BackgroundMaternal education is strongly associated with young child nutrition outcomes. However, the threshold of the level of maternal education that reduces the level of undernutrition in children is not well established. This paper investigates the level of threshold of maternal education that influences child nutrition outcomes using Demographic and Health Survey data from Malawi (2010), Tanzania (2009–10) and Zimbabwe (2005–06).MethodsThe total number of children (weighted sample) was 4,563 in Malawi; 4,821 children in Tanzania; and 3,473 children in Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Surveys. Using three measures of child nutritional status: stunting, wasting and underweight, we employ a survey logistic regression to analyse the influence of various levels of maternal education on child nutrition outcomes.ResultsIn Malawi, 45 % of the children were stunted, 42 % in Tanzania and 33 % in Zimbabwe. There were 12 % children underweight in Malawi and Zimbabwe and 16 % in Tanzania.The level of wasting was 6 % of children in Malawi, 5 % in Tanzania and 4 % in Zimbabwe. Stunting was significantly (p values < 0.0001) associated with mother’s educational level in all the three countries. Higher levels of maternal education reduced the odds of child stunting, underweight and wasting in the three countries. The maternal threshold for stunting is more than ten years of schooling. Wasting and underweight have lower threshold levels.ConclusionThese results imply that the free primary education in the three African countries may not be sufficient and policies to keep girls in school beyond primary school hold more promise of addressing child undernutrition.
Objective: To report on the trends and determinants of undernutrition among children ,5 years old in Kenya.
Background The preservation of the economic livelihood of tobacco farmers is a common argument used to oppose tobacco control measures. However, little empirical evidence exists about these livelihoods. We seek to evaluate the economic livelihoods of individual tobacco farmers in Malawi, including how much money they earn from selling tobacco, and the costs they incur to produce the crop, including labour inputs. We also evaluate farmers’ decisions to contract directly with firms that buy their crops. Methods We designed and implemented an economic survey of 685 tobacco farmers, including both independent and contract farmers, across the six main tobacco-growing districts. We augmented the survey with focus group discussions with sub-sets of respondents from each region to refine our inquiries. Results Contract farmers cultivating tobacco in Malawi as their main economic livelihoods are typically operating at margins that place their households well below national poverty thresholds, while independent farmers are typically operating at a loss. Even when labour is excluded from the calculation of income less costs, farmers’ gross margins place most households in the bottom income decile of the overall population. Tobacco farmers appear to contract principally as a means to obtain credit, which is consistently reported to be difficult to obtain. Conclusions The tobacco industry narrative that tobacco farming is a lucrative economic endeavour for smallholder farmers is demonstrably inaccurate in the context of Malawi. From the perspective of these farmers, tobacco farming is an economically challenging livelihood for most.
Tobacco control norms have gained momentum over the past decade. To date 43 of 47 Sub-Saharan African countries are party to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The near universal adoption of the FCTC illustrates the increasing strength of these norms, although the level of commitment to implement the provisions varies widely. However, tobacco control is enmeshed in a web of international norms that has bearing on how governments implement and strengthen tobacco control measures. Given that economic arguments in favor of tobacco production remain a prominent barrier to tobacco control efforts, there is a continued need to examine how economic sectors frame and mobilize their policy commitments to tobacco production. This study explores the proposition that divergence of international norms fosters policy divergence within governments. This study was conducted in three African countries: Kenya, Malawi, and Zambia. These countries represent a continuum of tobacco control policy, whereby Kenya is one of the most advanced countries in Africa in this respect, whereas Malawi is one of the few countries that is not a party to the FCTC and has implemented few measures. We conducted 55 key informant interviews (Zambia = 23; Kenya = 17; Malawi = 15). Data analysis involved deductive coding of interview transcripts and notes to identify reference to international norms (i.e. commitments, agreements, institutions), coupled with an inductive analysis that sought to interpret the meaning participants ascribe to these norms. Our analysis suggests that commitments to tobacco control have yet to penetrate non-health sectors, who perceive tobacco control as largely in conflict with international economic norms. The reasons for this perceived conflict seems to include: (1) an entrenched and narrow conceptualization of economic development norms, (2) the power of economic interests to shape policy discourses, and (3) a structural divide between sectors in the form of bureaucratic silos.
Introduction Tobacco production continues to increase in low- and middle-income countries creating complications for tobacco control efforts. There is the need to understand and address the global tobacco leaf supply as a means of decreasing tobacco consumption and improving farmers livelihoods in line with Article 17 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This study aims to understand the reasons why farmers grow tobacco and identify factors that influence these reasons. Methods Primary survey data (N = 1770) collected in Kenya, Malawi, and Zambia in the 2013–2014 farming season. Data analysis uses both descriptive and multinomial logistical regression methods. Results Majority of farmers started and are currently growing tobacco because they believed it was the only economically viable crop. Compared with Malawi, farmers in Kenya and Zambia have a 0.2 and 0.4 lower probability of growing tobacco, respectively because they perceive it as the only economically viable crop, but a 0.04 and 0.2 higher probability of growing tobacco, respectively because they believe it is highly lucrative. There are district/county differences in the reasons provided with some districts having a majority of the farmers citing the existence of a ready market or incentives from the tobacco industry. Statistically significant factors influencing these reasons are the educational level and age of the household head, land allocated to tobacco and debts. Conclusion There is the need to address the unique features of each district to increase successful uptake of alternative livelihoods. One consistent finding is that farmers' perceived economic viability contributes to tobacco growing. Implications This study finds that perceived economic viability of tobacco is the dominant factor in the decisions to grow tobacco by smallholder farmers in Malawi, Kenya, and Zambia. There is the need to more deeply understand what contributes to farmers' perceived viability of a crop. Understanding and addressing these factors may increase the successful uptake of alternative livelihoods to tobacco. Furthermore, this study demonstrates that a one-size fits all alternative livelihood intervention is less likely to be effective as each district has unique features affecting farmers' decisions on growing tobacco.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.