[Workshop en économie de développement:"Pertinence des politiques publiques de développement dans les pays d'Afrique subsaharienne" ]Pr noumba powerpoint dschang

1. PARENTAL EDUCATION, HOUSEHOLD
HEALTH, AND HOUSEHOLD STANDARD OF
LIVING: EVIDENCE FROM RURAL
CAMEROON

2. PLAN OF THE PRESENTATION
1/ BACKGROUND
2/ THE PROBLEM
3/ OBJECTIVES
4/ METHODOLOGY
5/ RESULTS

3. BACKGROUND
• Health is a complete state of physical, mental and social well-being (WHO, 2001);
• Health is an important factor of individual or household production;
• Healthier individuals should olso be wealthier individuals;
• Education can be defined as knowledge and skills accumulated by an individual;
• Education is also one of the must valuable elements of the human capital;
• Educated individuals are likely to be more productive, and to earn high income.

4. THE PROBLEM
RECENT TREND IN POVERTY IN CAMEROON (%)
SOURCE: INS (2015)
2001 2007 2014
National 40.2 39.9 37.5
Urban 17.9 12.2 8.9
Rural 52.1 55.0 56.8

5. THE PROBLEM (CONT.)
TREND IN SOME EDUCATION AND HEALTH INDICATORS
2004 2011
EDUCATION INDICATORS Urban Rural Urban Rural
Gross enrollment ratio in primary 87.5 70.5 87.4 72.1
Gross enrollment ratio in secondary 48.3 17.4 61.8 30.3
Net enrollment ratio in primary 124.0 128.4 116.5 106.9
Net enrollment ratio in secondary 69.8 20.4 91.3 40.5
HEALTH
Total fertility rate 4.0 6.1 4.0 6.4
Infant mortality rate 68 91 58 77
Diarrhea prevalence (children aged less than five years old) 0.3 1.4 0.9 2.6
Neonatal mortality ratio 13.2 18.4 17.7 23.3

6. THE PROBLEM
REAL ECONOMIC GROWTH RATE (%)
SOURCE: INS (2015)
2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4
1.9 3.3 4.1 4.6 5.6 5.9

7. OBJECTIVES
Main objective: understanding the linkages between household education
and household heal, household health and household standard of living.
(1) Estimating the impact of household education on household health;
(2) Establishing a link between household health and household standard
of living;
(3) Estimating the combined effect of household health and education on
household standard of living.

8. METHODOLOGY
The theoretical fundation of the study is the household economics.
Decisions relating to the health issues are made by the family that struggles to get all its
members being in good health.
Health lies among ‘‘goods’’ and services that a household consumes in order to maximize
his well-being.

9. METHODOLOGY (CONT.)
EMPIRICAL MODELS
HEALTH: H= a0 + x1β+ γHHE+ a1ἓ2 + µ(ἓ2 x HHE) + ζMILLSH+ η1
(ἓ2 x HHE)
ἓ2 is fitted residual of HHE
MILLSH is inverse Mills ratio

10. METHODOLOGY (CONT.)
ECONOMIC WELL-BEING:
ECW = Economic well-being index
Ḣ = Predicted health;
y = Vector of exogenous variables
Ψ and
Are parameters to be estimated.
ECW=yψ+ωḢ+µ2
µ2ω

11. RESULTS: DATA
Regional distribution of clusters and households selected
Number of Clusters Selected Number of Households
Selected
Region Urban Rural Urban Rural
Adamaoua 19 25 418 700
Center 18 30 396 840
Douala 54 0 1188 0
East 17 26 374 728
Far North 15 44 330 1232
Littoral 30 11 660 308
North 15 36 330 1,008
North West 18 32 396 896
South 15 24 330 672
South West 18 29 396 812
West 24 28 528 784
Yaoundé 52 0 1,144 0
CAMEROON 295 285 6490 7980

12. RESULTS: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Variables Observations Means Stad. Dev.
H (number of household members who felt sick… 30 days before the interview) 1518 1.3208 0.6777
Household head’s education (1 = literate and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.5051 0.5000
Household size (number of people living permanently in the household) 7503 5.376 3.668
Household head’s sex (1 = male and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.3122 0.3534
Household head’s age (number of years) 7501 48.6464 16.5919
Household head’s age squared 7501 2641.733 1727.745
Marital status (Martal_stat1 (1 = bachelor and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.0641 0.2449
Marital status (Marital_stat2 (1 = married and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.7095 0.4539
Marital status (Marital_stat3 (1 = divorcee and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.0579 0.2337
Marital_stat4 (1 = widow and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.1598 0.3664

13. RESULTS: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
EDUCATION (ECW)
Primary education (education1; yes = 1 and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.3317 1.3530
Secondary education (education2; yes =1 and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.1547 0.6984
Secondary high education (education3; yes = 1 and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.1243 0.8449
University education (education4, yes = 1 and 0, otherwise) 7503 0.0392 0.4882
INSTRUMENTS FOR LITERACY AND SAMPLE SELECTION
Owns the land cultivated (1 = yes and 0, otherwise) 7501 0.8924 0.3098
Agricultural land owned by the household (acres ) 6686 88.9324 219.6128
Distance to the source of drinking water (kilometers) 7476 1.9942 6.95269
Time to reach the drinking water source (minutes) 7448 92.0443 26.2339
Type of toilet facility (1 = improved and 0, otherwise) 7495 0.16035 0.4689
Shares toilet with other households (1 = yes and 0, otherwise) 6703 0.2794 0.4487

14. RESULTS: EMPIRICAL ESTIMATIONS (HEALTH)
MEAN RESULTS
1/ Education is strongly and positively linked to household health, showing
that household head’s education complements with other inputs to affect
household health;
2/ Being a male household head’s has no significant effect on the
household health;
3/ The household size increases the risk of having a sick household
member;
4/ Using shared toilets yields the same result.

15. RESULTS: ECONOMIC WELL-BEING
1/ Our results seem to be indicating that the higher the household head’s
education level, the higher the economic well-being;
2/ The coefficient attached to the predicted health from control function is
negative and significant, meaning that economic well-being may be
improved with a weak level of the household head’s education.

16. CONCLUSION
The work done so far can allow for only one prelimanary
conclusion: Education matters both to health and economic well-
being in rural Cameroon.