ABSTRACT
The previous chapter addressed the issue of the structural transformation of the countryside, using evidence from local-level studies to make the case for a profound change in the basis of rural life and livelihood. Studies from across the region show — consistently — an increase in the contribution of non-farm incomes to total incomes. What the chapter did not address was the question of how these changes have influenced (and are influenced by) the operation of the household, and the social processes and structures that constitute the household. Moreover, little attention was paid to the differential effects of these changes on different classes or groups in rural society — men and women, young and old, rich and poor. The discussion that follows, then, is designed to add flesh to the (largely) economic skeleton pieced together in the previous chapter. While diversification may be occurring on a broad (and global) scale, interpretations of what such diversification means are diverse and often conflicting. In a survey article concentrating on studies from sub-Saharan Africa, but which is equally relevant to Southeast Asia, Ellis warns:
Diversification may occur both as a deliberate household strategy, or as an involuntary response to crisis. It is found both to diminish and to accentuate rural inequality. It can act both as a safety valve for the rural poor and as a means of accumulation for the rural rich. It can benefit farm investment and productivity or impoverish agriculture by withdrawing critical resources (Ellis 1998: 2).
