Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Opportunity Cost of Illness and Occupational Classes:A Case Study of Balangir District in Odisha


Affiliations
1 Department of Economics, Central University of Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir 181143, India
2 School of Economics, University of Hyderabad, Prof C R Rao Road, Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500046, India
3 Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT Kharagpur, Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The opportunity cost of illness not only imposes a double cost burden (loss of income, working days and alternate uses of money) but also the past saving or income is sometimes insufficient to meet the treatment cost, thereby forcing people to borrow, mortgage and sell their assets for treatment. The existing studies measuring the opportunity cost-of-illness tend to measure the economic burden of disease and estimate the maximum amount that could be potentially saved if a given disease has to be eradicated by not taking into consideration the occupation of the patients and the care givers or accompanying persons.

This study estimates the opportunity cost of illness for different occupational classes (such as labour, farmer, business, service and others categories) and examines the consequences. Using multistage random sampling and purposive sampling technique, Balangir district in Odisha was selected where the necessary data was collected from 176 households in both rural and urban areas during September-October 2010.

Due to illness, the work and earning losses were the highest for the labour class, both for the patients as well as accompanying persons. Also, the direct cost burden of illness was greater than indirect cost burden for the occupational classes. A higher proportion of rural households depended on borrowing to meet their illness cost. These findings call for reviewing the existing public health policy.


Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Attanayake, N., J. Fox-Rushby and A. Mills (2000), Household Costs of Malaria ‘Morbidity’: A Study in Matale District, Sri Lanka, Tropical Medicine and International Health, 5(9): 595-606.
  • Babu, B.V., et. al. (2002), The Economic Loss due to Treatment Costs and Work Loss to Individuals with Chronic Lymphatic Filariasis in Rural Communities of Odisha, India, Acta Tropica, 82: 31-38.
  • Berman, P., B. Ormond, A. Gani (1987), Treatment Use and Expenditure on Curative Care in Rural Indonesia, Health Policy and Planning, 2(4): 289-300.
  • Chambers, R. (1982), Health, Agriculture and Rural Poverty: Why Seasons Matter, Journal of Development Studies, 18(2): 217-238.
  • Dreze, J. and A. Sen (1999), India: Economic Development and Social Opportunity, Oxford University Press.
  • Gallup, J. and J. Sachs (2000), The Economic Burden of Malaria, Working Paper No. 52, Centre for International Development, Harvard University, Cambridge.
  • Gilson, L. and D. McIntyre (2005), Removing User Fees for Primary Care in Africa: The Need for Careful Action, British Medical Journal, 331: 762-765.
  • Guruswamy, M. and S. Mazumdar (2009), Demand and Willingness to Pay for Health Care in Rural West Bengal, Social Change, 39(4): 568-585.
  • Household Consumer Expenditure in India (2004), NSS Report No. 505.
  • Lucas, H. and G. Bloom (2006), Protecting the Poor against Health Shocks, Background Paper, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK.
  • Makinen, M., et. al. (2000), Inequalities in Health Care Use and Expenditures: Empirical Data from Eight Developing Countries and Countries in Transition, Bulletin of the World Health Organisation, 78(1): 55-65.
  • McIntyre, D., et. al. (2005), What are the Economic Consequences for Households of Illness and of Paying for Health Care in Low-and Middle-Income Country Contexts?, Social Science and Medicine, 62: 858-865. Parker, R. (1986), Health Care Expenditures in a Rural Indian Community, Social Science and Medicine, 22(1): 23-27.
  • Rout, H.S. (2006), Gender Inequality in Household Health Expenditure: The Case of Urban Orissa, MPRA paper, No. 6544, posted 03. January 2008/ 03:36
  • ---------- (2008), Socio-economic Factors and Household Health Expenditure: The case of Odisha, Journal of Health Management, 10(1): 101-118.
  • Russell, S. (2004), The Economic Burden of Illness for Households in Developing Countries: A Review of Studies Focusing on Malaria, Tuberculosis and Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 71(supp 2): 147-155.
  • Russell, S. and L. Gilson (2006), Are Health Services Protecting the Livelihoods of the Urban Poor in Sri Lanka? Findings from Two Low-Income Areas of Colombo, Social Science and Medicine, 63: 1732-1744.
  • Sauerborn, R., A. Adams and M. Hien (1996), Household Strategies to Cope with the Economic Costs of Illness, Social Science and Medicine, 43(3): 291-301.
  • Sauerborn, R., et. al. (1995), The Economic Costs of Illness for Rural Households in Burkino Faso, Tropical Medicine and Parasitology, 46: 54-60.
  • Scitovsky, A.A. (1982), Estimating the Direct Costs of Illness, The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, Health and Society, 60(3): 463-491.
  • Segel, J.E. (2006), Cost-of-Illness Studies-A Primer, RTI-UNC Centre for Excellence in Health Promotion Economics.
  • Suhrcke, M., M. Mckee, R.S. Arce, S. Tsolova and J. Mortensen (2005), The Contribution of Health to the Economy in the Europeon Union, Health and Consumer Protection DirectorateGeneral, Europeon Commission, Belgium.
  • Vaishnavi, S. and U. Dash (2009), Catastrophic Payments for Health Care among Households in Urban Tamil Nadu, India, Journal International Development, 21: 169-184.
  • World Bank (2004), The Millennium Development Goals for Health: Rising to the Challenges, World Bank: Washington, DC.
  • World Health Organisation (2002), Health, Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction, Report of the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health, Geneva.

Abstract Views: 665

PDF Views: 0




  • Opportunity Cost of Illness and Occupational Classes:A Case Study of Balangir District in Odisha

Abstract Views: 665  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Susanta Nag
Department of Economics, Central University of Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir 181143, India
Phanindra Goyari
School of Economics, University of Hyderabad, Prof C R Rao Road, Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500046, India
G. Sridevi
School of Economics, University of Hyderabad, Prof C R Rao Road, Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500046, India
Inder Sekhar Yadav
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT Kharagpur, Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India

Abstract


The opportunity cost of illness not only imposes a double cost burden (loss of income, working days and alternate uses of money) but also the past saving or income is sometimes insufficient to meet the treatment cost, thereby forcing people to borrow, mortgage and sell their assets for treatment. The existing studies measuring the opportunity cost-of-illness tend to measure the economic burden of disease and estimate the maximum amount that could be potentially saved if a given disease has to be eradicated by not taking into consideration the occupation of the patients and the care givers or accompanying persons.

This study estimates the opportunity cost of illness for different occupational classes (such as labour, farmer, business, service and others categories) and examines the consequences. Using multistage random sampling and purposive sampling technique, Balangir district in Odisha was selected where the necessary data was collected from 176 households in both rural and urban areas during September-October 2010.

Due to illness, the work and earning losses were the highest for the labour class, both for the patients as well as accompanying persons. Also, the direct cost burden of illness was greater than indirect cost burden for the occupational classes. A higher proportion of rural households depended on borrowing to meet their illness cost. These findings call for reviewing the existing public health policy.


References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.21648/arthavij%2F2015%2Fv57%2Fi3%2F109162