|N.E Nigeria|29.0|22.5|6.5|14.0|22.5|-8.6|18.5|22.5|-4.0|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Somalia|53.6|70.7|**-17.2****|32.9|52.8|**-19.9*****|40.7|59.0|**-18.3*****|
|South Sudan|49.7|20.5|**29.2***|29.3|14.2|**15.1*****|32.5|14.9|**17.6*****|
|Sudan|44.7|39.5|5.2|13.7|8.3|5.4|27.0|16.6|**10.3*****|
|**A (%)**||||||||||
|Ethiopia|61.1|58.1|**3.0*****|57.4|58.6|-0.013|61.1|58.1|**2.9*****|
|N.E Nigeria|59.0|61.2|-2.2|57.1|64.1|-7.0|58.0|63.3|**-5.3***|
|Somalia|62.5|62.6|-0.1|62.4|64.4|**-2.0****|62.5|63.0|-1.3|
|South Sudan|59.9|58.3|1.7|62.5|59.1|**3.4****|61.9|59.0|**2.9****|
|Sudan|58.7|58.2|0.6|58.2|55.2|3.0|58.6|57.1|**1.5***|

Source: Authors’ calculations based on data from the High Frequency Surveys of Ethiopia (2017), Nigeria (2018), Somalia (2017), South Sudan (2017) and Sudan (2017). H is the incidence of multidimensional poverty; A is the intensity of multidimensional poverty and MPI=H*A. Asterisks indicate statistical significance at 1% ***, 5% ** and 10% * levels.

The results reveal that in all countries, female-headed IDP/refugee households have a higher incidence of poverty and MPI than female-headed households that are not displaced. We also note the emerging pattern that, for female-headed households in camps (Ethiopia, Sudan) multidimensional poverty appears higher and more intense than for their female-headed counterparts living outside camps. In Ethiopia and Sudan, there is a 28 and 18 percentage point difference in incidence between female-headed households in camps and in the host community, respectively, whereas the differences between the female-headed IDP households and female-headed host community households of Nigeria, Somalia, and South Sudan are 12 percentage points or smaller. This finding among female headship is particularly notable in Sudan, considering the fact that its neighbor South Sudan sees overall bigger differences in magnitude of multidimensional poverty between male- and female-headed households within the country overall, as well as when disaggregated by displacement status. This suggests that, in determining a household’s level of multidimensional poverty, the gender of the household head interacts not only with displacement status, but type of displacement status (e.g. living in camps or resettled) and that our multi-country comparison succeeds in capturing the diversity of IDP experiences.

Looking at the breadth of poverty, Figure 4 reveals that male- and female-headed households in Somalia are likely to suffer a similar intensity of poverty (average deprivation share among the poor), which suggests that the observed difference in MPI is generally driven by the difference in the incidence of poverty. In contrast, there is a significant difference in intensity between the two groups in Ethiopia and South Sudan, with only 46% of the poor female-headed households being in the lowest intensity band in the latter, compared to 63% of male-headed households. More, in South Sudan, nearly 24% of the multidimensionally poor female-headed households are deprived in 70% or more of the weighted indicators, while only 17% of poor male-headed households have such high intensity. The direction of the overall difference in Ethiopia and South Sudan can be explained by the difference in the share of poor households with an intensity of 70% or more by female- versus male-headed households, with a higher proportion among the former (9.5% vs 3.5% in Ethiopia, and 23.5% vs 17% in South Sudan).

_Figure 4: Distribution of intensities among MPI poor male- and female-headed households: by country_ 19