Agricultural non-wage production and health status

Audibert, Martine

doi:10.1016/0304-3878(86)90093-3

Cited by 40 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The average indirect impact of illness (a loss of 495 hours of labor) remains greater than the direct impact (a loss of 24 hours of labor) even with the inclusion of the interaction term. These results are not consistent with previous research that failed to detect the impact of illness on farm labor or farm output (Audibert, 1986;Nur, 1993). We suggest that coarse measurement of labor use and of high degree of labor aggregation might explain why these previous studies failed to detect the impact of transient labor shocks 3 .…”

Section: [Table 2 Goes About Here]contrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Secondly, we hypothesize that hired labor markets are ineffective in mitigating illness shocks. Audibert (1986) attempted to measure the impact of malaria on rice production using a production function model without controlling for illness endogeneity. Two explanatory variables related to the health status of the households were included in the model: one captured the impact of malaria and another impact of schistosomiasis on rice output.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transient Health Shocks and Agricultural Labor Demand in Rice-producing Households in Mali

Larochelle

Dalton

2005

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: [Table 2 Goes About Here]contrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transient Health Shocks and Agricultural Labor Demand in Rice-producing Households in Mali

Larochelle

Dalton

2005

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Previous research conducted on agricultural estates has focused on three other diseases common to adults: schistosomiasis (Foster 1967; Fenwick & Figenschou 1972; Collins et al. 1976; Audibert 1986; Parker 1992); malaria (Brohult et al. 1981; Pehrson et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of HIV/AIDS on labour productivity in Kenya

Fox

Rosen

Macleod

et al. 2004

Tropical Med Int Health

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summaryobjectives To estimate the impact of HIV/AIDS on individual labour productivity during disease progression.methods We used a retrospective cohort design to study the productivity and attendance of tea estate workers who died or were medically retired because of AIDS-related causes between 1997 and 2002 in western Kenya. We compared daily output in kilograms of tea leaves plucked, use of paid and unpaid leave and assignment to less strenuous tasks by 54 workers who died or were medically retired because of AIDS to those of comparison workers, matched on time and tea field using longitudinal regression.results HIV-positive workers plucked less tea in the 18 months preceding AIDS-related termination and used more leave in the 3 years before termination. After adjusting for age and environmental factors, cases plucked between 4.11 and 7.93 kg/day less in the last year and a half before termination. Cases used between 9.2 and 11.0 more sick leave days, between 6.4 and 8.3 more annual leave days, between 19.9 and 11.8 more casual leave days, and spent between 19.2 and 21.8 more days doing less strenuous tasks in the 2 years before termination than did comparison pluckers. Tea pluckers who terminated because of AIDS-related causes earned 16.0% less in their second year before termination and 17.7% less in the year before termination.conclusion These results provide empirical estimates of the impact of HIV/AIDS on labour productivity. As workers often bring unrecorded 'helpers', actual differences may be greater. Decreased attendance and output may put sick workers in jeopardy of losing their jobs and impose financial burdens on employers.

show abstract

“…24 Assessing the effect of schistosomiasis on irrigated rice production in Cameroon, Audibert also found that the rates of production for uninfected households were higher than those of infected households. 25 The originality of our results lies in that they go beyond the findings of the above-mentioned previous studies and emphasize the behavior of households that prefer to utilize the additional time available to them for leisure activities or for cultivating crops other than those grown as part of the agricultural projects. Accordingly, assessing the effects of health on the basis of impact on one particular factor-in our study, return on the main cash crop-would lead to the conclusion that there is no economic benefit to investing in health.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Productive Benefits after Investment in Health in Mali

Audibert¹,

Etard

2003

Economic Development and Cultural Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Development and Cultural Change.

show abstract

Agricultural non-wage production and health status

Cited by 40 publications

References 7 publications

Transient Health Shocks and Agricultural Labor Demand in Rice-producing Households in Mali

Transient Health Shocks and Agricultural Labor Demand in Rice-producing Households in Mali

The impact of HIV/AIDS on labour productivity in Kenya

Productive Benefits after Investment in Health in Mali

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About