Skip to Main Navigation

Stakeholders, power relations, and policy dialogue : social analysis in agriculture sector poverty and social impact analysis (English)

The primary message of this report is that poverty and social impact analysis (PSIA) is highly relevant to the great majority of policy reforms, but its application in the agricultural sector is particularly important- because reforms in this sector have profound and direct impacts on poverty. The high incidence of poverty in rural areas and the overall vulnerability of the livelihoods of the rural poor make it essential to ensure that distributional impacts are consistent with poverty-reduction goals. In other words, without careful attention throughout the design and implementation of agricultural reforms, the poor are often excluded, particularly those who live in remote areas, work in under-valued sectors, and are economically, politically and socially powerless. The objective of this study is to improve standards for social analysis in PSIA as it pertains to the agricultural sector. The study is intended to contribute to a broader, long-term goal of enhancing the capacity of development practitioners and policy-makers to carry out or commission poverty and social impact analysis of policy reforms in the agricultural sector. This study focuses on the contribution of social analysis to PSIAs, particularly in regard to the integration of socio-political and institutional factors into the policy processes. Conclusions drawn from the report is Policy reforms in the agricultural sector are complicated by a number of factors. Social structures within rural areas are often shaped by unequal power relationships, which in turn have an impact on poor people's livelihoods. Rural areas are characterized by low population density and dispersed groups which have limited access to public services and markets. Reforms can also have indirect positive and negative spillovers and tend to be associated with social upheaval due to their impacts on long-standing political and social relations.

Details

  • Document Date

    2006/11/01

  • Document Type

    Social Analysis

  • Report Number

    36498

  • Volume No

    1

  • Total Volume(s)

    1

  • Country

    World,

  • Region

    The World Region,

  • Disclosure Date

    2010/07/01

  • Disclosure Status

    Disclosed

  • Doc Name

    Stakeholders, power relations, and policy dialogue : social analysis in agriculture sector poverty and social impact analysis

  • Keywords

    poverty and social impact analysis;social analysis;distributional impact of policy reforms;adequate monitoring and evaluation system;agricultural sector;democracy and governance;Food and Nutrition Security;terms of poverty reduction;political economy of reform;Low-income country under stress;millennium development goal;economic and sector work;power relation;reform process;political economy risk;impact of reforms;rural area;agricultural marketing system;land tenure reform;impact on poverty;social group;stakeholder analysis;types of reforms;incidence of poverty;design of reforms;structures of society;policy process;Poverty Impact Assessment;analysis of poverty;food security policy;Natural Resource Management;poor rural dweller;implementation of reform;traditional land tenure;rural social structure;civil society partner;short time horizon;distribution of rent;public service reform;international donor agencies;degrees of participation;provision of information;access to information;competitiveness of export;productivity of land;rural development efforts;Political Economy Analysis;Social Safety Nets;quality of governance;rural development strategy;central government investment;International Finance Institution;control over resources;stakeholder identification;agriculture sector;Public Services;land policy;land policies;land reform;institutional factor;reform design;transmission channel;institutional mechanism;multidisciplinary approach;social tools;institutional weakness;transactions cost;policy option;social diversity;transaction cost;social difference;institutional risk;Rural Poor;unequal power;social process;imperfect market;negative spillover;political analysis;political interest;political process;livelihood group;partner country;household size;agricultural economist;economic efficiency;vulnerable group;interdisciplinary approach;quantitative method;market reform;poverty-reduction goals;assessing risk;social upheaval;tenure security;power relationship;economic relation;conceptual framework;social tension;imperfect information;social relation;institutional analysis;land market;market operation;gender concern;Trade Policies;Trade Policy;mitigating risk;government budget;vested interests;agricultural productivity;Rural Growth;policy parameters;land right;rural strategy;livelihood strategy;stakeholder influence;political pressure;political level;reform implementation;annex annex;direct taxation;power structure;legal right;methodological issue;Exchange Rates;subsidiary right;gender relation;global condition;Population Density;reform impacts;stakeholder concern;social scientist;coffee price;risk analysis;urban agricultural policy;agricultural growth;outward migration;agriculture policy;government strategy;political reality;rural income;agricultural finance;price formation;increased investment;efficiency impacts;government support;social dimension;urban consumer;institutional linkage;reform outcomes;Primary Partner;donor staff;secondary sources;empirical material;household headship;economic crisis;market power;relative price;production process;government actor;external factor;increasing return;social outcome;implementing policy;reducing uncertainty;country risk;stakeholder interest;unequal access;reform alternatives;natural disaster;research exercise;qualitative method;political risk;building ownership;interest group;productive asset;political instability;institutional dimension;increased security;institutional performance;Agricultural Extension;participatory method;fiscal exposure;institutional barrier;local policy;policy space;institutional stakeholders;market institution;social context;early identification;public support;compensation measures;administrative authority;welfare payment;multiple partner;land allocation;marketing margin;budget function;central policy;engagement support;significant threat;remote farmer;economic reform;mixed methods;production cycles;literature review;cultural practice;agricultural service

Downloads

COMPLETE REPORT

Official version of document (may contain signatures, etc)

  • Official PDF
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *The text version is uncorrected OCR text and is included solely to benefit users with slow connectivity.

Citation

Stakeholders, power relations, and policy dialogue : social analysis in agriculture sector poverty and social impact analysis (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/860391468141268772/Stakeholders-power-relations-and-policy-dialogue-social-analysis-in-agriculture-sector-poverty-and-social-impact-analysis