokriti Nokrek

Save the Children UK Research Officer

01713203205 pnokrek24@hotmail.com

21


Arafat Alam Save the Children UK Monitoring Officer 01716066049 Arafat@savethechildren-bd.org

Haseeb Md Irfamullah

PAB Team Leader

01817118522 haseeb@practicalaction.org.bd

Imran Reza

PAB Research Associate

01818350177 imrankuurp@gmail.com

Abdul Khaleque

Uttaran Project Director

01716126234 khaleque@gmail.com

Sonia Kabeer

Uttaran Research Officer

01711436430 kabirfam@yahoo.com

Korban Ali

Uttaran Research Assistant

01911037057 Anik_du98@yahoo.com

Saifuddin Ahmed

Care

01713200801 Saifah01@gmail.com

Felix Bachmann

Intercooperation Delegate Intercooperation Programme Officer Research Assistant ,Care Volunteer NETZ Bangladesh Monitoring Officer BOSS Plan BGD , Advisor Director Program Quality Care Bangladesh

01715 469803 felix.bachmann@intercooperatio-bd.org 01730073301 shamin.ahmed@intercooperation.bd.org

Shamin Ahmed

Abdul Bari Jana Fahrig Sayama Sakhawat Tarequl Hoque Mehrul Islam

22


Amin Uddin A.Majed Mallan Khaleduzzanam Shamin Rokeya Begum Papon Kumar Dev Program Manager HKI Advisor Uttaran Project Manager MJSKS

Aid Comilla Shushilan

Other donor-funded projects Stuart Kenwood Chars Livelihood Programme (CLP) IML Director Urban Development Consultant (GIZ) stuart@clp-bangladesh.org

Nadia Goodman

nadiagoodman@gmail.com

shiree and consortium partners Zilfiqur Ali Joe Devine Nick Mascie-Taylor John Woolner Monjur Hossain Md Asadul Islam Colin Risner Unnayan Shammany / BIDS University of Bath University of Cambridge Harewelle International PMTC Bangladesh PD EEP/shiree shiree Chief Executive Officer (CEO) shiree (YP) Research Focal Point 01741679361 colin@shiree.org zulfiqar@bids.org.bd

Hannah Marsden

01741679360 Hannah@shiree.org

David Jackman

shiree Associate Programmes Manager (YP) shiree Internal Consultant (YP) shiree Associate Programmes Manager (YP) shiree YP Advocacy Communications Researcher at the UEA. and

david@shiree.org

Jonathan Perry Christopher Maclay

jonathan@shiree.org maclay@shiree.org

Delara Hossain

Delara@shiree.org

Phoebe Beedell

23