Disease Control, Demographic Change and
Institutional Development in Africa
Margaret S. McMillan
Department of Economics, Tufts University
http://margaretsmcmillan.com/
William A. Masters
Department of Food and Nutrition Policy, Tufts University
http://sites.tufts.edu/willmasters
Harounan Kazianga
Department of Economics, Oklahoma State University
http://www.hkazianga.org/
Revised version of NBER Working Paper No. 17718,
entitled “Rural Demography, Public Services and Land Rights in Africa:
A Village-Level Analysis in Burkina Faso”
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Abstract: Our paper in 150 words
This paper addresses the role of tropical disease in rural demography,
land use rights and public amenities, using data from Onchocerciasis
(river blindness) control in Burkina Faso. We combine a new survey of
village elders with historical census data for 1975-2006 and geocoded
maps of treatment under the regional Onchocerciasis Control Program
(OCP). The OCP ran from 1975 to 2002, first spraying rivers to stop
transmission and then distributing medicine to help those already
infected. Controlling for time and village fixed effects, we find that villages
in treated areas acquired larger populations and also had more cropland
transactions, fewer permits required for cropland transactions, and more
regulation of common property pasture and forest. Treated villages also
acquired closer access to electricity and telephone service, markets,
wells and primary schools, with no difference in several other variables.
These results are consistent with both changes in productivity and effects
of population size on public institutions.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Abstract: Our paper in 150 words
This paper addresses the role of tropical disease in rural demography,
land use rights and public amenities, using data from Onchocerciasis
(river blindness) control in Burkina Faso. We combine a new survey of
village elders with historical census data for 1975-2006 and geocoded
maps of treatment under the regional Onchocerciasis Control Program
(OCP). The OCP ran from 1975 to 2002, first spraying rivers to stop
transmission and then distributing medicine to help those already
infected. Controlling for time and village fixed effects, we find that villages
in treated areas acquired larger populations and also had more cropland
transactions, fewer permits required for cropland transactions, and more
regulation of common property pasture and forest. Treated villages also
acquired closer access to electricity and telephone service, markets,
wells and primary schools, with no difference in several other variables.
These results are consistent with both changes in productivity and effects
of population size on public institutions.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Abstract: Our paper in 150 words
This paper addresses the role of tropical disease in rural demography,
land use rights and public amenities, using data from Onchocerciasis
(river blindness) control in Burkina Faso. We combine a new survey of
village elders with historical census data for 1975-2006 and geocoded
maps of treatment under the regional Onchocerciasis Control Program
(OCP). The OCP ran from 1975 to 2002, first spraying rivers to stop
transmission and then distributing medicine to help those already
infected. Controlling for time and village fixed effects, we find that villages
in treated areas acquired larger populations and also had more cropland
transactions, fewer permits required for cropland transactions, and more
regulation of common property pasture and forest. Treated villages also
acquired closer access to electricity and telephone service, markets,
wells and primary schools, with no difference in several other variables.
These results are consistent with both changes in productivity and effects
of population size on public institutions.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Abstract: Our paper in 150 words
This paper addresses the role of tropical disease in rural demography,
land use rights and public amenities, using data from Onchocerciasis
(river blindness) control in Burkina Faso. We combine a new survey of
village elders with historical census data for 1975-2006 and geocoded
maps of treatment under the regional Onchocerciasis Control Program
(OCP). The OCP ran from 1975 to 2002, first spraying rivers to stop
transmission and then distributing medicine to help those already
infected. Controlling for time and village fixed effects, we find that villages
in treated areas acquired larger populations and also had more cropland
transactions, fewer permits required for cropland transactions, and more
regulation of common property pasture and forest. Treated villages also
acquired closer access to electricity and telephone service, markets,
wells and primary schools, with no difference in several other variables.
These results are consistent with both changes in productivity and effects
of population size on public institutions.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Abstract: Our paper in 150 words
This paper addresses the role of tropical disease in rural demography,
land use rights and public amenities, using data from Onchocerciasis
(river blindness) control in Burkina Faso. We combine a new survey of
village elders with historical census data for 1975-2006 and geocoded
maps of treatment under the regional Onchocerciasis Control Program
(OCP). The OCP ran from 1975 to 2002, first spraying rivers to stop
transmission and then distributing medicine to help those already
infected. Controlling for time and village fixed effects, we find that villages
in treated areas acquired larger populations and also had more cropland
transactions, fewer permits required for cropland transactions, and more
regulation of common property pasture and forest. Treated villages also
acquired closer access to electricity and telephone service, markets,
wells and primary schools, with no difference in several other variables.
These results are consistent with both changes in productivity and effects
of population size on public institutions.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
• What are the “deep determinants” of global poverty?
• Why are some still so poor, long after others got so rich?
• The most visible variation is explained by social choices
especially institutional rules and government policies
• Those differences can in turn be traced to physical geography
especially tropical climate and landlocked isolation
• Do geographic factors still matter today?
• Do yesterday’s obstacles still limit peoples’ choices?
• We might look where a new technology has helped overcome
an old geographic obstacle, and see how people respond…
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
• Tropical disease control as natural experiment
• Tropical diseases are location-specific, often “endemic” in a
particular place
• In the 20th century, especially after World War II, there were
many breakthroughs against tropical disease…
• The particular tropical disease control we study was unusual:
• Big enough to matter, but varied enough to measure
(All across Africa, including about 60% of Burkina Faso)
• Suddenly brought under control in recent decades
(From 1975 to 2002, between census years)
• Clearly exogenous to Burkina Faso’s own choices
(Same treatment across almost all of West Africa)
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
• The details of Onchocerciasis
• A species of blackfly (Simulium damnosum)
• breed in rivers, bite people and pick up Onchocerca larva
• transmit the Onchocerca to its next victim
• A species of worm (Onchocerca volvulus)
• grow in nodules under your skin, live for about 14 years
• release millions of microfilarial larva that live or up to 2 years
in the human host, who they maim and blind, and viable for
6-8 days in the blackfly during transmission to next victim
= > Endemic in hot, tropical places near to rivers (up to 40 km?),
with low population density (under 35-50 people/km2)
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Source: Carter Center (2010), River Blindness Programs. http://www.cartercenter.org/health/river_blindness.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
The West Africa Onchocerciasis Control Program (OCP)
Step 1: Spray larvacide in rivers, to stop blackfly reproduction
In the late 1950s, French
researchers mapped the blackfly
larva and showed that killing them
would stop transmission
Source: IRD (2010), Onchocerciasis. http://en.ird.fr/allthe-current-events/news/onchocerciasis-an-exemplarycontrol-programme.
From 1975, World Bank and other
donors paid for helicopters to
spray larvacide over rivers in
Oncho areas across Africa
Source: WHO (n.d.), African Programme for Onchocerciasis
Control. http://www.who.int/apoc/onchocerciasis/control/en.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
The West Africa Onchocerciasis Control Program (OCP)
Step 1: Spray larvacide in rivers, to stop blackfly reproduction
Step 2: Distribute deworming meds, to kill microfilaria
• In the 1980s, a veterinary
deworming drug called ivermectin
(Mectizan) was found to control
Onchocerciasis symptoms in people
• Since 1987, Merck has given the
drug freely for distribution by aid
agencies in affected areas
Source: Merck (2012), www.mectizan.org
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
The West Africa Onchocerciasis Control Program (OCP)
• spraying stopped in 1989, after 14 years (no new transmission)
• ivermectin distribution stopped in 2002 (and continues elsewhere)
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
OCP Results in West Africa
How did people respond?
Estimated Onchocerciasis Prevalence in West Africa
Prior to control (1974)
After control (2002)
Source: WHO, Onchocerciasis Control Programme (www.who.int/apoc/onchocerciasis/ocp).
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
• How might people have responded to Oncho control?
• Move into and invest in previously Oncho-affected areas
• Improve institutions and public policies in those areas
• If we observe this in response to the OCP during 1975-2002…
• Then the presence of Oncho can help explain why these
locations stayed poor
• …which in turn implies that OCP-type programs to overcome
other geographic problems can help disadvantaged locations
• because their “deep determinants” of historical
underdevelopment might still be operative today
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Villages’ Location, Population Growth 1975-85 and Oncho Status
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Survey Method
• Universe is 747 villages in the national farm survey of
the Office of Agricultural Statistics in Burkina Faso,
minus 118 subject to AVV planning, and 14 missing
from census data, for a sample of 615 villages
• Survey asks a focus group of elders to recall:
– the status of the village’s land rights and distance to
various public amenities,
– now and in the past,
– recording the year of each change.
• Responses permit construction of 3-step time series
– we use only the situation in 1975, 1985, 1996 and 2006
– some villages did not report some data, so samples vary
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Questionnaire design: land rights
N°
Questions
Réponse
VIII.1
Type de droit appliquée pour les terres de culture
(si la réponse est non, mettre des croix à année de début d’application)
Type de droit appliquée
(1=Oui ; 0=Non)
Année de début
d’application
VIII.1.1 Propriété individuelle
|____|
|____|____|____|____|
VIII.1.2 Propriété collective-familiale
|____|
|____|____|____|____|
VIII.1.3 Propriété collective-communautaire
|____|
|____|____|____|____|
VIII.2
Location, vente et prêts de terres de culture
(si la réponse est non, mettre des croix à année de début d’application)
Possibilité de transaction Année de début
(1=Oui ; 0=Non)
d’application
VIII.2.1 Est-ce que la terre peut-être louée ?
|____|
|____|____|____|____|
VIII.2.2 Est-ce que la terre peut-être vendue ?
|____|
|____|____|____|____|
VIII.2.3 Est-ce que la terre peut-être prêtée ?
|____|
|____|____|____|____|
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Questionnaire design: distance to services
N°
V.1
V.1.1
V.1.2
V.1.3
V.2
V.2.1
V.2.2
V.2.3
Questions
Réponse
Distance (en km)
Année d’établissement
Distance entre le village et l’administration centrale (pour les registres des naissances)
La situation actuelle
|____|____|____|
|____|____|____|____|
La situation précédente
|____|____|____|
|____|____|____|____|
La situation antécédente
|____|____|____|
|____|____|____|____|
Distance entre le village et la route praticable par car ou camion toute l’année
La situation actuelle
|____|____|____|
|____|____|____|____|
La situation précédente
|____|____|____|
|____|____|____|____|
La situation antécédente
|____|____|____|
|____|____|____|____|
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Our measures of property rights
–
–
–
–
–
Are (or were) land rights assigned to individuals?
Do (or did) cropland transactions occur?
Is (or was) pasture access regulated?
Is (or was) forest access regulated?
Do (or did) cropland transactions require a permit?
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Our measures of public amenities
Distance (km) from village to nearest:
– Road
– Bus Stop
– Bank
– Electricity
– Telephone
– Public Market
– Livestock Market
– Private Shop
– Water Well
– Borehole
– Dam
– Primary School
– Secondary Sch.
– Health Clinic
– Church
– Mosque
– Temple
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Descriptive statistics: property rights in census years
Year = 1975
Year = 1985
Year = 1996
Year = 2006
Observations
Villages
Village
population
(from census)
Land rights
assigned to
individuals
Land
transactions
occurred
Pasture
access is
regulated
Forest
access is
regulated
Land
transactions
require permit
1,266
(1,248)
1,637
(1,561)
1,659
(1,413)
1,414
(2,597)
2,307
615
0.378
(0.485)
0.400
(0.490)
0.409
(0.492)
0.435
(0.496)
2,307
615
0.846
(0.361)
0.862
(0.346)
0.868
(0.339)
0.889
(0.314)
2,307
615
0.228
(0.420)
0.293
(0.456)
0.350
(0.477)
0.425
(0.495)
2,307
615
0.075
(0.263)
0.096
(0.294)
0.135
(0.342)
0.173
(0.378)
2,307
615
0.335
(0.473)
0.348
(0.477)
0.352
(0.478)
0.371
(0.484)
2,307
615
Source:
Table 1: Mean, standard deviation, and sample size for all variables in each year
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Descriptive statistics: distance to amenities
Year = 1975
Year = 1985
Year = 1996
Year = 2006
Observations
Villages
Transport
.
