The short-term economic effects of COVID-19 on low-income households in rural Kenya: An analysis using weekly financial household data
Wendy Janssensa b c, Menno Pradhanb c d, Richard de Groote f✉, Estelle Sidzeg h, Hermann Pythagore Pierre Donfoueth i j, Amanuel Alemu Abajobirg h
- aVrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development and Tinbergen Institute, Netherlands
- bTinbergen Institute (Tinbergen Institute Roetersstraat 31 1018 WB Amsterdam The Netherlands - Netherlands)
- cVU - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam [Amsterdam] (De Boelelaan 1105 1081 HV Amsterdam - Netherlands)
- dVrije Universiteit, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development and Tinbergen Institute, Netherlands
- eAmsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Netherlands
- fAmsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development (Amsterdam, - Netherlands)
- gAfrican Population and Health Research Center, Kenya
- hAPHRC Campus - African Population and Health Research Center, Inc (Kenya)
- iAfrican Population and Health Research Center (Kenya) and CREM, UMR CNRS 6211, University of Rennes 1, France
- jCREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management (7 place Hoche, BP 86514 35065 RENNES CEDEX - France)
Papers open inside SciRah from the original publisher or repository; SciRah never hosts them.
Abstract
This research assesses how low-income households in rural Kenya coped with the immediate economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. It uses granular financial data from weekly household interviews covering six weeks before the first case was detected in Kenya to five weeks after during which various containment measures were implemented. Based on household-level fixed-effects regressions, our results suggest that income from work decreased with almost one-third and income from gifts and remittances reduced by more than one-third after the start of the pandemic. Nevertheless, household expenditures on food remained at pre-COVID levels. We do not find evidence that households coped with reduced income through increased borrowing, selling assets or withdrawing savings. Instead, they gave out less gifts and remittances themselves, lent less money to others and postponed loan repayments. Moreover, they significantly reduced expenditures on schooling and transportation, in line with the school closures and travel restrictions. Thus, despite their affected livelihoods, households managed to keep food expenditures at par, but this came at the cost of reduced informal risk-sharing and social support between households.

