The Burkina Faso National Institute of Statistics and Demography (INSD), with technical assistance from the World Bank’s Poverty and Equity Global Practice and the Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS) program, and financial support by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the World Bank, disseminated the data and survey report for the third round of the Burkina Faso COVID-19 High Frequency Phone Survey (BFA COVID-19 HFPS). The BFA COVID-19 HFPS is set to be conducted monthly by phone between June 2020 and May 2021, covering about 2,200 households, representative at national and urban/rural level. The main objective of the survey is to meet the urgent need for timely data and evidence to monitor the crisis and inform interventions and policy responses in relation to the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and its potential impacts in Burkina Faso.
The first round of the survey, conducted from June 9 to July 1, 2020, covered a subsample of households of the Enquête Harmonisée sur les Conditions de Vie des Ménages (EHCVM), a household survey conducted by INSD in 2018/19 in collaboration with the World Bank. The extensive information collected in the EHCVM provides a rich set of background information for the BFA COVID-19 HFPS. This background information can be leveraged to assess the differential impacts of the pandemic in the country.
This note presents selected results on employment and income, agriculture and social protection of the third round of BFA COVID-19 HFPS. Data collection took place between September 12 and October 21, 2020, for a total of 2,013 successfully interviewed households.
The proportion of respondents who are employed has increased significantly, from 75.1% in the first round to 83.3% during in the second round, and 89.4% in the third round (Figure 1). The increase in the employment rate is mainly driven by the agricultural sector: 50% of new employed are in agriculture – household farms – and about 80% in rural areas. Hence, this increase is very likely related to a seasonality effect in agriculture. However, the non-poor seem to have benefitted more from this positive shift of the labor market. Between the first and third rounds, the proportion of non-poor who are employed increased by 15.2 percentage points, against only 8.9 percentage points for the poor.
Figure 1: Share of respondents who are employed
The increase in the employment rate has yet to translate into a clear increase of incomes. For instance, up to 11% of employees mentioned that, during the previous week, they were forced to work less than usual. Only 62% of wage earners mentioned that, during the last month, they did not receive the full normal payment of their salary. One in three household non-farm businesses (32.8%) noted that, compared to the previous month, there was a reduction in their revenues. The absence of customers is by far the main reason put forward by respondents to justify the reduction or lack of revenues (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Main reason for having lower income
7.2% of farmers declared that, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, they were obliged to change their plans regarding the agricultural activities. As illustrated in Figure 3, four types of adjustments stand out: farm households reduced the planted area and delayed the planting activities, planted crops that take less time to grow, and were forced to abandon some specific crops. These adjustments will very likely result in reduced production and, consequently, increase the risk of food insecurity in the near future.
Figure 3: Changes of crop planting activities due to COVID-19
When asked how the COVID-19 pandemic is impacting farming activities, farmers mentioned a range of factors (Figure 4), mostly related to travel restrictions, and difficulties to acquire or transport inputs such as fertilizers and seeds. These factors affected farmers equally, irrespective of their location or poverty status. Farmers also mentioned the price increase of seeds as being the main constraint in accessing seeds, while transport-related restrictions are the main constraints in accessing fertilizers.
Figure 4: Impact of COVID-19 on farms activities
Social protection is very limited in Burkina Faso: only 8.8% of households declared having received any form of assistance from an institution since March 2020 (11.6% in rural areas, 2.2% in Ouagadougou and 4% in other urban areas). Free food is by far the most important type of assistance. Other types of transfers, including cash transfers, are almost nonexistent (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Assistance from an institution since March
The social protection assistance is dominated by local NGOs (34.3%), the Government (32.8%), international NGOs (16.8%), and religious bodies (11.8%) (Figure 6).
Figure 6: Main source of assistance
To access the BFA COVID-19 HFPS dataset and related documentation, please visit the World Bank’s Microdata Catalog here.
The members of the team working on the BFA COVID-19 HFPS (listed in alphabetical order for each institution) are Zakaria Koncobo and Boureima Ouedraogo from the INSD; Prospere Backiny-Yetna, Marco Tiberti and Clarence Tsimpo Nkengne from the World Bank; Adama Tiendrebeogo from the WAEMU Commission.
Join the Conversation