# _Discussion_

In an agrarian economy, as is the case in some LMICs under study, many jobs are in the primary sector (agriculture, forestry, mining) and may involve heavy manual labor, which people with physical difficulties may not be able to do. People with hearing or cognition difficulties, on the other hand, may not experience barriers to physical labor. The effect of disability on employment will also depend on the workplace, its accessibility, available accommodations and transport, and whether there may also be discrimination that might prevent access to employment and/or might lead to lower wages. The policy context is also relevant; for instance, vocational rehabilitation, disability insurance or social assistance programs could facilitate, limit, or not affect access to employment for disabled people depending on how they are designed and implemented.

Results in this paper are consistent with those from several studies in LMICs finding that persons with disabilities are less likely to be employed and are more often in the informal sector (WHOWorld Bank 2011; Mizunoya and Mitra 2013)<sup>5</sup> and that the relative employment rate tends to be higher in low-income countries compared to middle-income countries (Mizunoya and Mitra 2013). People with disabilities may be more often in the informal sector due to barriers they face in the formal labor market. This study further adds to the literature by showing the functional difficulty gradient in the disability gap and the higher idle rate among youths with disabilities.

Finally, this study shows that the unemployment rate, although it is part of SDG indicator to be disaggregated by disability status (indicator 8.5.2), should be used with caution and should be complemented with other labor market outcomes such as the employment population ratio. The unemployment rate is significantly higher among persons with any difficulty in six countries but lower in eight countries while the EPR was lower for persons with disabilities in almost all countries. Persons with functional difficulties may disproportionately drop out of the labor force by stopping to search for work and hence are not captured in the unemployment rate.

# **Poverty**

Table 4.3 gives poverty headcounts using international poverty lines of $1.90, $3.20, $5.50. It also gives the headcount using $1.90 but applying the household consumption expenditures per capita net of health expenditures. Poverty headcounts were calculated based on daily household consumption aggregates divided by household size to obtain local currency and nominal daily per capita consumption expenditures (PCE). PCE were adjusted using PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) conversation rates of the International Comparison Program (2011) for each country. Poverty headcounts are close to published poverty headcounts, except for Uganda where our estimates are higher at more than 60%.<sup>6</sup> Using the international poverty lines of $1.90, $3.20, $5.50, poverty headcounts are significantly higher among persons with functional difficulties in some countries (Ethiopia, Namibia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda). However, there are variations depending on the threshold for the poverty line

> 5 For a recent review of the literature, see United Nations (2019).

> 6 For Afghanistan, the international poverty rate is not available. But our computation is larger compared to the national poverty rate.

28