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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Occupational<br />

category<br />

Table 4.13<br />

Loss <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come <strong>of</strong> caregiver if currently work<strong>in</strong>g by occupational groups<br />

No.<br />

HHs<br />

Average<br />

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

lost due<br />

to leave/<br />

absence<br />

from work<br />

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

Rural Urban Total<br />

Income<br />

lost as a<br />

percentage<br />

<strong>of</strong> current<br />

household<br />

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

No.<br />

HHs<br />

Average<br />

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

lost due<br />

to leave/<br />

absence<br />

from work<br />

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

Income<br />

lost as a<br />

percentage<br />

<strong>of</strong> current<br />

household<br />

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

No.<br />

HHDS<br />

Average<br />

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

lost due<br />

to leave/<br />

absence<br />

from work<br />

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

Income<br />

lost as a<br />

percentage<br />

<strong>of</strong> current<br />

household<br />

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

Cultivation 0 0 0.00 0. 0 0 0 0 0<br />

Agriculture 20 1,513 8.28 5 7,924 36.41 25 2,795 14.74<br />

wage labour<br />

Nonagricultural<br />

11 5,520 15.03 9 889 2.67 20 3,436 9.77<br />

wage<br />

Self-employed<br />

nonagriculture<br />

8 562 1.66 2 1 0.00 10 450 1.45<br />

Salaried 3 333 0.55 6 333 0.47 9 333 0.49<br />

Others 9 1,444 8.82 0 0 0 9 1,300 7.20<br />

Total 51 2,146 8.00 22 2,157 5.67 73 2,150 7.09<br />

It is also possible that the caregiver<br />

may have to completely withdraw from<br />

the labour force <strong>in</strong> order to take care<br />

<strong>of</strong> the PLWHA. However, <strong>in</strong> the present<br />

sample there were no such cases. Overall,<br />

it may be surmised that at the current<br />

stage <strong>of</strong> the <strong>HIV</strong> epidemic <strong>in</strong> the state,<br />

the ma<strong>in</strong> impact on the economy is go<strong>in</strong>g<br />

to come through lower productivity<br />

or withdrawal from labour force <strong>of</strong><br />

PLWHA. The impact due to reduced time<br />

spent by caregivers <strong>in</strong> the labour market<br />

is very low. However, the household level<br />

impact, for the specific households that<br />

experience the tw<strong>in</strong> impacts, is very<br />

significant.<br />

In order to predict some economy-wide<br />

effects <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>AIDS</strong><br />

the average number <strong>of</strong> workdays lost per<br />

PLWHA worker needs to be observed.<br />

This would provide an <strong>in</strong>dication <strong>of</strong> the<br />

amount <strong>of</strong> loss that would result due<br />

to the depletion <strong>of</strong> manpower. Overall,<br />

the workdays lost for those who had<br />

to take leave or be absent from work<br />

numbered around 44 <strong>in</strong> a year. The<br />

loss was highest for the agriculture<br />

wage labour households. It may be<br />

emphasised that leave/absence also<br />

depends on the stage <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>fection <strong>of</strong><br />

the person <strong>and</strong> the k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> work one is<br />

engaged <strong>in</strong>.<br />

When us<strong>in</strong>g these figures to predict<br />

economy-wide effects, however, one<br />

has to keep <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d the possibility <strong>of</strong><br />

substitution <strong>of</strong> PLWHA workers with<br />

other non-<strong>HIV</strong> workers. For <strong>in</strong>stance, <strong>in</strong><br />

agricultural households with the PLWHA<br />

still active, only one household reported<br />

hav<strong>in</strong>g spent an extra amount on hired<br />

labourers. In the other two households,<br />

other family members substituted for<br />

44 <strong>Socio</strong>-<strong>Economic</strong> <strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>HIV</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>AIDS</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Tamil</strong> Nadu, India

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!