Attachments
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the results of Resilience Index Measurement Analysis (RIMA) Round-2, which demonstrated a comparative analysis of household resilience capacity between Round-1 and Round-2 with panel samples by identifying key determinants and casual factors influencing resilience. The report outlines the resilience index in different disaggregation like treatment vs control, resilience index by farmer category, sub-district wise resilience index, resilience index based on access to natural resources and exposure to natural shocks. However, a different set of variables were used while measuring resilience capacity index of the Bangladeshi and Rohingya communities due to contextual differences.
The analysis was conducted with data collected from multiple population groups to highlight the diversity of the situation. Within the Bangladeshi community, the study gathered information from 1000 households in four sub-districts (Cox’s Bazar Sadar, Ramu, Ukhia, and Teknaf) of Cox’s Bazar that received interventions from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) as the treatment group. For comparison, 700 households from the host community that didn’t receive support from any humanitarian actors were surveyed in three sub-districts (Ramu, Ukhia, and Chakaria) of Cox’s Bazar to act as the control group. Similarly, for the Rohingya community, 400 households who received agriculture support from World Food Program (WFP) were surveyed as the treatment group, while information from an additional 400 Rohingya Nationals that didn’t receive any agricultural support from any agency was collected to be the control group. Altogether, these 2500 households’ data were collected between November to December 2022.
The study reveals that for the Bangladeshi community, the treatment group has a higher resilience capacity with a score of 39 compared to the control group scored 31. In comparison to 2021, the resilience index of the control group remained the same as 31. However, the index increased from 35 to 39 for the treatment group which indicates the positive impact of the intervention received by the treatment group. The higher resilience index of the treatment group can be characterized by their higher income, savings, and access to loans, increased usage of technology in agricultural production, receipt of capacity building training, and savings of crops for the lean period. Simultaneously, it was seen that the resilience capacity of the farmers from all three categories: marginal, large, and smallholders has slightly increased compared to 2021. However, still, marginal farmers in the treatment group had the lowest resilience among the three groups. The lowest resilience capacity of the marginal farmers can be described by their lower participation in capacity-building training and adoption of technology in agricultural production, lower household income, access to loan and savings for the agricultural lean season, limited ownership of productive and non-productive assets, minimal usage of land and inputs in agricultural production. On the other hand, it was evident that Ramu was the most resilient sub-district followed by Ukhia, Cox’s Bazar Sadar and the least one was Teknaf. In comparison to 2021, the resilience index of Ukhia and Teknaf has significantly increased. In contrast, it decreased in Cox’s Bazar Sadar. In Ramu, the resilience index remained the same as in 2021. The low resilience of Teknaf can be characterized by the lower adoption of agricultural technology, lower household income and savings for lean season, limited ownership of productive assets, and lower usage of land and inputs in agricultural production. Besides, a negative impact of shock specially landslides and price hike was observed on the resilience capacity of the Bangladeshi households. The households not affected by shock were found having a higher resilience capacity (37) compared to those affected by shocks (32).
The resilience index of the treated households from the Rohingya community is slightly higher (36) compared to the resilience index of the control group which is 35. The unlikely increase of resilience capacity among the control group can be described by the limited practice of homestead gardening by the treatment group households compared to 2021. The higher resilience capacity of the treatment group can be characterized by their higher income, getting more capacity-building training, usage of input in agricultural production, and better access to the agriculture input market and primary education. Shocks particularly cyclone also adversely impacted the resilience capacity of the Rohingya households with those affected by shocks having lower (32) resilience capacity compared to those not affected by it (38).
