Defining vulnerability
A case study from Zambia
Katie Schenk, Lewis Ndhlovu, Stephen Tembo,
Andson Nsune, Chozi Nkhata, RAPIDS
Interagency Task Team on Children and HIV and AIDS
Washington, DC
23-24th April 2007
Reaching AIDS-affected People with
Integrated Development and Support
ECR
Outline
• Introduction
– Aims, methods
• Results
– Quantitative and qualitative
• Lessons learnt
– Implications for programs
Study Aims
• To explore community
conceptualizations of vulnerability
• To examine vulnerability factors –
characteristics and prevalence
• To discuss implications for communitybased care and support interventions
Methods
• 6 sentinel sites
• Quantitative approaches: household
surveys
• Qualitative approaches: focus group
discussions and in-depth interviews
• Ethical issues
Results
Sociodemographics
Table 1: Description of household respondents
District name
Chongwe
(n = 241)
%
Kalomo
(n = 259)
%
Mazabuka
(n = 236)
%
Mpika
(n = 279)
%
Ndola
(n = 195)
%
Petauke
(n = 293)
%
Total
(n = 1,503)
%
Male
77
77
80
72
81
72
76
Female
23
23
20
28
20
28
24
Male
43
39
39
42
43
43
41
Female
42
37
39
43
40
41
40
Single
4
10
3
9
5
4
6
Sex of head of household
Respondent age (mean, in years)
Respondent marital status
Males
Females
Currently married
86
84
92
84
86
91
87
Divorced/separated
4
3
2
3
6
2
3
Widowed
6
3
3
4
3
3
4
Single
8
11
6
3
1
8
6
Currently married
42
56
50
48
61
54
52
Divorced/separated
15
9
16
10
11
10
11
Widowed
35
24
28
39
27
28
30
% of currently married who are in
polygamous marriages
Males
7
13
17
4
4
10
10
Females
14
14
25
10
2
13
13
Number of households
Household Composition
1000
Female-headed
800
Male-headed
13%
600
22%
400
200
73%
22%
29%
0
1 adult
2 adults
3-4 adults
5-6 adults
Number of adult members
7+ adults
Problems
•
•
•
•
LACK OF FOOD
health problems (adult and child)
increasing number of orphans
agricultural production problems (esp lack of
farming inputs)
• lack of money, material goods, earning
opportunities
• insufficient schooling support for children
Which Households?
•
•
•
•
Female-headed households
Elderly-headed households
Widow-headed households
Households with a member who is chronically
ill or disabled
• Households with a child member who has
been orphaned or taken in
• Households headed by children
• Households that are simply poor
Orphanhood and Fostering
Child-headed Households
• Qualitative vs quantitative data
– “My parents died 4 years ago and being the eldest
I look after 6 siblings. I have to put food on the
table and pay school fees, especially for those in
secondary school.”
– “I have taken up responsibility of looking after my
siblings. I like school but attending school won’t
put food on the table or pay for the much needed
school fees. I would rather work on the farms and
earn an income for my family.”
Female youths, Chongwe
Vulnerability Characteristics
All 6 sites
(n = 5,009)
%
Orphaned
(% of all
children)
Maternal orphan
(mother dead or unknown)
Paternal orphan
(father dead or unknown)
Double orphan
Vulnerable Child lives with a parent who is chronically ill
(% of all
Child lives in a hh with anyone who is chronically ill
children)
Child has been taken in from another hh
4
11
7
3
17
30
Child lives in a hh that has taken in children
53
Child lives in a female-headed hh
22
Child lives in an elderly-headed household
10
Child lives in a widow/er-headed household
14
Vulnerability Prevalence
neither
T otal
46%
32%
22%
vulnerable,
not orphaned
orphaned
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Vulnerability Distribution
1800
Number of children
1600
orphaned
not orphaned
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
1
2
3
4
Number of characteristics of vulnerability
5-7
Lessons Learnt
Implications for Programs
• Importance of community input
• Targeting
• Data requirements
• Further research
– Clustering, thresholds
– SES
– Link to outcomes
Thank you
kschenk@pcdc.org
www.rapids.org.zm
www.popcouncil.org/hivaids/orphans.html
www.popcouncil.org/horizons