M.M. Islam*
Joint Director
Palli Daridro Bimochon Foundation, Head office, Mirpur-2, Dhaka-1216, Bangladesh
M.A.Baree
Associate Professor
Department of Crop Science and Technology, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh
M.S. Ali
Professor
Department of Agricultural Extension & Information System, Sere-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
M.M.Rahman
Managing Director
Palli Daridro Bimochon Foundation, Head Office, Mirpur-2, Dhaka, Bangladeash
M.S.U.Talukder
Deputy Director
Palli Daridro Bimochon Foundation, Head Office, Mirpur-2, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Contribution, PDBF, Socio-economic development.
Bhaluka upazila under Mymensingh district, Serpur upazlia under Bogra district and Bhairab upazila under Kishoreganj district
Socio-economic and Policy
Socio-economic status
The study was undertaken in three upazilas namely Bhaluka upazila under Mymensingh district, Serpur upazlia under Bogra district and Bhairab upazila under Kishoreganj district. All the group members organized by Palli Daridro Bimochon Foundation (PDBF) of the 3 selected upazilas were considered as the locale of the study. The numbers of PDBF beneficiaries were 2767, 3450 and 2229 in Bhaluka, Serpur and Bhairab upazilas respectively. Thus, a total of 8446 beneficiaries of PDBF of these 3 selected upazilas constituted the population of the study. By taking 4% of the population a total of 338 PDBF beneficiaries were selected proportionate randomly as the sample of the study. Data were collected personally by the researcher himself in a face to face condition with the individual respondent by using interview schedule. The data collection took six months from September, 2011 to February, 2012.
Measurement of variable Age, education, family size, farm size, savings behavior, group cohesion, credit received, credit utilization, credit repayment behavior, participation with PDBF, training exposure, income generating activities, adoption of innovation, and attitude towards PDBF activities were considered as the independent variable of the study. Age of the respondents was measured in terms of years on the basis of his/her response. The age of the respondents were measured in terms of actual years from his/her birth to the time of interview. A score of 0.5 was assigned to those who could sign their name only. A score of zero (0) was assigned to illiterate respondents. Family size of a respondent could be measured by assigning a score of one for each member of the family. Farm size was estimated on the basis of the cultivated area either owned by a farmer or cultivated on share cropping. Savings behavior was measured as regularly, occasionally, seldom and not at all bases. Nine items scale was considered to measure group cohesion. The score of group cohesion of the respondent could range from ‘0’ to ‘27’. Credit received was measured to the amount of money received of last 3 years by a respondent as loan from any institutional source or no institutional source. It was expressed in ‘000’ Taka. Credit utilization behaviors of the respondent were measured by the percentage of loan used for assigned purposes. Four types of repayment behavior was considered for this study treated as regular, irregular, default and not at all basis and the scores of respondents could range from 0 to 3. Organizational participation with PDBF was measured by adding, the scores after multiplying by duration of participation (year) for all types of membership. Training exposure was measured by the total number of days of training received by the respondent under different training programs. Income generating activities were measured on their nature of participation in different income generating activities as frequently, occasionally, seldom and no participation. Adoption of innovation of a responded was measured on the basis of the degree of adoption of 8 selected improved agricultural technologies and the score of a respondent could range from ‘0’ to ‘24. Attitude towards PDBF activities were measured by constituting of 14 statements (7 positive and 7 negative). The scores of respondents could range from 0 to 56.
Contribution of PDBF activities on socio-economic development of the beneficiaries was considered as the only dependent variable of the study. Measurement of overall socio-economic development of the beneficiaries through PDBF activities was determined by summing the changes scores for all the 11 selected dimensions before and after involvement with PDBF. For the convenience of calculation and description, the following formula was used for determining the contribution of socio-economic development of the beneficiaries through PDBF activities. Y=Y1+Y2+Y3+Y4+Y5+Y6+Y7+Y8+Y9+Y10+Y11
Where, Y=score of socio-economic development of the beneficiaries through PDBF activities; Y1=change in participation of women empowerment; Y2=change in awareness on social issues: Y3=change in sanitation condition; Y4=change in drinking water sources: Y5=change in household water sources; Y6=change in the treatment of diseases; Y7=change in ability to bear family expenses; Y8=change in the dressing habit; Y9=change in housing condition; Y10=change in wealth possession Y11=change in participation in health activities. Thus, the possible range of the impact of socio-economic development scores of the beneficiaries through PDBF activities could range from ‘0’ to ‘33’ where, ‘0’ indicated "no development" and ‘33’ indicated "very high development".
IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science (IOSR-JAVS) e-ISSN: 2319-2380, p-ISSN: 2319-2372.Volume 7, Issue 1 Ver. I (Jan. 2014), PP 01-07 www.iosrjournals.org
Journal