Assessing the impact of public transfer payments on the vulnerability of rural households to healthcare poverty in China

Abstract

Background China completed the task of eliminating absolute poverty, following the 18th National Congress. However, after 2020, rural poverty in China has entered a new stage that is characterised by transformational secondary poverty and relative poverty; thus, the poverty vulnerable group is the new target group. Public transfer payments play a vital role in reducing the vulnerability of rural households to healthcare poverty. Assessing the effectiveness of public transfer payments in rural households can improve the vulnerability of rural households to healthcare poverty. Methods In total, 5754 rural households were included each year, which accounted for a total of 16,722 rural households during the three-year study period. The multidimensional poverty and the vulnerability to healthcare poverty of rural households were assessed and compared. Two series of multivariate logistic regression models were further used to assess the effects of public transfer payments on improving the vulnerability of rural households to healthcare poverty. Results When the poverty line was set at $1.90 and $3.20, rural households in all the three study years exhibited a higher vulnerability to healthcare poverty than the actual incidence of multidimensional poverty in healthcare, and the Eastern regions exhibited higher vulnerability to poverty than the Western regions of China. The series of multivariate logistic models employed to evaluate the effects of public transfer payments on the rural households’ vulnerability to healthcare poverty indicated that considering the differences in rural households’ demands for healthcare is vital for the government to fulfill the effects of public transfer payments. When income elasticity indicators for health care needs were included, the effect of public transfer payments on improving the vulnerability of rural households changed from less significant in 2014 and 2016. In 2018, however, the effect of public transfers on improving the vulnerability of rural households has increased compared to the non-inclusion elasticity. Conclusions The imbalance of development between urban and rural areas in China is increasing, and rural households with heavy economic burdens are facing the risk of low healthcare services. Our findings highlight the importance of government departments in improving public transfer payments to reduce rural households’ vulnerability to healthcare poverty.

A study on the factors influencing the vulnerability of women of childbearing age to health poverty in rural western China

“…The prevailing approach for measuring this vulnerability is through the use of vulnerability as expected poverty (VEP) 29 , 30 , which employs a three-stage feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) method to assess the extent to which a family is susceptible to health-related poverty. This method involves a series of three steps to quantify a family's vulnerability to health poverty 31 :…”

Study on Rural Development Evaluation and Drivers of Sustainable Development: Evidence from the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region of China

“…From 2009 to 2020, the civilization of Beijing's rural areas progressed significantly, and the civilization of Hebei Province's cities, such as Zhangjiakou, Chengde, Shijiazhuang, and Tangshan, was gradually established. The building of civilization in rural areas includes both the promotion of rural culture, education, health care, and other businesses, as well as the ability of rural residents to have leisure time and access to knowledge [37,56,57]. Figure 5 shows the results of the efforts made by the Chinese government.…”

Reducing farmers' poverty vulnerability in China: The role of digital financial inclusion

“…The literature on poverty vulnerability has proposed several key strategies to reduce poverty vulnerability, for example, traditional finance development (Han et al, 2019; Khandker, 2007; Phan et al, 2023), public fiscal transfer payments (Azeem et al, 2019; Brugh et al, 2018; Li & Huang, 2022; Wang et al, 2021), and social security (Carter & Janzen, 2018; Khosla & Jena, 2022; Tirivayi et al, 2016; Zhang et al, 2020). In addition, informal risk‐coping mechanisms, such as the sale of livestock to smooth consumption, are supported by a large number of documents (Dube & Ozkan, 2022; Fafchamps et al, 1998; Kurosaki, 1995; Ngigi et al, 2021; Rosenzweig & Wolpin, 1993; Udry, 1995).…”