The intersecting crises affecting poverty in Bangladesh

Bangladesh’s poverty reduction has been precarious, and risks being stalled or even reversed amidst intersecting crises such as climate-related disasters, political violence and economic shocks. The country achieved remarkable economic growth and strong poverty reduction from the beginning of the 21st century. As our recent research uncovers, rates of chronic poverty and impoverishment in rural Bangladesh were relatively low (2.4% and 4.6% respectively) between 2011 and 2019, when applying the US$ 1.90 international poverty line that was in use at the onset of the study period. However, these shares hide the underlying vulnerability of many Bangladeshis. Indeed, rates of chronic poverty and impoverishment drastically increase to 44.3% and 9.0% respectively when the US$ 1.90 international poverty line is doubled (this doubling of an extreme poverty threshold is a common practice in assessments of vulnerability).

Drivers of poverty

Bangladeshis can experience impoverishment for many reasons – including the ill health or death of earning household members, food price increases, high indebtedness, land disputes, and limited education or job opportunities (in a nation of 170 million people, more than 30 million are not in work or education).

And, as might be expected, the COVID-19 pandemic – which came as both a health and an economic shock – undid significant progress in poverty reduction. An estimated 1.6 million people in Bangladesh were pushed into poverty by the pandemic. Many rural households became impoverished in 2020 and struggled to regain their pre-COVID-19 income by 2021.

The other major drivers of poverty and vulnerability to poverty in Bangladesh are severe floods and political violence. Neither are uncommon in the country, and both have been simultaneously experienced in recent months.

Climate-related shocks affect a large share of Bangladesh’s population. The country is vulnerable to a number of climate-induced natural hazards, including floods, tropical cyclones, tornadoes, coastal and riverbank erosion, droughts, and landslides. Bangladesh is ranked the seventh extreme disaster risk-prone country in the world and children living in the country are thought to be the most exposed to climate and environmental hazards. In areas where communities are at risk, poverty reduction is substantially lower.

Floods – the most economically damaging climate-related disaster – are a continuous threat for Bangladeshis, with 57.5% of the population classified as being exposed to high flood risk and an estimated 3.5 million people at risk of annual river flooding. This year, millions of people across Bangladesh have again been affected by catastrophic floods caused by severe monsoon conditions, significantly impacting livelihoods. The floods have damaged or destroyed homes, schools, villages, roads, fisheries and crops (an estimated 1.1 million metric tons of rice have been destroyed and more than 200,000 tons of vegetables have been impacted).

Meanwhile, although Bangladesh is not a ‘fragile’ country according to most international indices, political violence nonetheless permeates within its borders. Violence principally involves riots (violent demonstrations, often involving spontaneous action by unorganised, unaffiliated members of society) and protests of a political nature, which accounted for the biggest share (around 60%) of total reported violent events in Bangladesh between 2010 and 2018.

Recent incidents include clashes between political protesters and the police in the run up to the January 2024 election. Then in July 2024, peaceful student-led anti-government demonstrations against civil service job quotas escalated into violence between security forces and protestors. There were weeks of unrest, hundreds of deaths and over 20,000 people were injured. Bangladesh’s former prime minister Sheikh Hasina resigned and fled to India (arrest warrants have since been issued against her, and dozens of her close aides, on charges of “crimes against humanity”), and an interim government is currently in place.

Analysing the effect of crises, including when they intersect

There is a need to analyse the effect of different crises on poverty dynamics to inform policy responses and build resilience. And, given that climatic disasters, conflict, economic crises and health shocks don’t always happen in isolation (as seen this year, with floods and unrest co-occurring), it is also important to analyse the effect of intersecting crises.

In our recent research, we examined climate-related disasters (droughts and floods) and conflict and political violence to assess their relationship with household poverty dynamics in rural Bangladesh, using four large datasets. We also examined the impact that COVID-19 and related economic shocks and stressors had on poverty.

While political violence was linked to a higher probability of chronic poverty, especially among the poorest households, it is the strong prevalence of flooding in Bangladesh that seemingly may account for high levels of vulnerability to long-term poverty.

We found that four in five households were living in a union (a local government area) affected by flooding at some point between 2011 and 2019. As many as 62% of households reported that flooding severely or extremely severely affected their food consumption, while 73% reported that flooding also severely or extremely severely affected their economic conditions. Our analysis showed a higher rate of transient poverty among households living in an area that experienced floods relative to living in an area where these disasters did not occur over the studied period. There is likely to be a degree of bidirectionality however, where floods might drive impoverishment, but equally, more marginalised populations may be residing in more flood-prone areas.

Our results also suggest that simultaneous exposure to shocks may prolong poverty and lower household resilience, significantly contributing to the precarity that Bangladeshis face.

We found the rate of chronic and transient poverty is highest in areas experiencing multiple crises and shocks that overlap with floods, whether in terms of violence, economic shocks or ill health. The largest share of negative trajectories is seen when households experience both floods and violence; they have a higher probability of chronic poverty and a lower probability of resilience than those who experience just floods. While the floods and political violence experienced in recent months are not included in our data, we can surmise that these combined events will have a significantly negative impact on household resilience.

Coping strategies and building resilience

When faced with crises, household coping strategies appear to be most limited in relation to flooding, followed by economic shocks. Taking out credit (such as a loan from an NGO/institution or Mahajan/non-institutional source) was the most common active coping response across different types of shock (but this will put pressure on longer-term recovery, and taking out credit was less frequently available for people in chronic poverty). We also found that livelihoods can play an important role in mitigating the negative effects of shocks on poverty. In particular, consumption assets (which may offer liquidity to be sold in times of crises) and land ownership can cushion the impact of flooding.

Our research paper highlights some policy responses that could be considered to strengthen coping strategies and build resilience. They include social protection programmes (such as anticipatory cash transfers that are automatically triggered by flood projections); asset development; different forms of insurance (such as agriculture, livestock, credit, asset and health); improved climate information systems; and guaranteed, year-round employment schemes to provide a more stable safety net (extending programmes like the Employment Generate Programme for the Poorest, which aims to generate jobs in rural areas, but only during certain periods of the year).

It is clear there is a strong need to build individual-, household-, and system-level resilience to a range of shocks to help prevent impoverishment and propel an escape from poverty that can be sustained over time – and in an era of intersecting crises, it is no longer sufficient to respond only to individual events.

This blog was written with the support of the DEEP communications team.