Pandemic, informality, and vulnerability: impact of COVID-19 on livelihoods in India

Abstract

We greatly acknowledge their efforts in the project and several others who provided their valuable feedback at numerous stages of the project. We are particularly grateful to Deepti Goel, Arjun Jayadev, Rajendran Narayanan, and Anand Srivastava for several discussions and for their comments and feedback. We acknowledge Azim Premji University and the Azim Premji Philanthropic Initiatives for their support and funding for the project. We are thankful to the staff at the various civil society organizations who conducted the interviews and the numerous student volunteers from Azim

COVID-19 and women's nutrition security: panel data evidence from rural India

“…In Ceballos et al, (2020) phone survey in Harayana and Odisha, households reported inability to access or afford sufficient quantity and variety of foods. Kesar et al (2020) phone survey of 12 states, 75% of respondents reported consuming less food than before the lockdown, and 35% not having enough money to buy a week's worth of essential goods like food, water, and healthcare. Acharya (2020) phone study concludes that between 50 and 60% of households in the different states faced shortages of food items (mostly nonstaples such as fresh foods and vegetables) in the 30 days preceding the survey and reduced food intake during the lockdown.…”

“…Acharya (2020) phone study concludes that between 50 and 60% of households in the different states faced shortages of food items (mostly nonstaples such as fresh foods and vegetables) in the 30 days preceding the survey and reduced food intake during the lockdown. The limitations of previous studies using telephone surveys were that they (a) were primarily qualitative using self-reported measures to determine food security outcomes (Acharya, 2020;Ceballos et al, 2020;Kesar et al, 2020); (b) the survey data collected were cross-sectional, without a reliable baseline for comparison and assess the extent of change first; (c) they did not distinguish between to access and consumption of staples and nonstaples separately and (d) except for Acharya (2020), focused on the household at large not accounting for intrahousehold food allocation or the disproportionate effect on women. The following section details the study's location, data collection, analytical framework, validation, and measurement.…”

“…Two studies try to capture the extent of safety net program outreach during the lockdown. Kesar et al (2020) in their phone survey carried on rural and urban workers across 12 states of India, observe that household access to safety net relief measures was not equal. While nearly 80% of households had received the PDS ration, anywhere between 40 and 60% did not receive any cash transfers under various government schemes.…”

Gender and COVID-19: What have we Learnt, One Year Later?

“…In India, a survey conducted in April 2020, shortly after the implementation of lockdown measures, shows that women were more likely than men to report additional child and elderly care responsibilities (South Asia Gender Innovation Lab 2020). Another study for India shows that women who lost their jobs in the initial phase of the pandemic were more likely than men to report themselves as being engaged in domestic activities, and less likely to actively seek employment (Kesar et al 2021). Some of the cross-country studies further show that the presence of school-age children in the household is empirically correlated with the loss of employment by women.…”

Opinion Mining of Saudi Responses to COVID-19 Vaccines on Twitter

“…This has resulted in serious economic problems for many countries, including the Arab Gulf states, which have suffered due to the lower demand for oil. As pointed out by Kesar, et al [5], the coronavirus pandemic has resulted in a large-scale humanitarian crisis leading to misery and suffering for all of humanity, and pushing social and economic well-being to the brink of collapse.…”