Table 3.
Robustness of results: Association between village economic inequality, using the coefficient of variation (CV), and individual health indicators. Results from a nine-year panel (2002–2010) of 13 villages.
| Village CV of: | Health outcomes: | Addiction | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Perceived
|
Anthropometrics
|
|||||
| Stress | Ill | Bed | Arm | BMI | ||
| [I]. High visibility – Coefficient of variation: | ||||||
| Wildlife | 0.05 (0.10) | −0.01 (0.05) | 0.01 (0.02) | 0.05 (0.10) | −0.18 (0.08)** | −0.06 (0.21) |
| N | 3850 | 5007 | 5167 | 2888 | 4884 | 3562 |
| Meat | −0.14 (0.11) | −0.04 (0.02)** | −0.03 (0.01)** | −0.03 (0.03) | −0.05 (0.02)** | −0.11 (0.09) |
| N | 3850 | 5007 | 5167 | 2888 | 4884 | 3562 |
| [II]. Medium visibility – Coefficient of variation: | ||||||
| Durables | −0.04 (0.02)** | −0.01 (0.01)** | −0.01 (0.01) | −0.01 (0.01) | −0.01 (0.01) | −0.02 (0.03) |
| N | 2861 | 3956 | 3956 | 2888 | 3934 | 2902 |
| Luxuries | −0.17 (0.04)*** | 0.002 (0.01) | −0.02 (0.01) | −0.07 (0.03)* | −0.02 (0.03) | −0.09 (0.11) |
| N | 2861 | 3956 | 3956 | 2888 | 3934 | 2902 |
| [III]. Low visibility – Coefficient of variation: | ||||||
| Plantings | −0.29 (0.32) | −0.13 (0.09) | −0.03 (0.09) | −0.13 (0.15) | −0.18 (0.14) | −0.81 (0.71) |
| N | 2848 | 3925 | 3932 | 2836 | 3903 | 2895 |
| Forest | −0.21 (0.23) | −0.14 (0.07)* | −0.04 (0.07) | −0.24 (0.13)* | −0.28 (0.09)** | −1.16 (0.39)** |
| N | 3838 | 4943 | 5098 | 2839 | 4817 | 3523 |
Notes:
***
p<.01,
**
p<.05,
*
p<.10. All regressions included robust standard errors (in parentheses) adjusted for clustering at the village level and the following covariates (coefficients not shown): year fixed effects, individuals attributes (age, sex, education, number of annual surveys in which the subject participated, and level of economic resource) and village attributes (village-to-town travel time, village median of the resource, and total number of households in village).