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.

Table 4.2<br />

Distribution <strong>of</strong> households <strong>and</strong><br />

their share <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>come by <strong>in</strong>come categories <strong>in</strong> the sample<br />

Non-<strong>HIV</strong> households<br />

(<strong>in</strong> Percentages)<br />

Annual <strong>in</strong>come<br />

category<br />

Rural Urban Total<br />

HHs Share <strong>in</strong> HHs Share <strong>in</strong> HHs Share <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

Upto Rs. 20,000 9.54 3.97 4.34 1.31 7.15 2.53<br />

20,001-30,000 34.31 20.82 21.16 9.32 28.26 14.61<br />

30,001-41,000 20.62 17.82 17.18 10.71 19.04 13.98<br />

41,001-84,000 28.92 39.21 42.68 43.61 35.25 41.59<br />

84,001-1,30,000 4.92 12.07 10.49 19.92 7.48 16.31<br />

1,30,001-1,73,000 1.54 5.32 1.63 4.01 1.58 4.61<br />

Above 1,73,000 0.15 0.80 2.53 11.12 1.25 6.37<br />

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100<br />

Average <strong>in</strong>come per<br />

household<br />

41,584 57,450 48,878<br />

<strong>HIV</strong> households<br />

Annual <strong>in</strong>come<br />

category<br />

Rural Urban Total<br />

HHs Share <strong>in</strong> HHs Share <strong>in</strong> HHs Share <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

Upto Rs. 20,000 44.84 20.63 20.86 5.34 33.90 11.48<br />

20,001-30,000 22.87 19.34 16.04 7.88 19.76 12.48<br />

30,01-41,000 11.66 14.43 16.58 11.29 13.90 12.55<br />

41,001-84,000 18.39 35.26 33.69 38.49 25.37 37.19<br />

84,001-1,30,000 0.90 3.62 9.09 19.13 4.63 12.90<br />

1,30,001-1,73,000 1.35 6.74 1.60 4.67 1.46 5.50<br />

Above 1,73,000 0.00 0.00 2.14 13.19 0.98 7.89<br />

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100<br />

Average <strong>in</strong>come<br />

per household<br />

29,019 51,556 39,298<br />

employed non-agriculturalists. However,<br />

when the annual per capita <strong>in</strong>come is<br />

taken <strong>in</strong>to consideration it is seen that the<br />

per capita <strong>in</strong>come <strong>of</strong> non-agriculture wage<br />

earners is also higher for <strong>HIV</strong> households<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that <strong>HIV</strong> households <strong>in</strong> this<br />

group are smaller <strong>in</strong> size as compared to<br />

non-<strong>HIV</strong> households. Also, while there is<br />

a considerable difference <strong>in</strong> the average<br />

annual <strong>in</strong>come <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> <strong>and</strong> non-<strong>HIV</strong><br />

households, the difference <strong>in</strong> annual per<br />

capita <strong>in</strong>come is much less. In fact, the<br />

per capita <strong>in</strong>come <strong>of</strong> the urban sample<br />

<strong>in</strong> both types <strong>of</strong> households is nearly the<br />

same. This clearly suggests that the size<br />

<strong>of</strong> the <strong>HIV</strong> households is smaller than<br />

the non-<strong>HIV</strong> households <strong>in</strong> the sample.<br />

One <strong>of</strong> the important determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong><br />

variation <strong>in</strong> the household <strong>in</strong>come is<br />

the number <strong>of</strong> earners. Mov<strong>in</strong>g up the<br />

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

33

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!