Poverty transition through targeted programme: the case of Bangladesh Poultry Model



Table 4. Multinomial logit model (Livelihood strategy #1 Agriculture includes livestock as comparison group.

#2 Livestock plus business/
skilled service___________________

#3 Livestock plus regular job

#4 Livestock plus wage labour

#5 Livestock plus other non-farm
(with international migration) jobs

Co-
efficient

Std.

Error

Sig.

Odds
ratio

Co-
efficient

Std.
Error

Sig.

Odds
ratio

Co-
efficient

Std.

Error

Sig.

Odds
ratio

Co-
efficient

Std.

Error

Sig.

Odds
ratio

Intercept

6.177

1.702

.00

2.207

2.882

.44

2.065

2.440

.40

5.418

1.749

.00

ed1

-.019

.106

.85

.98

.263

.147

.07

1.30

-.137

.166

.41

.87

.022

.103

.83

1.02

edu

.072

.101

.47

1.07

-.164

.146

.26

.85

.021

.163

.90

1.02

-.070

.101

.49

.93

deprat

-1.466

1.212

.23

.23

2.968

2.178

.17

19.45

-3.742

1.884

.05

.02

-2.110

1.277

.10

.12

adult

-.150

.659

.82

.86

1.689

1.008

.09

5.42

-1.990

1.072

.06

.14

-.052

.668

.94

.95

famS

.943

.523

.07

2.57

-1.222

.858

.15

.29

2.224

.833

.01

9.24

.894

.537

.10

2.44

Age

-.034

.022

.12

.97

-.017

.035

.62

.98

-.027

.036

.47

.97

-.027

.023

.24

.97

fhead

-1.097

1.403

.43

.33

-2.576

1.840

.16

.08

-2.210

1.793

.22

.11

-1.802

1.384

.19

.16

D11

-1.453

.767

.06

.23

-1.618

1.595

.31

.20

-1.481

1.223

.23

.23

-2.119

.906

.02

.12

Farm

-.404

.361

.26

.67

-.771

.560

.17

.46

-.771

.649

.23

.46

-.610

.343

.08

.54

lnyield

-.260

.051

.00

.77

-.020

.085

.82

.98

-.308

.099

.00

.73

-.137

.048

.00

.87

credit

.087

.518

.87

1.09

-.868

.940

.36

.42

1.757

.987

.08

5.79

.195

.534

.71

1.22

InBasset

-.059

.056

.30

.94

.005

.093

.95

1.01

-.013

.077

.86

.99

.069

.054

.20

1.07

lnlstk

-.730

.127

.00

.48

-.654

.173

.00

.52

-.466

.167

.01

.63

-.675

.131

.00

.51

distmkt

-.135

.309

.66

.87

-.736

.497

.14

.48

-.071

.396

.86

.93

.097

.313

.76

1.10

distroad

.135

.223

.55

1.14

-.451

.429

.29

.64

.374

.292

.20

1.45

-.036

.240

.88

.96

D1

1.582

1.356

.24

4.86

4.062

1.709

.02

58.07

2.883

1.534

.06

17.86

2.828

1.334

.03

16.91

tlength

.004

.036

.91

1.00

-.114

.064

.07

.89

-.002

.050

.97

1.00

-.062

.037

.10

.94

infoS

.254

.443

.57

1.29

-.618

.728

.40

.54

.320

.610

.60

1.38

.130

.456

.78

1.14

Model fit

Mean pred.

______prob.=0.313

% of correct
pred.=76.8

Mean pred.
prob.=0.154

% of correct

______pred.=88.7

Mean pred.
prob.=0.098

% of correct

______pred.=51.3

Mean pred.

________prob.=0.221

% of correct
pred.=35.2

Pseudo R square (Cox and Snell) = 0.748, Likelihood ratio Chi Square = 549.38 (sig = 0.00).

10



More intriguing information

1. Towards a framework for critical citizenship education
2. NATURAL RESOURCE SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: A COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM APPROACH
3. Declining Discount Rates: Evidence from the UK
4. Text of a letter
5. Update to a program for saving a model fit as a dataset
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. Imputing Dairy Producers' Quota Discount Rate Using the Individual Export Milk Program in Quebec
10. LOCAL CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE