Isabel Lambrecht

Consequences of increased farm resilience on food security in Tajikistan

Unprecedented climate change, socio-economic shocks, and political conflict exacerbate food insecurity. Worsened conditions and increased vulnerability now give prominence to improving farm resilience to withstand shocks. This article aims to analyse the effect of farm resilience on food security outcomes in Tajikistan. Using panel data collected in 12 districts in the Khatlon Province of Tajikistan from 2015 to 2023, the study has the following. (a) measure farm resilience determinants (pillars) through adaptive capacity, transformation capacity, and robustness; (b) estimate the relationship between resilience pillars and food security outcomes; (c) cluster farm households based on the level of resilience pillars; and (d) estimate the effect of farm resilience on food security outcomes. The study first measures farm resilience pillars using Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Next, Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) is used to classify farm households into three resilience categories: “Low Resilience”, “Medium Resilience”, and “High Resilience”. The estimation strategy involves making causal claims using LPA and Propensity Score Matching (PSM) techniques. Our results suggest a positive relationship between farm resilience and food security outcomes. Our findings also confirm that “High Resilience” and “Medium Resilience” profiles experience better dietary diversity, higher fruit and vegetable consumption, or decreased household hunger, compared to the “Low Resilience” profile. Such a positive relationship underlines the importance of strengthening farm resilience. Further development agendas for Tajikistan should consider resilience thinking, especially in shock-prone zones. Objectives: (a) measure farm resilience determinants (pillars) through adaptive capacity, transformation capacity, and robustness; (b) estimate the relationship between resilience pillars and food security outcomes; (c) cluster farm households based on the level of resilience pillars; and (d) estimate the effect of farm resilience on food security outcomes. The study first measures farm resilience pillars using Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Next, Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) is used to classify farm households into three resilience categories: “Low Resilience”, “Medium Resilience”, and “High Resilience”. The estimation strategy involves making causal claims using LPA and Propensity Score Matching (PSM) techniques. Our results suggest a positive relationship between farm resilience and food security outcomes. Our findings also confirm that “High Resilience” and “Medium Resilience” profiles experience better dietary diversity, higher fruit and vegetable consumption, or decreased household hunger, compared to the “Low Resilience” profile. Such a positive relationship underlines the importance of strengthening farm resilience. Further development agendas for Tajikistan should consider resilience thinking, especially in shock-prone zones.

Gender attitudes in agriculture and positivity bias: A survey experiment in four countries in sub-Saharan Africa

Income aspirations and migration: Evidence from rural Tajikistan

In places with limited employment opportunities, households aspiring to increase their income are mainly left with two options: either (a) invest locally in their farm or non-farm enterprises, or (b) earn income elsewhere via migration. With survey data from 1,705 respondents from rural Tajikistan, we analyze the relationship between income aspirations and household investment strategies, and we contrast this to the relationship between income aspirations and international migration. We find evidence of a strong link between the income aspirations gap and international migration, but, strikingly, we do not observe any association between the income aspirations gap and local investment in farm or non-farm assets. These results suggest that households do not view local investment as a viable strategy for increasing income. Exploring heterogeneity, we find that these results can vary by household poverty status and household land endowments, but not by the respondent’s gender. Given the prominence of migration in the study area, this also suggests that remittances commonly serve different purposes than farm or non-farm investments — such as supporting households in their day-to-day expenditures or funding major ritual events.