20.10.2014 Views

Socio-Economic Impact of HIV and AIDS in Tamil nadu

Socio-Economic Impact of HIV and AIDS in Tamil nadu

Socio-Economic Impact of HIV and AIDS in Tamil nadu

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 4<br />

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> Status on<br />

Income <strong>and</strong> Employment<br />

4.1 Income <strong>and</strong> its<br />

distribution<br />

Income is the major determ<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>of</strong><br />

household welfare. Households derive<br />

their <strong>in</strong>come from many sources. This<br />

study def<strong>in</strong>es the occupational group <strong>of</strong><br />

the household accord<strong>in</strong>g to the source<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come <strong>of</strong> the head <strong>of</strong> the household.<br />

For example, if the source <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come <strong>of</strong><br />

the head <strong>of</strong> the household is cultivation,<br />

then <strong>in</strong> the occupational classification<br />

that household is considered to be<br />

“cultivation household”. The occupation<br />

<strong>of</strong> the household is closely related to<br />

the earn<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> the household as well<br />

as the vulnerability <strong>of</strong> the household to<br />

exogenous shocks, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g any serious<br />

disease/illness affect<strong>in</strong>g any member <strong>of</strong><br />

the household.<br />

The distribution <strong>of</strong> both <strong>HIV</strong> <strong>and</strong> non-<br />

<strong>HIV</strong> households among the various<br />

occupational groups is quite similar<br />

as can be seen from Table 4.1. While<br />

wage earners account for 44 percent <strong>in</strong><br />

both households, their contribution to<br />

<strong>in</strong>come is about 32 percent <strong>in</strong> non-<strong>HIV</strong><br />

households <strong>and</strong> about 35 percent <strong>in</strong> <strong>HIV</strong><br />

households. Agriculturalists account<br />

for about n<strong>in</strong>e percent <strong>of</strong> households<br />

<strong>and</strong> the same percentage <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come<br />

<strong>in</strong> non-<strong>HIV</strong> households whereas they<br />

account for eight percent <strong>of</strong> households<br />

but only four percent <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come <strong>in</strong> <strong>HIV</strong><br />

households. The self employed nonagriculturalists<br />

<strong>and</strong> salaried form nearly<br />

38 percent <strong>of</strong> the non-<strong>HIV</strong> households<br />

with their contribution to <strong>in</strong>come be<strong>in</strong>g<br />

higher at 48 percent. This group, while<br />

form<strong>in</strong>g 39 percent <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> households,<br />

accounts for 45 percent <strong>of</strong> their <strong>in</strong>come.<br />

Households belong<strong>in</strong>g to the category<br />

<strong>of</strong> ‘others’ under non-<strong>HIV</strong> constitute<br />

around 9 percent <strong>of</strong> the total number<br />

while this figure is much higher at 19<br />

percent for <strong>HIV</strong> households. While<br />

agricultural wage labourers <strong>in</strong> the rural<br />

sample <strong>and</strong> non-agricultural wage<br />

earners <strong>in</strong> the urban sample form the<br />

s<strong>in</strong>gle highest percentage <strong>of</strong> households<br />

among the non-<strong>HIV</strong> households, nonagricultural<br />

wage earners account for<br />

the highest percentage <strong>of</strong> households<br />

<strong>in</strong> both rural <strong>and</strong> urban samples <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong><br />

households.<br />

An attempt was made to draw the <strong>HIV</strong><br />

<strong>and</strong> non-<strong>HIV</strong> sample from similar<br />

socio-economic backgrounds. In spite<br />

<strong>of</strong> this, it can be seen that the average<br />

<strong>in</strong>come per household has turned out to<br />

be higher for non-<strong>HIV</strong> households <strong>and</strong><br />

particularly so <strong>in</strong> the rural sample. The<br />

rural sample <strong>in</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> households has only<br />

2.25 percent <strong>of</strong> the households earn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

an <strong>in</strong>come above Rs. 84,001 while <strong>in</strong><br />

the non-<strong>HIV</strong> households, this sample<br />

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> Status on Income <strong>and</strong> Employment <strong>in</strong> India<br />

31

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!