In 2023, nearly ** percent of the world population in extreme poverty lived in Nigeria, considering the poverty threshold at **** U.S. dollars a day. Within the studied timeframe, the share mainly rose. Overall, the number of people living in extreme poverty in Africa was estimated to reach *** million in 2025.

Nigeria NG: Multidimensional Poverty Headcount Ratio: % of total population data was reported at 62.900 % in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 53.700 % for 2017. Nigeria NG: Multidimensional Poverty Headcount Ratio: % of total population data is updated yearly, averaging 58.300 % from Dec 2017 (Median) to 2021, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 62.900 % in 2021 and a record low of 53.700 % in 2017. Nigeria NG: Multidimensional Poverty Headcount Ratio: % of total population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Nigeria – Table NG.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. ;Government statistical agencies. Data for EU countires are from the EUROSTAT;;

Abstract

In this report, we present data from the emergency response survey conducted via telephone among households in three conflict affected regions of Nigeria, North East, North Central and South South between August-September 2017. This round is the second round of telephone data collected from a subsample of households in the Nigeria General Household Survey (GHS). The first round collected data on conflict exposure.

The purpose of this second round of data collection was to understand food insecurity in conflict affected regions. Armed conflict can have a detrimental effect on food security. This might be due to for example reduced agricultural production, or price increases due to malfunctioning markets. Food insecurity might be permanent, such that a household living below the poverty line has a constant struggle to acquire food from the market or produce food for their own use. In situations such as armed conflict, also better endowed households might be temporarily food insecure.

In this report, we find that food insecurity is a major concern in all the three regions studied:

· The mean household in all the three regions is “highly food insecure” · North East of Nigeria is the most food insecure of the three regions · Reducing meals or portion size is the most important coping strategy in all three regions · Food prices are the most important source of food insecurity in all three regions · A large majority of households rely on the market as the main source of food in all regions. Price concerns should therefore be taken very seriously by policy makers. · Households in all three regions do not report there being an inadequate supply of food in the market.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage Households

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

The Survey covered all household members. The questionnaire was administered to only one respondent per household - most often a male household head.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The food security survey was a telephone based survey conducted between August 15th and September 8th 2017. The interview was the second round of a telephone survey using a sub-set of the sample of GHS (General Household Survey) households. The first round of the telephone interview was administered during spring 2017 with 717 completed interviews with the following geographical distribution: 175 interviews in the North East, 276 in North Central and 266 in South South. The first round was focused on conflict exposure, while the second round discussed in this report focused on food insecurity in conflict affected regions.

In the three conflict affected geographical zones comprising of 16 states of Nigeria, households from LGS's that had high conflict exposure were oversampled chosen for a pilot sample, conducted before the telephone surveys. These LGS's were chosen based on the following criteria: The oversampled LGS's needed to have over 10 conflict events during 2012-14 recorded in the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) database.

The first round of the telephone survey (which took place after the pilot) first attempted to reach 742 households from the GHS panel, of which 529 could be reached and interviewed. The rest did not have phone numbers or functioning phone numbers (only 2.7 percent refused to answer). In order to increase the sample size to a level that was considered adequate for the survey, an additional 288 replacement households were included in the sample also from the GHS panel. Out of these replacement households 188 could be interviewed. Therefore altogether 1030 households were attempted to be reached, with a final sample size of 717 completed interviews.

Conflict affected areas were oversampled in order to have a large enough sample of households that in fact experienced conflict events in order to shed light on the type of events that have happened. A random sample of the zones might have given too small sample of conflict affected households and therefore restricted the analysis of the various types of conflict events. Due to the oversampling however, the sample drawn was not representative at the level of the geographical zone, as is the case in the GHS. Therefore in the analysis we use sampling weights that adjust for the propensity of being in a conflict affected LGA in order to ensure that the sample is representative at the level of the geographical zone.

During the second round of the survey 582 of the 717 households were re-interviewed on food security related issues (only the 717 were attempted to be reached). Of the 582 households, 147 in the North East, 219 in North Central, and 216 in South South were interviewed. The attrition rates in our sample from round one to round two are hence 16 percent, 21 percent, and 19 percent for North East, North Central and South South, respectively. The attrition from the conflict survey round was mostly due to not being able to reach the respondents possibly due to non-functioning phone numbers. Only 3 percent of respondents refused to answer.

