Focus of the study in Bangladesh In Bangladesh the study will aim to understand economic mobility and the role of microfinance in eight villages in two regions (Madhupur and Chandina).  Drawing upon earlier research findings the study will: Document socio-economic differentiation in 8 villages in Madhupur and Chandina, aiming to determine whether, and to what extent, the poorest of the poor are excluded (or self-excluded) from microfinance services. Generate conclusions and policy prescriptions about how to better provide microfinance services for the poorest of the poor Investigate and explain the conditions under which poor people are able to graduate out of endemic poverty. This will involve an analysis of the constraints that prevent them from obtaining access to new and productive opportunities in the rural economy.

Research in Bangladesh centres on a re-survey of some of the villages surveyed in a DFID-funded study carried out by IDS. A particular focus is on the extent to which observed livelihood changes over time can be attributed to the improved provision of microfinance services. 

The fieldwork is being carried in two regions, Chandina and Madhupur. Administratively, these regions are called Thanas. Each Thana is comprised of a large number of villages. Eight villages (four from each Thana) were originally selected using agroecological criteria and not on any other criteria of being representative. Chandina is the "low" potential area with higher population density, greater flood risk and lower irrigation potential. Chandina has a rainfall of 2245 mm/year whereas Madhupur has a rainfall of 1742 mm/year. The density of population in Chandina is 1137 persons per square kilometre and the corresponding figure for Madhupur is 750. Chandina is characterised by what is generally referred to as floodplain agriculture. There are higher lands in Chandina, which are relatively less prone to flood. On the other hand Madhupur, being an upland track, is less prone to flood. Out-migration is a standard feature in Chandina. Madhupur has been taking in-migrants from quite a long time. Recent (and broad) changes in the two sites include improvement in infrastructure (mainly roads but some electricity in Madhupur), markets (more shops, more new shops), crop diversification (more in Madhupur), and involvement of some large NGOs in Chandina (NGO involvement in Madhupur has a much longer history). 

A complete population census of 5062 households from eight villages done in 1995 is available for the current research. This dataset helped in sampling and is used to address some dynamic issues related to the study questions. A three-module research design has been implemented. 

All these modules are based on the following set of questionnaires: 

A: Basic Household Information

B. 2001 Land Interests and Cropping Patterns

C. Livestock, Poultry and Homestead Garden Earnings

D. Off-Farm Earnings: 2001

E: Non-Income Aspects

F: Coping with Crisis

G. Migration Information

H. Pond Utilisation

I. NGO Participation

J. Participation in local institutions

K. Loan history of borrowers of credit from NGOs  

This is a class of households defined as extreme poor in the 1995 study. They are termed "extreme" poor on the basis of some objective and subjective criteria. 133 households from a list of 200 such households were interviewed. The main purpose for this module would be to compare the poverty situation of these households over time (1994 and 2000) and to see whether microfinance played any major role in this process.  

Module 2 has been designed to see the mobility of the households between these three groups and role of microfinance in this mobility. Two villages were chosen because they had the highest degree of poverty in 1995. The poverty line income was estimated at Tk. 4200 (per person per year). Three categories of households were defined: 

Group 1: Those with income below one third of poverty income (Tk. 2800) 

Group 2: Those with income between poverty income of Tk. 4200 and less than Tk. 6630. 

Group 3: Those with income between poverty income (Tk. 4200) and more than one third of income below the poverty income (Tk. 2800) 

234 households were randomly chosen from each village with 78 households from each group. This makes the total number of households studied for this module 468.  

Module 1 and Module 2 will explain changes for a section of households (extreme poor and three poverty groups). They will not explain livelihoods changes of all the households and they will also exclude households well above the poverty line. Since it is not possible to study all the villages it was decided to have a complete survey of households for two villages from each site. The villages were selected on the basis of two criteria (i) similar village size, and (ii) similar relative poverty situation. A total of 1140 households were studied in this module. 

So the Bangladesh sample studied 1741 households altogether from the three modules: 

Module 1: 133

Module 2: 468

Module 3: 1140