Poverty reduction is a key objective of development interventions. Evaluating the effectiveness of policies and programmes thus requires practical, reliable and contextrelevant measures of poverty. This article is the first to compare the newly presented Extreme Deprivation Index (EDI) framework with the increasingly used global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) framework. Locally adapted versions of both nonmonetary poverty measures were calculated for each household using an original survey in Rwanda's main coffee-producing region (a high deprivation context) and another in Laos' main coffee-producing region (a relatively low deprivation context). We highlight the crucial role of rural labour markets for many of the poorest and discuss the implications of our findings for policy design and evaluation. We find that, despite limited overlap, in both contexts each index identifies households that are consistently worse off on multiple key markers of poverty and can therefore be considered valid measures. In addition, our analysis shows that known key markers of poverty can predict adjusted global MPI status better than EDI status in Laos, whereas the EDI framework performs best in Rwanda. We conclude that the EDI framework provides a quick and reliable way to identify households with very low standards of living in high deprivation contexts. It is particularly useful for programmes with limited resources operating in comparatively poor rural settings.

This paper explores the organization of production in Rwanda's main coffee producing zone. Most rural households in the region have limited access to land and stable employment. Yet, while differences in property and employment appear small from afar, this paper shows why they are consequential: even when marginal, these differences interact with time and market pressures (e.g. relative dependence on household food production or need for cash) that shape the complex and gendered labour relations between and within generally landpoor households. In a context of heightened precarity, such a labour-centred approach helps chart the prevailing trajectories of accumulation and exploitation.