Similar telephone-based surveys are being conducted in six countries in Sub-Saharan Africa under the World Bank project "Listening to Africa". As a comparison, a mobile phone survey in Tanzania (see Croke et al. 2012 for details), had a high drop-out rate between the very first rounds from 550 to 458 respondents, but very low attrition for the subsequent rounds for the 458 respondents, who could reliably be reached by a mobile phone. In light of this reference point and also considering the fact that the households interviewed live in conflict affected regions, our attrition rates seem to be within reasonable limits.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Response rate

The first round of the telephone survey (which took place after the pilot), first attempted to reach 742 households from the GHS panel, of which 529 could be reached and interviewed. The rest did not have phone numbers or functioning phone numbers (only 2.7 per cent refused to answer). In order to increase the sample size to a level that was considered adequate for the survey, an additional 288 replacement households were included in the sample also from the GHS panel. Out of these replacement households 188 could be interviewed. Therefore altogether 1030 households were attempted to be reached, with a final sample size of 717 completed interviews. The response rate is 96%

Data appraisal

Limitations Recall Bias In the pilot data collection, respondents were asked to report on conflict events that had taken place in their family and their community over the last six years. This extremely long recall period must be considered when drawing inferences from the data. People are likely to under-report less severe (and therefore less memorable) events, particularly those that happened to community members in larger communities. Respondents are also more likely to recall events that happened to family members than those that happened to community members. Other biases may also be at play - for example, those who have been most highly affected by conflict over the last six years may have moved to another community. These factors demonstrate the importance of implementing a regular data collection schedule, which would allow far more accurate data to be collected.

Sampling Bias The GHS is a panel survey taking place over multiple rounds through a period of time. Therefore, households that are more mobile or households that are nomadic are less likely to be represented in this sample. This may be particularly relevant in circumstances where nomadic groups are named as perpetrators of conflict events.

Power Dynamics There are some disadvantages to the phone system, and for this reason it should be supplemented by additional types of data collection wherever possible. In a mobile phone survey, the respondent is the person who owns a mobile phone. In many areas, particularly those highly affected by poverty and those located in rural areas, only one family member owns a mobile phone. This is generally the household head, who is most likely male. Furthermore, in many of these communities, women are not allowed to have access to mobile phones and are forbidden from speaking to outsiders, which can prohibit mobile phone-based data collection.

Gender Dynamics The questionnaire was administered to only one respondent per household - most often a male household head. This means that crimes that carry stigma, especially sexual violence, are less likely to be reported. In this dataset, no sexual assault was reported despite data collected elsewhere that indicate that rape was used as a weapon by Boko Haram and elsewhere. This also means that violence that affects members of the household with less power (such as women, children, and employees), is less likely to be reported. This may be particularly important when considering violence not related to ongoing external conflict, such as domestic violence.

Nigeria’s inflation has been higher than the average for African and Sub-Saharan countries for years now, and even exceeded 16 percent in 2017 – and a real, significant decrease is nowhere in sight. The bigger problem is its unsteadiness, however: An inflation rate that is bouncing all over the place, like this one, is usually a sign of a struggling economy, causing prices to fluctuate, and unemployment and poverty to increase. Nigeria’s economy - a so-called “mixed economy”, which means the market economy is at least in part regulated by the state – is not entirely in bad shape, though. More than half of its GDP is generated by the services sector, namely telecommunications and finances, and the country derives a significant share of its state revenues from oil. Because it got highTo simplify: When the inflation rate rises, so do prices, and consequently banks raise their interest rates as well to cope and maintain their profit margin. Higher interest rates often cause unemployment to rise. In certain scenarios, rising prices can also mean more panicky spending and consumption among end users, causing debt and poverty. The extreme version of this is called hyperinflation: A rapid increase of prices that is out of control and leads to bankruptcies en masse, devaluation of money and subsequently a currency reform, among other things. But does that mean that low inflation is better? Maybe, but only to a certain degree; the ECB, for example, aspires to maintain an inflation rate of about two percent so as to keep the economy stable. As soon as we reach deflation territory, however, things are starting to look grim again. The best course is a stable inflation rate, to avoid uncertainty and rash actions. Nigeria todayNigeria is one of the countries with the largest populations worldwide and also the largest economy in Africa, with its economy growing rapidly after a slump in the aforementioned year 2017. It is slated to be one of the countries with the highest economic growth over the next few decades. Demographic key indicators, like infant mortality rate, fertility rate, and the median age of the population, all point towards a bright future. Additionally, the country seems to make big leaps forward in manufacturing and technological developments, and boasts huge natural resources, including natural gas. All in all, Nigeria and its inflation seem to be on the upswing – or on the path to stabilization, as it were.

