ABSTRACT

This study analyzed social capital, livelihoods and poverty status of rural women headed agribusiness households in Imo State, Nigeria. The study established social capital status, estimated the poverty status, determined factors influencing social capital status and effects of social capital on poverty status, described livelihood options and ascertained influence of livelihoods and social capital on poverty status of the respondents. Only primary data were used. Multistage sampling techniques were employed in selecting 216 rural women headed agribusiness households with the use of a well-structured questionnaire, and data were analyzed with both descriptive and inferential statistical tools. Results showed an increased number of older respondents (78.24%) who were poor with larger household sizes (61.11% for 5 persons and above). Majority (78.24%) of the respondents lived in bungalows built by their husbands (57.41%) with cemented floor (74.54%) and walls (82.87%) covered with corrugated iron sheet (75.46%). At leisure, the women engaged in media and interpersonal communications such as listening to radio/music ( = 3.655), storytelling ( = 3.435) and watching movies ( = 3.089). Majority (48.62%) attested to having three square meals on daily bases. Social groups in the area comprised mostly of voluntarily registered members (43.52%) and they indicated strong agreement to all the question statements on social capital - trust and solidarity ( = 3.67), collective action and cooperation ( = 4.01), norms and values ( = 3.93), among others. Farming alone accounted for the highest source (29.66%) of households monthly income (N153186.16). The mean per capita income was N2391.339 while poverty line was N1594.226. Most of the respondents (58.8%) lived below the poverty line and the average poor respondents required about 17.5% of the poverty line to get out of poverty. Access to credit (5%), education (5%), gift/award (10% for membership density and 5% for trust and solidarity) and years of farming (1%) positively influenced social capital status of the respondents, while household size (10%), duration of group membership (10% for membership density and 1% for trust and solidarity) and non-farm income (5%) negatively influenced it. The respondents engaged in multiple livelihood activities with farming (74.54%) as the major and trading (52.32%) as the major livelihoods. Access to credit (5%), educational level (1%), farm income (5%), and non-farm income (10%) negatively determined poverty status, while household expenses (1%) positively determined poverty status. Age (10%), size of farm land (10%) and negatively determined choice of livelihoods among the respondents, while educational level (5%) and years of membership (10%) positively determined choice of livelihoods. Social capital proxies such as duration of group membership (10.0%), labour contribution (10.0%) and duration of group training (10.0%) negatively affected poverty status, while group density (5.0%) positively affected poverty status, and livelihoods had a strong and negative relationship with poverty status of the respondents. It was recommended that poverty alleviation strategies such as implementation of a set of social, cultural and institutional measures be made available to the rural women to assist in alleviating them from poverty; radio farm forums should be created within villages and among the rural women, and more livelihoods off farm livelihoods diversification are suggested for the respondents to augment farm income.