R4D Armenia

Constraints and Potential to the Development of Rural Non-Farm Activities in Armenia

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:57 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Davis, J.R.; Asatrian, P.; Kharatyan, H.

Production Year: 2002

Citation: Davis, J.R.; Asatrian, P.; Kharatyan, H. Constraints and Potential to the Development of Rural Non-Farm Activities in Armenia. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2002) 115 pp. [NRI Report No: 2683]

Summary: The report provides a coherent set of strategy measures and action programme for the diversification of activities in the rural areas of Armenia. The main findings of this report will complement the Government of Armenia’s (GoA) agriculture development strategy delineating the main lines of an action plan for the promotion of activity diversification in rural areas. It is expected that the reports will indicate priorities for the design of technical assistance projects dealing with the diversification of activities and rural development.

The report is organised as follows. The first section provides background information on the RNFE in Armenia. The second section summarises recent agricultural sector and macroeconomic developments in Armenia as they relate to the RNFE. The third section describes the sampled communities socio-economic structure, agricultural sector and natural resource base. Section 4 outlines our regional/community level analysis of the pattern of nonfarm rural employment and income generating activities (IGAs) diversification in a transition economy context. Section 5 of the report is based on our social survey and focus group activities which analyse the main determinants of participation in the non-farm economy. The findings from section 5 are then discussed and elaborated upon in Section 6 of the report where data are presented on the activities of “successful” rural non-farm diversifiers – nonfarm enterprises – which is presented in the context of the rural economies of the surveyed marzes/ regions (Ararat, Gegharkounik and Syunik). Finally, the main findings of the report are placed in a national context and RNFE policy proposals and suggestions on strategic planning are advanced.

Development of non-farm activities in the Armenian village

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:42 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Kharatyan, H.

Production Year: 2002

Citation: Kharatyan, H. Development of non-farm activities in the Armenian village. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2002) 34 pp. [NRI Report No. 2680]

Summary: The present study aims to identify different kinds of rural non-farm activity, types of economic initiatives and ideas, factors underlying the adoption or non-adoption of these varied activities as well as income and labor inputs for these activities. At the level of the rural household, we sought to identify the key obstacles, positive factors, and possible avenues of future non-farm activity development in Armenian villages through meetings and discussions with the rural population of Armenia.

The Rural Non-Agricultural Economy in Transition Countries: Findings from Armenia

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 05:50 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Bezember, D.; Davis, J.

Production Year: 2002

Citation: Bezember, D.; Davis, J. The Rural Non-Agricultural Economy in Transition Countries: Findings from Armenia. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2002) 36 pp. [NRI Report No. 2678]

Summary: There is evidence that economic diversity in the countryside has the potential to foster local economic growth and alleviate the rural-urban income gap and rural poverty. The situation in Armenia is discussed based on findings from a survey conducted in June 2001.

Factors affecting involvement in the non-farm economy in villages in Armenia

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 05:23 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Kharatyan, H.; Janowski, M.

Production Year: 2002

Citation: Kharatyan, H.; Janowski, M. Factors affecting involvement in the non-farm economy in villages in Armenia. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2002) 12 pp. [NRI Report No: 2735]

Summary: This paper is based on data collected through fieldwork carried out in Armenia in 2001, part of the baseline data collection for a wider project on non-farm economic activities in Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS countries which covered Romania, Armenia and Georgia. Fieldwork was carried out in three villages, chosen to be as representative as possible of variables affecting Armenian villages, particularly in relation to access to non-farm activities. Economic activity in villages, and factors affecting livelihood strategies, are discussed.

The Rural Non-Farm Economy in Armenia, Georgia and Romania: A Synthesis of Findings

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 04:57 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Davis, J.R.; Bezemer, D.J.; Wandscheider, T.

Production Year: 2003

Citation: Davis, J.R.; Bezemer, D.J.; Wandscheider, T. The Rural Non-Farm Economy in Armenia, Georgia and Romania: A Synthesis of Findings. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2003) 37 pp. [NRI Report No: 2731]

Summary: The focus of this paper is on rural non-farm livelihoods in economies in transition. The intended outputs of this study are (1) to improve understanding of the dynamics of the RNFE in providing employment and income diversification opportunities in Armenia, Georgia and Romania, and (2) to promote mechanisms for integrating research results into relevant policy processes. The empirical work presented in this report is primarily based on large (nation-wide) rural household surveys and other field-related research activities using a broad range of methodologies.

The Rural Non-Farm Economy in Armenia: Overview of Findings

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 04:39 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Bezemer, D.; Davis, J.

