Author
Listed:
- Browne, M.
- Ortmann, G.F.
- Hendriks, S.L.
Abstract
The objective of the study was to develop an indicator of household resilience as a measure of progress towards achieving the first of four elements identified in the Framework for African Food Security. A review of the literature provided support for the use of assets owned by a household as an indicator of household resilience. Several methods of constructing household asset indices emerged from the literature reviewed. The application of four of these methods to Demographic and Health Survey data from six African countries is presented in this paper. The resulting indices were used to estimate individual socio-economic status scores for all households. All four methods performed similarly across the assessment characteristics, but yielded different results when the households were grouped into quintiles based on the estimated socio-economic status scores. As suggested by the literature, quintiles were used to classify the study households into categories of socio-economic status based on the estimated socio-economic status scores. However, socio-economic status was not evenly distributed across the study households making the use of a quintile approach inappropriate for grouping the households. Cluster analysis was applied as an alternative to the quintile classification to group the study households. Cluster analysis appeared to be a more effective approach to grouping households, both in that it does not assume an even distribution of socio-economic status across households – as the quintile approach does – and it provides a useful indication of changes in the per cent of households falling into different socio-economic status groups over time.
Suggested Citation
Browne, M. & Ortmann, G.F. & Hendriks, S.L., 2014.
"Developing a resilience indicator for food security monitoring and evaluation: Index construction and household classification for six African countries,"
Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 53(3), October.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:agreko:346817
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.346817
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:346817. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeasaea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.