Effects of Climate Finance on Risk Appraisal: A Study in the Southwestern Coast of Bangladesh
Table 3
Summary of differences in socioeconomic profiles of climate finance (CF HHs) and nonclimate finance households (non-CF HHs).
Findings ( value)
CF households
Non-CF households
Household size
No significant difference
4.07
4.27
Educational attainment
Significant difference at 10% confidence interval value (0.062)
(i) The lower level of illiteracy with 69.6% (ii) Higher completion of the primary level with 26.3% (iii) Higher completion of the secondary level with 4.2%
(i) A higher level of illiteracy with 75.8% (ii) Lower completion of primary level with 25.6% (iii) No completion of secondary level
Land-holding size
No significant difference
However, more men have land than women; both CF men and CF women have more land than non-CF women
Housing conditions
Significant difference at 0.01% and 0.05% confidence interval
Tenancy value (0.049)
(i) 4.2% CF live free (ii) Only 1 CF rents (iii) 85% own housing (iv) More (10%) inherited from parents
(i) More non-CF (11.7%) live free (ii) 0 non-CF rents (iii) More non-CF (80%) own housing (iv) Less (8.3%) inherited from parents
Location now
(i) More CF (10.4%) live outside embankment (ii) 7 CF live on embankment (iii) Less CF (74.6%) live inside embankment (iv) More CF (12.1%) live upland
(i) Less non-CF (2.5%) live outside embankment (ii) 0 non-CF live on embankment (iii) More non-CF (94.2%) live inside embankment (iv) Less non-CF (3.3%) live upland
Household construction material value (0.016)
(i) More CF (3.8%) houses made of mud (ii) More CF (22.9%) houses made of leaves (iii) Less CF (66.7%) houses made of corrugated tin (iv) More CF (2.9%) houses made of brick and cement (v) More CF (3.8%) houses made of others (wicker)
(i) Fewer non-CF (0.8%) houses made of mud (ii) More non-CF (13.3%) houses made of leaves (iii) More non-CF (83.3%) houses made of corrugated tin (iv) Fewer non-CF (1.7%) houses made of brick and cement (v) Fewer non-CF (0.8%) houses made of others (wicker)
Water purification methods
(i) Less CF (1.3%) use water purification tablets (ii) More CF (2.5%) use filtering systems (iii) Less CF (21.7%) use boiling (iv) More CF (62.1%) use fitkari (aluminium sulfate, also known as alum) as others (v) Less CF do not use any purification method (12.5%)
(i) More non-CF (2.5%) use water purification tablets (ii) 0 non-CF use filtering systems (iii) More non-CF (23.3%) use boiling (iv) Fewer non-CF (45%) use fitkari (aluminium sulfate, also known as alum) as others (v) More non-CF do not use any purification method (29.2%)
Primary source of income
Significant difference at 0.05% confidence interval
(i) More CF wage labourer (55.4%) (ii) Less CF in service (6.3%) (iii) More CF in trade (8.8%) (iv) More CF fishermen (7.5%)
(i) Less non-CF wage labourer (40.8%) (ii) More non-CF in service (25.5%) (iii) Fewer non-CF in trade (7.5%) (iv) Less non-CF fishermen (5.8%)
Secondary source of income
Significant difference at 0.01% confidence interval
(i) More CF as pastoralist (12.5%) and wage labourer (5.4) (ii) 71.7% CF does not have any secondary source
(i) Only 1 farmer, 1 domestic worker, 1 begging non-CF (ii) 96.7% non-CF do not have any secondary source
Average monthly income
Difference
USD 59.9
USD 54.9
Membership in social groups
Significant difference at 0.01% confidence interval
Self-help groups
More CF (64.6%) participation in self-help group
Less non-CF (1.7%) participation in self-help group
Producer group
More CF (48.8%) participation in producer group
Less non-CF (0.8%) participation in producer group
DMC
More CF (10.5%) participation in disaster management committee (DMC)
Less non-CF (0.8%) participation in disaster management committee (DMC)
Cooperatives
More CF (76.3%) participating in cooperatives
Less non-CF (16.7%) participating in cooperatives
No membership in any social group
Less CF (3.8%) not participating in any social group
More non-CF (83.3%) not participating in any social group