Abstract

The purpose of this second round of data collection was to understand food insecurity in conflict affected regions. Armed conflict can have a detrimental effect on food security. This might be due to for example reduced agricultural production, or price increases due to malfunctioning markets. Food insecurity might be permanent, such that a household living below the poverty line has a constant struggle to acquire food from the market or produce food for their own use. In situations such as armed conflict, also better endowed households might be temporarily food insecure. In this report, we find that food insecurity is a major concern in all the three regions studied:

• The mean household in all the three regions is “highly food insecure”.

• North East of Nigeria is the most food insecure of the three regions.

• Reducing meals or portion size is the most important coping strategy in all three regions.

• Food prices are the most important source of food insecurity in all three regions.

• A large majority of households rely on the market as the main source of food in all regions. Price concerns should therefore be taken very seriously by policy makers.

• Households in all three regions do not report there being an inadequate supply of food in the market.

Geographic coverage

Zones, States and Local Government Areas (LGAs).

Analysis unit

• Individuals

• Households

• Communities

Universe

The survey covered all household members. The questionnaire was administered to only one respondent per household - most often a male household head.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

In the three conflict affected geographical zones comprising of 16 states of Nigeria, households from LGS's that had high conflict exposure were oversampled chosen for a pilot sample, conducted before the telephone surveys. These LGS's were chosen based on the following criteria: The oversampled LGS's needed to have over 10 conflict events during 2012-14 recorded in the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) database.

The first round of the telephone survey (which took place after the pilot) first attempted to reach 742 households from the GHS panel, of which 529 could be reached and interviewed. The rest did not have phone numbers or functioning phone numbers (only 2.7 percent refused to answer). In order to increase the sample size to a level that was considered adequate for the survey, an additional 288 replacement households were included in the sample also from the GHS panel. Out of these replacement households 188 could be interviewed. Therefore altogether 1030 households were attempted to be reached, with a final sample size of 717 completed interviews.

Conflict affected areas were oversampled in order to have a large enough sample of households that in fact experienced conflict events in order to shed light on the type of events that have happened. A random sample of the zones might have given too small sample of conflict affected households and therefore restricted the analysis of the various types of conflict events. Due to the oversampling however, the sample drawn was not representative at the level of the geographical zone, as is the case in the GHS. Therefore in the analysis we use sampling weights that adjust for the propensity of being in a conflict affected LGA in order to ensure that the sample is representative at the level of the geographical zone.

During the second round of the survey 582 of the 717 households were re-interviewed on food security related issues (only the 717 were attempted to be reached). Of the 582 households 147 in the North East, 219 in North Central, and 216 in South South were interviewed. The attrition rates in our sample from round one to round two are hence 16 percent, 21 percent, and 19 percent for North East, North Central and South South, respectively. The attrition from the conflict survey round was mostly due to not being able to reach the respondents possibly due to non-functioning phone numbers. Only 3 percent of respondents refused to answer.

Similar telephone-based surveys are being conducted in six countries in Sub-Saharan Africa under the World Bank project "Listening to Africa". As a comparison, a mobile phone survey in Tanzania (see Croke et al. 2012 for details), had a high drop-out rate between the very first rounds from 550 to 458 respondents, but very low attrition for the subsequent rounds for the 458 respondents, who could reliably be reached by a mobile phone. In light of this reference point and also considering the fact that the households interviewed live in conflict affected regions, our attrition rates seem to be within reasonable limits.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Research instrument

The questionnaire is divided into 9 sections including a household roster. Information on food insecurity (the coping strategy index, CSI), food and market access, water quality, employment, income, employment and assets were collected.