Production Year: 2003

Citation: Bezemer, D.; Davis, J. The Rural Non-Farm Economy in Armenia: Overview of Findings. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2003) 38 pp. [NRI Report No: 2728]

Summary: The focus of this paper is on rural non-farm livelihoods in Armenia. The empirical work presented in this report is primarily based on a large (nation-wide) rural household survey and other field-related research projects representing a broad range of methodologies borrowed from economics, sociology and social anthropology.

Sustaining Rural Livelihoods: A Report On Farming And Non-Farm Activities In Three Communities In Armenia

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 04:29 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Kharatyan, H.

Production Year: 2003

Citation: Kharatyan, H. Sustaining Rural Livelihoods: A Report On Farming And Non-Farm Activities In Three Communities In Armenia. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2003) 37 pp. [NRI Report No: 2727]

Summary: The main objective of this study is to examine how people in rural Armenia sustain their livelihoods after the privatisation reforms of 1991. Based on a case study of three rural communities, it examines whether farming and non-farm activities provide a social safety net to the impoverished rural population. The study is especially concerned with the types and nature of non-farming activities that people in Armenian villages are engaged in. It aims to identify the main obstacles to nonfarming activities in Armenia and to present recommendations for policy design and planning.

Rural Non-Farm Livelihood Activities In Romania, Georgia And Armenia: Synthesis Of Findings From Fieldwork Carried Out At Village Level 2001–2002

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 03:48 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Janowski, M.

Production Year: 2003

Citation: Janowski, M. Rural Non-Farm Livelihood Activities In Romania, Georgia And Armenia: Synthesis Of Findings From Fieldwork Carried Out At Village Level 2001–2002. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2003) 18 pp. [NRI Report No: 2724]

Summary: As part of a project funded by DFID and being carried out in collaboration with the World Bank, which focuses on the rural non-farm economy (RNFE) in Georgia, Armenia and Romania, qualitative, anthropological research using a variety of methods including focus group discussion, key informant interview and participant observation was conducted, in two phases between December 2000 and May 2002.

This research looked at livelihood activities of all kinds, including farming, activities linked to farming and activities which are separate from farming. This included subsistence activities, barter and sources of cash. The relationship between different kinds of livelihood activities was also examined.

A synthesis of the main findings of the research is presented here, with conclusions and recommendations.

Rural Non-Farm Livelihoods in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia and the Reform Process: A Literature Review

Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:11 GMT

Document Type: Report
Creator: Bright, H.; Davies, J.; Janowski, M.; Low, A.; Pearce, D.

Production Year: 2000

Citation: Bright, H.; Davies, J.; Janowski, M.; Low, A.; Pearce, D. Rural Non-Farm Livelihoods in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia and the Reform Process: A Literature Review. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK (2000) 70 pp. [NRI Report No. 2633]

Summary: While agriculture still constitutes the backbone of the rural economy, non-farm activities and sources of income are increasingly significant for rural households in transition economies. It is now widely recognised that in the longer term the development of the rural non-farm sector is a critical factor in providing rural employment and income. The need for policymakers to effectively address the needs of the rural non-farm sector provides the rationale for the policy research project ‘Characterisation and Analysis of the Non-Farm Rural Sector in Transition Economies’ led by the Natural Resources Institute for the World Bank and Department for International Development.

The intended outputs of this project are to improve understanding of the dynamics of the non-farm sector in providing employment and income diversification opportunities, and to promote mechanisms for integrating research results into relevant policy processes. The purpose of this paper is to review literature and studies on the rural non-farm sector and the associated reform process in the rural economy. Particular emphasis is placed on Romania, Armenia, Georgia and the Ukraine, as these are the case-study countries selected for the project.

Left behind in transition? Poverty, social networks and social support amongst older people in Central Asia and the Caucasus

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:00 GMT

Project Status: Current
Project Background:

The break-up of the Soviet Union and the subsequent transition to market-led economies was accompanied by severe economic disruption and a crisis in public funding. A significant amount of research has been conducted into the impact of economic transition on living standards of the population in general and children in particular. However, there has been relatively little research focusing on older people, despite the fact that the older population face particular challenges in terms of the falling value of pensions and shrinking government services. Having lived their entire working lives in a planned socialist state, they now find themselves in later life facing a new world / politically, economically, socially, psychologically and physically.

This project examines the living conditions and sources of finance and social support (both state and family) amongst older people living in the seven poorest countries of the former Soviet Union / Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. The project uses a mixed method design, combining quantitative analysis of recently available household survey data in each of the 7 countries combined with in depth qualitative research in 3 case study countries.

Project Objectives: The main objective of the proposed research project is to shed light on the living conditions and sources of finance and social support (both state and family) amongst older people living in the seven poorest countries of the former Soviet Union / Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan (known as the CIS-7). A secondary aim is to disseminate these findings to key stakeholders, both regionally and within the international donor community, and to influence the poverty alleviation programmes in these countries