Land utilization was found to be highest among large farmers followed by smallholders and marginal farmers both in the control and the treatment groups. However, in the treatment group average amount of land utilized by the large farmers has drastically dropped from 415 decimals to 356 decimals, 194 to 148 decimals for smallholders, and 58 to 29 decimals for marginal farmers in comparison to 2021. In contrast, the amount of land utilized by the large and small-holders of the control group had increased but it was decreased for the marginal farmers. The major share of this land (59 percent from the treatment group and 81 percent from the control group) was used to produce cereal crops like rice, maize, etc. Besides, a remarkable portion of land is also used for vegetable production (23 percent from the treatment group and 10 percent from the control group) Usage of land for cereal crop production has significantly increased both in the control and treatment groups compared to 2021. The most cultivated cereal crop by the Bangladeshi community considering across both groups was Aman and Boro rice, and the most cultivated vegetables were potato, brinjal, tomato, and green chili. However, the productivity of vegetables in the treatment group is comparatively higher than in the control group. In the camp area bottle gourd, sweet gourd, and country bean were the most cultivated vegetables.
According to the survey, around 39 percent of respondents from the Bangladeshi treatment group received cash transfers in the last 12 months, with the average amount being BDT 9,728 which was 39 percent, and BDT 10,863 in 2021. On the other hand, though the percentage of control group households that received formal transfer dropped by 8 percent in 2022 (15 percent in 2021), the average amount increased by BDT 3,324 if compared with 2021. None of the households of the Rohingya community receive cash transfers. In contrast, almost all of the Rohingya community households received in-kind transfers such as food, shelter, medical facilities, agricultural supplies, LPG, and so on in the last 12 months, with an average value of BDT 108,124 (109,709 from the control and 106,539 from the treatment) per household which was BDT 78,520 (82,621 from the control and 74,419 from the intervention) in 2021. Food assistance accounted for most of the in-kind transfers (79 percent), followed by LPG gas (13 percent), and hygiene and dignity kit (4 percent). In contrast, the host community only received a small number of in-kind transfers—on average, BDT 7,518 per household which was 8,637 in 2021. The major share of this assistance was allocated for food (54 percent), agriculture support (21percent), and then shelter (7 percent).
The average monthly income of the households from the host community is BDT 23,076 (BDT 24,862 for the treatment group and BDT 20,525 for the control group) which was BDT 14,694 (BDT 15,596 for treatment and BDT 12,358 for control) in 2021. In both groups, large farmers are the highest income earners and there is a significant gap in income between the large and the marginal farmers. However, the major share of host community household income is coming from the agricultural sector which is around 36 percent (36 percent from treatment and 37 percent from the control group), which in 2021 was 47 percent (47 percent from treatment and 55 percent from the control group). However, income share from family businesses, private sector wages, and remittances has significantly increased. On the other hand, the average monthly income of the Rohingya community is worth BDT 3,168 (BDT 3,474 for treatment group and BDT 2,863 for control group) which is slightly higher compared to 2021. In 2021, the average income of the households was BDT 2,436 (BDT 2,517 for treatment group and BDT 2,354 for control group). Although the major share of the income, 27 percent is coming from casual labour work, in 2021 the income share from this was 52 percent. On the other hand, income share from business, and remittance have significantly increased.
The study also found that one-third (34 percent) of the households from the Bangladeshi community are suffering from inadequate food consumption (borderline and poor consumption). The inadequate consumption rate increased slightly, compared to 2021 from 31 percent to 34 percent. In contrast, hence 2021, half of the households from the refugee community were found having inadequate consumption in 2022. Besides, around 57 percent of households from the Bangladeshi community and 68 percent of households from the Rohingya community adopted at least one consumption-based coping strategy to cope with the food crisis. Dependence on less preferred or less expensive food is the most used coping strategy in both the Bangladeshi (56 percent) and Rohingya (66 percent) communities. Additionally, almost one-third (28 percent) of the Bangladeshi community households had to adopt at least one crisis or emergency livelihood strategy, while 37 percent have undertaken at least one stress coping technique. The adoption of a livelihood coping strategy for the Bangladeshi community has decreased compared to 2021. On the other hand, one-third (33 percent) of the households from the Rohingya community followed at least one crisis or emergency strategy and 42 percent followed a stress strategy. The tendency of adopting livelihood-based coping decreased compared to 2021.