Cleaning operations

Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics in Stata 15. All data analysis was tracked using comprehensive do files to ensure reproducibility. All statistics presented in this report have been adjusted with probability weights, when possible, to be representative at the level of the geopolitical zone.

Demographics for each geopolitical zone were analyzed based on the complete GHS 2016 dataset.

Response rate

The first round of the telephone survey (which took place after the pilot), first attempted to reach 742 households from the GHS panel, of which 529 could be reached and interviewed. The rest did not have phone numbers or functioning phone numbers (only 2.7 percent refused to answer). In order to increase the sample size to a level that was considered adequate for the survey, an additional 288 replacement households were included in the sample also from the GHS panel. Out of these replacement households, 188 could be interviewed. Therefore altogether 1030 households were attempted to be reached, with a final sample size of 717 completed interviews.

The response rate is 96%.

Data appraisal

Limitations

• Recall Bias

In the pilot data collection, respondents were asked to report on conflict events that had taken place in their family and their community over the last six years. This extremely long recall period must be considered when drawing inferences from the data. People are likely to under-report less severe (and therefore less memorable) events, particularly those that happened to community members in larger communities. Respondents are also more likely to recall events that happened to family members than those that happened to community members. Other biases may also be at play - for example, those who have been most highly affected by conflict over the last six years may have moved to another community. These factors demonstrate the importance of implementing a regular data collection schedule, which would allow for more accurate data to be collected.

• Sampling Bias

The GHS is a panel survey taking place over multiple rounds through a period of time. Therefore, households that are more mobile or households that are nomadic are less likely to be represented in this sample. This may be particularly relevant in circumstances where nomadic groups are named as perpetrators of conflict events.

• Power Dynamics There are some disadvantages to the phone system, and for this reason, it should be supplemented by additional types of data collection wherever possible. In a mobile phone survey, the respondent is the person who owns a mobile phone. In many areas, particularly those highly affected by poverty and those located in rural areas, only one family member owns a mobile phone. This is generally the household head, who is most likely male. Furthermore, in many of these communities, women are not allowed to have access to mobile phones and are forbidden from speaking to outsiders, which can prohibit mobile phone-based data collection.

• Gender Dynamics The questionnaire was administered to only one respondent per household - most often a male household head. This means that crimes that carry a stigma, especially sexual violence, are less likely to be reported. In this dataset, no sexual assault was reported despite data collected elsewhere that indicate that rape was used as a weapon by Boko Haram and elsewhere. This also means that violence that affects members of the household with less power (such as women, children, and employees), is less likely to be reported. This may be particularly important when considering violence not related to ongoing external conflict, such as domestic violence.

每天生活费不足2.15美元的贫困人口比例：2017 PPP：占人口百分比在12-01-2018达30.900%，相较于12-01-2015的32.300%有所下降。每天生活费不足2.15美元的贫困人口比例：2017 PPP：占人口百分比数据按年更新，12-01-1985至12-01-2018期间平均值为41.350%，共8份观测结果。该数据的历史最高值出现于12-01-1996，达58.400%，而历史最低值则出现于12-01-2018，为30.900%。CEIC提供的每天生活费不足2.15美元的贫困人口比例：2017 PPP：占人口百分比数据处于定期更新的状态，数据来源于World Bank，数据归类于全球数据库的尼日利亚 – Table NG.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality。

每天生活费不足3.65美元的贫困人口比例：2017 PPP：占人口百分比在12-01-2018达63.500%，相较于12-01-2015的63.300%有所增长。每天生活费不足3.65美元的贫困人口比例：2017 PPP：占人口百分比数据按年更新，12-01-1985至12-01-2018期间平均值为69.900%，共8份观测结果。该数据的历史最高值出现于12-01-1996，达79.100%，而历史最低值则出现于12-01-2015，为63.300%。CEIC提供的每天生活费不足3.65美元的贫困人口比例：2017 PPP：占人口百分比数据处于定期更新的状态，数据来源于World Bank，数据归类于全球数据库的尼日利亚 – Table NG.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality。