Support types by wealth categories

Differences in geographical distribution are most pronounced between the financial networks of rich households and those of poor households while differences in social composition are most pro-nounced between the advice networks of rich households and those of poor and middle households (Figure 17a–c).

Labor

Figure 17a shows that poor households draw least on translocal labor but attribute relatively greater importance to translocal labor than other households. The majority of labor available to poor house-holds is provided through local bonding ties to relatives and local bridging ties to neighbors, whereas the former are of considerably higher importance than the latter. In comparison to middle and rich households, the poor have less translocal bonding ties to seasonally migrating household members, but nevertheless attribute high importance to them.

Labor networks of middle household differ from labor networks of other households in terms of a more pronounced dominance of bonding ties. In particular, local bonding ties to relatives are more frequent, while local bridging ties to neighbors are less frequent than among other households. With regard to limited translocal ties, middle households attribute comparatively lower importance to translocal bonding ties to seasonally migrating household members and relatives than do other households.

Rich households draw more than other households on translocal labor and, to an equal extent, draw on bonding and bridging ties. Characteristically, rich households draw the biggest share of labor through local bridging ties to neighbors. Local bonding ties to relatives are not only less frequent, but also of relatively lower importance than among other households. Rich households also draw more than other households on translocal bonding ties, mostly provided by relatives at district level, and perceive of them as highly important source of labor.

Advice

As Figure 17b shows, poor households draw more on and attribute greater importance to translocal advice than middle and rich households. Poor households draw the majority of advice through local bonding ties to relatives but consider them as relatively less important. Local bridging ties to neigh-bors are less frequent and of lower importance than among other households. The relatively higher share of translocal advice among poor households is due to a higher share of translocal bridging ties to agricultural extension agencies, such as the district branch of the DOAE. These translocal bridging ties are not only more frequent but also relatively more important than among other households.

Simultaneously, poor households draw a relatively higher share of advice through translocal bonding ties to migrating household members and relatives, which are considered the most important source of advice.

Middle households draw less than other households on translocal advice. Dominant local advice is, like among rich households, of considerably higher importance than translocal advice. The high fre-quency and importance of local advice is particularly due to frequent and important local bonding ties to relatives, while the low frequency and importance of translocal advice is due to a particularly low share of less important translocal bridging ties to extension agencies.

Advice networks of rich households are characterized by a dominance of bridging ties. In particular, rich households draw more on translocal bridging ties to agricultural extension agencies and ac-quaintances than do other households. At the same time rich households draw less on translocal bonding ties to migrating household members and relatives and attribute lower importance to them.

With regard to local advice, rich households draw more on local bridging ties to neighbors and at-tribute greater importance to them than do other households. Local bonding ties to relatives are less frequent than among other households but of high importance.

Figure 17(a–c): Tie distribution and composition in terms of frequency and importance, by support types and wealth category

Finance

Figure 17c shows that poor households, for accessing financial support, draw less on translocal ties but more on bonding ties than other households. Although less translocal than networks of middle and rich households, financial networks of poor households are characterized by a higher share of translocal bonding ties, in particular with migrating household members, which are considered the most important source of finance. At the same time, poor households draw more than other

house-holds on local bridging ties to community institutions, such as village funds or saving groups, and considerably less on translocal bridging ties to financial institutions, such as the BAAC.

Financial networks of middle households show similarities with those of poor households and those of rich households. Like poor households, middle households draw the majority of finance through local bridging ties to community institutions and translocal bonding ties to migrating household members and relatives. At the same time middle households draw a considerable share of finance through translocal bridging ties to financial institutions, explaining the relatively higher overall share of translocal ties and bridging ties among middle households.

Rich households draw more on translocal financial ties and attribute comparatively higher im-portance to translocal financial ties than other households. Unlike among poor and middle house-holds, bridging ties account for the majority of financial support and are of comparatively higher importance. Networks of rich households are characterized by a relatively higher share and im-portance of translocal ties due to a higher share of translocal bridging ties to financial institutions, such as the BAAC. Local bonding ties to migrating household members and relatives, instead, are of lower frequency and importance than among other households. At the same time, rich households draw less frequently on local bridging ties to community institutions and also consider them as less important than do other households.