Integrate feedback Uganda

_drivers-of-inequality-uganda.qmd

@@ -14,19 +14,22 @@
 <!-- intro/overall -->
 Uganda generally has a degree of inequality that fluctuates but over time seems largely unchanged,
 as does the share of people below its poverty line in recent years.
-The long-term level of welfare inequality in the country had a slight upward trend,
+The long-term level of income inequality in the country stayed relatively stagnant,
 with a Gini coefficient for the consumption per capita of 0.36 calculated for the 1992/93 census and a World Bank calculation of 0.43 for the year 2019,
-with the coefficient rising slighly in the years 2002/03 and 2009/10 during its fluctuation [@Lwanga-Ntale2014; @Atamanov2022, see also @fig-uga].
-However, the overall aggregation masks several important distinctions:
-Rural inequality on the whole is lower than urban inequality, with @Lwanga-Ntale2014 finding coefficients of 0.35 and 0.41 for 2012/13 respectively.
-Additionally, he sees quintile inequalities primarily driven by the highest quintile (0.25) with the middle-incomes less affected (0.05-0.07),
-also finding a significantly higher coefficient for the first quintile (0.14), however.
-These inequality levels remain mostly unchanged from 2012/13 to 2019/20 but hide qualitative dimensions such as the shift out of a lower-income agricultural livelihood predominantly taking place among older men who have at least some level of formal education and are from already more well-off households [@Atamanov2022].
+with the coefficient rising slighly in the years 2002/03 and 2009/10 during its fluctuation [@Atamanov2022, see also @fig-uga],
+while @Lwanga-Ntale2014 finds a slight upward trend over time.
+However, the aggregation masks several important distinctions:
+Rural inequality overall is lower than urban inequality, with @Lwanga-Ntale2014 finding Gini coefficients of 0.35 and 0.41 for 2012/13 respectively.
+Additionally, he sees inequalities between income quintiles primarily driven by the highest (0.25) and lowest (0.14) quintiles,
+whereas middle-income show lower Gini coefficients (0.05-0.07).
+These inequality levels remained mostly unchanged between 2012/13 and 2019/20 but hide qualitative dimensions such as the shift out of a lower-income agricultural livelihood predominantly taking place among older men who have at least some level of formal education and are from already more well-off households [@Atamanov2022].
 
 ```{python}
 #| label: fig-uga
 #| fig-cap: "Gini index of consumption per capita for Uganda. Source: Author's elaboration based on UNU-WIDER WIID (2022)."
-plot_consumption_gini_percapita(uga)
+gni_cnsmpt = uga[uga['resource'].str.contains("Consumption")]
+gni_cnsmpt_percapita = gni_cnsmpt[gni_cnsmpt['scale'].str.contains("Per capita")]
+gini_plot(gni_cnsmpt_percapita)
 ```
 
 <!-- poverty -->
@@ -38,8 +41,8 @@ with an improvement in 2019/20 conversely being linked to favorable weather cond
 <!-- TODO find citation or put Atamanov -->
 @Ssewanyana2012 find that in absolute terms poverty fell significantly (from 28.5% in 2005/06 to 23.9% in 2009/10) but there are clear relative regional differences emerging,
 with Western Ugandan households increasing in poverty while Northern and Eastern households reduced their share of households below the poverty line.
-Additionally they find, while transient poverty is more common than chronic poverty in Uganda,
-nearly 10% of households continue to live in persistent or chronic poverty.
+Additionally, they find that while transient poverty is more common than chronic poverty in Uganda,
+nearly 10% of households continue to live in persistent material deprivation.
 Lastly, for a long time it has been seen as an issue that Uganda puts its national poverty line too low with the line being put between 0.94 USD PPP and 1.07 USD PPP depending on the province (lower than the international live of 1.90 USD PPP),
 while @vandeVen2021 estimate a living income of around 3.82 USD PPP would be required for a national poverty line that meets basic human rights for a decent living.
 <!-- TODO find a source for the national poverty line being too low (quant data is already in vandeVen2021) -->
@@ -63,6 +66,8 @@ instead of looking into more transformative policy approaches which would operat
 removing oppressive structures of inequality in tandem with government institutions at multiple levels.
 
 <!-- water access -->
+### Inequalities in access to drinking water
+
 Such personal circumstances as access to a timely education play decisive role in life and human capital development ---
 circumstances to which decent housing as well as access to clean water are equally fundamental building blocks [@Atamanov2022].
 In 1990 a policy initiative to shift from a supply-driven to a demand-driven model for rural drinking water provision was enacted which, over time,
@@ -81,7 +86,7 @@ only 28% of households had access to improved water [@Mulogo2018].
 and of the fewer existing improved water sources, only 53% were fully functional,
 with 24% being only partly functional (having only low or intermittent yield) and 18% not being functional at all.
 Additionally, they found blocked drainage channels in some of the sources which could in turn lead to a possible health risk due to contamination of the source.
-@Naiga2018 sees some reasons for the low access to working improved water sources in the absence of many of the organizational characteristics prescribed by the design principles of its community-managed water infrastructure management ---
+@Naiga2018 argues that some reasons for the low access to working improved water sources is the absence of many of the organizational characteristics prescribed by the design principles of community-managed water infrastructure management ---
 unclear social boundaries, missing collective-choice arrangements and a lack of sanctions or conflict resolution mechanisms ---
 in other words, a policy failure resulting in lack of sufficient self-governance arrangements.