Poverty from multidimensional perspectives : a micro level study of seven Malaysian kampungs (villages) / Ataul Huq (Pramanik)

Poverty is an endemic feature of many developing countries. In this respect, Malaysia is considered to be in a better position. Ataul Huq's Poverty From Multidimensional Perspectives: A Micro Level Study of Seven Malaysian Kampungs, however, shows that Malaysia is not completely immune from the poverty situation. The first three of the fourteen chapters deal with the methodology, data collection and characteristics of the villages studied. The rest of the book deals with explaining the causes of poverty in the area and a critical evaluation of Poverty Reduction Programme (PPRT) of Malaysia. In the last chapter the author prescribes measures for reducing poverty in the study areas in particular and in Malaysia in general. The study is based upon participant observation, personal interviews, and the administration of questionnaire to a representative sample of 161 households in 7 villages in the district of Ijok selama in the state of Perak, Malaysia. The data were gathered in the middle of 1994. The factors identified for poverty in the study area are multidimensional in nature. The study found that those who are at the poverty level have large families. Those with small families are better off. As for the age structure, those who belong to high achievers category appear to be older than those in low achievers. The study also found gender bias in poverty. For example, the households belonging to the higher age structure mostly comprise female-headedh ouseholds and thus are less likely to suffer from poverty than the households headed by males and belonging to the lower age structure, below forty six. Among the social factors, the study shows that the high achievers, on average, have greater access to general education of four years or more compared to low achievers. The study also shows that. with the exception of Kg. Sangkut. about 25 to 40% of the sampled households do not have homestead lands and, hence, are vulnerable to economic uncertainties. In terms of earnings and expenditures of the respondents, the study considered those adults who have less than RM 70.00 monthly income as "poor" and those whose income is less than RM 35.00 as "hard core" poor. The results on the pooled data of seven villages indicate that the proportion of poor including the hard core in the study area is more than 50 percent. The percentage of those families suffering from abject poverty, i.e.. the hard core poor, is a little over one-tenth. The access to farming asset, e.g. land, emerges as one of the significant causes of abject poverty. The high achievers are likely to have higher access to farm land compared to low achievers. Since farming is considered as more risk prone. the income from the non-farming sector, i.e.. factory jobs, significantly explainsthe level of achievements. It is evident from the study that the high achievers are likely to have, on average, more than one working member in the family while for low achievers much less than one member qualifies for a factory job. Even in terms of having access to small jobs like driving, teaching, defence services the high achievers are likely to have higher access to more such assured sources of income compared to low achievers. It also appears that the percentage of families whose per capita monthly expenditure lies below RM 70.00 jumps to 75 percent as opposed to 66 percent under income based estimation of poverty. The study interestingly indicates that the higher percentage of low achievers (35 percent) are dissatisfied with the moral standard of the local political leaders involved in rural development programmes like PPRT. In other words, these people feel that their local leaders do not do justice to the real poor. This micro-level study also suggests that higher income or growth may contribute to lowering absolute poverty provided the relative inequality does not worsen. The author claims that the absolute poverty results to a certain extent from relative inequality. This means that without addressing the issue of relative inequality any attempt to redress absolute poverty will be least effective. In analysing the religious, historical and attitudinal factors for poverty the author found that the historical forces resulting from the colonial legacies (such as illiteracy, non-accessibility to land) are predominant in two out of seven villages, both of which have been identified as low achievers. In the remaining villages, historical forces seem to be comparatively weaker and they are doing better than those two poor achievers. Finally, the study found that the family members from among the low achievers tend to resort to large scale internal migration than those from high achievers. This adversely affects family stability. In order to meet the needs of the poor the government of Malaysia has adopted certain measures. However, according to the author, there are many institutional, bureaucratic, substantive and financial restraints which militate against the realization of government efforts. Therefore, the author suggested several measures. First, surplus and waif lands be distributed through co-operatives having landless families as members. Second, the government should provide incentives for the poor families to rear goats, 'sheep and other domestic animals. Cows and buffaloes, he 'suggests, are a good source of cash income to meet other family needs. The poor families could also be involved in rearing poultry under the principle of cooperatives. Third, the poor families with school going children should be given child allowances (an opportunity cost for families) for sparing their children to have general education and vocational training, etc. Fourth, the government should minimise the misuse of funds allocated for poverty focused programmes in the form of heavy investment in administration as well as infrastructures. Efforts may be made to build socio-economic and physical infrastructures serving a group of planned villages in clusters and not each and every individual village having pockets of poverty. Additionally, the government should create additional work opportunities; encourage formation of co-operatives; include religious and moral values in the Rakan Muda programmes; allocate Trust Funds more efficiently; and to continue the provision of low cost housing. In brief, the book has highlighted the poverty situation of seven villages in Perak state of Malaysia. However, several observations are in order. First, the book may not be an accurate study of the poverty situation in Malaysia. It is a micro study of seven villages and should be confined to these villages only. It will not be wise to generalise the situation for the whole country. Second, the book contains many theories and statistical data which general readers may not be able to understand. Terms like "trickle up" "trickle down" ought to have been better explained. Finally there are quite a few printing errors including in the chapter headings. Thus, Chapter seven on page 59 is titled the "physiological factors" instead of "psychological factors". Despite these limitations, this book is an important contribution on the Malaysian economy. The author has raised a very important issue in the book and has tried to substantiate his arguments through empirical data. The book contains many tables and figures. It offers creative and effective solution for the reduction of poverty in rural areas of the country. As rightly pointed out by Professor Di Raja Ungku A. Aziz in the Foreword, says that this "study can be a useful basis for exploration of causality and for an examination of the specific effects of certain programmes launched by government agencies with the intention of reducing the extent of rural poverty.”