| Literature DB >> 34895355 |
Daniele Rinaldo1, Javier Perez-Saez2, Penelope Vounatsou3,4, Jürg Utzinger3,4, Jean-Louis Arcand5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The economic impact of schistosomiasis and the underlying tradeoffs between water resources development and public health concerns have yet to be quantified. Schistosomiasis exerts large health, social and financial burdens on infected individuals and households. While irrigation schemes are one of the most important policy responses designed to reduce poverty, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, they facilitate the propagation of schistosomiasis and other diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Agriculture; Neglected Tropical Diseases; Poverty; Schistosomiasis; Sub-Saharan Africa; Water Resources Development
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34895355 PMCID: PMC8667389 DOI: 10.1186/s40249-021-00919-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Dis Poverty ISSN: 2049-9957 Impact factor: 4.520
Fig. 1(Upper panel) Mechanisms studied in the paper. Our main interest lies in estimating (1), the causal effect of schistosomiasis on agriculture. To achieve identification we use a set of variables (instruments) that influence disease intensity without directly affecting agriculture: we use the densities of the different snail species that act as intermediate hosts for the Schistosoma. (2). Poverty is shown to have a reinforcing effect on the burden the disease exerts on agricultural production, as well as being its consequence (3). Water resources development (4) is shown to boost agriculture and development, but also to increase the adverse effects of schistosomiasis via both the increase of snail habitat and human-water contact. (Lower panel) Data overview. a Villages included in the agricultural surveys, the capital Ouagadougou (white point) and level 1 (regions, black lines) and level 2 (provinces, white lines) administrative subdivisions. b River network (blue lines, width proportional to upstream area) and water resources infrastructure in the country. c Estimated schistosomiasis prevalence up to 2010. d Estimated schistosomiasis prevalence for 2011–2017
Fig. 2(Upper panel) Estimates of the yield loss (in %) due to schistosomiasis. Each label reports the average loss and in parentheses the loss at the top 5% infection intensity clusters. 95% error bands are cluster-bootstrapped at the village level. (Lower panel) Nonlinear effect of the disease intensity. Dotted lines represent the 95% confidence interval in function fitting
Fig. 3(Upper panel) Added schistosomiasis-induced yield loss due to poverty. Each point on the middle surface represents the extra loss due to the disease for plots below the respective crop weight and surface quantiles. The upper and lower transparent surfaces are cluster-bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals. (Lower panel) Losses to yield suffered by households above and below threshold levels of poverty, defined by the left tail of the joint harvest weight and plot surface distribution
Fig. 4(Top left) Added effect of schistosomiasis on yields caused by the presence of a large dam. (Bottom left) Joint effect of schistosomiasis, distance from water resources networks and dam size. Estimations account for spatial correlation. (Right) Joint effect of schistosomiasis and distance (in km) from dams and water networks. Each point in the fitted surface represents the effect of schistosomiasis on yield for a village at the corresponding distance from a dam or a water reservoir: the darker the color, the more negative is the effect