Road
Bus Stop
3.79
17.60
(7.21)
(22.86)
4.34
13.93
(13.92)
(18.55)
4.91
12.99
(14.21)
(17.43)
4.32
10.64
(13.44)
(15.82)
1,433
1,719
449
518
Bank
49.03
(47.49)
39.29
(35.52)
35.12
(30.91)
25.81
(24.21)
1,084
559
Services
Electricity
57.17
(43.69)
51.12
(36.07)
46.91
(33.86)
36.73
(26.39)
1,227
462
.
Telephone
40.84
(35.48)
37.11
(31.71)
28.28
(24.64)
21.34
(19.67)
1,589
557
Public
7.85
(16.80)
5.73
(8.10)
5.28
(8.12)
4.85
(7.52)
2,216
601
Markets
Livestock
20.67
(30.26)
22.46
(29.82)
20.55
(26.01)
17.07
(20.57)
1,042
339
Source:
Table 1: Mean, standard deviation, and sample size for all variables in each year
.
Private
5.63
(10.08)
5.18
(8.90)
4.68
(9.02)
2.09
(5.25)
1,228
549
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Descriptive statistics: distance to amenities (cont’d)
Year = 1975
Year = 1985
Year = 1996
Year = 2006
Observations
Villages
Well
1.11
(4.69)
0.74
(3.42)
0.89
(3.33)
0.30
(1.30)
1,041
322
Water
Borehole
1.52
(4.95)
0.63
(2.90)
0.57
(2.69)
0.33
(2.07)
1,062
414
.
Dam
18.59
(21.76)
18.12
(20.10)
16.91
(19.02)
15.41
(18.15)
753
249
Schooling and Health .
Primary Secondary Clinic
10.73
51.74
16.30
(12.84)
(39.86)
(17.33)
6.94
40.14
12.70
(11.74)
(33.60)
(13.83)
3.73
26.07
8.79
(8.46)
(24.02)
(10.56)
1.14
17.32
5.91
(4.43)
(16.66)
(6.76)
2,025
1,681
2,055
573
528
574
Religious Services
.
Church Mosque Temple
8.95
5.46
9.48
(13.55) (11.40)
(12.14)
4.88
3.92
5.09
(9.73)
(7.30)
(8.85)
4.97
3.88
5.09
(9.84)
(7.29)
(8.95)
3.55
2.63
3.01
(8.65)
(5.73)
(6.42)
1,694
1,777
1,410
471
505
411
Source:
Table 1: Mean, standard deviation, and sample size for all variables in each year
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Do treated and control villages differ at baseline?
Population and land rights
Village population
Treated
1130.703
[70.242]
Control
1468.08
[90.799]
Difference
-337.378***
[114.797]
Con
Dis
Indicators of agricultural land-use rights
Land rights assigned to individuals 0.328
0.452
-0.125***
[0.027]
[0.035]
[0.045]
Land transactions occurred
0.834
0.864
-0.030
[0.022]
[0.024]
[0.033]
Pasture access is regulated
0.206
0.261
-0.055
[0.024]
[0.031]
[0.039]
Forest access is regulated
0.084
0.06
0.024
[0.016]
[0.017]
[0.023]
Land transactions require permit
0.389
0.256
0.132***
[0.028]
[0.031]
[0.042]
Table 2: Mean, standard deviation and difference between treated and control areas in 1975
[0.022]
[0.024]
[0.033]
Pasture
access is regulatedand Institutional
Disease,
Demography
Development
0.206
0.261
-0.055
[0.024]
[0.031]
[0.039]
Motivation | Data | Method
| Results
Forest access is regulated
0.084
0.06
0.024
[0.016] differ
[0.017] at baseline?
[0.023]
Do treated and control villages
Land transactions require permit
0.389
0.256
0.132***
Transport and infrastructure
[0.028]
[0.031]
[0.042]
Treated
Control
Village population
1130.703
Distance from village to nearest public
amenity1468.08
(km)
[70.242] [90.799]
Road
4.196
[0.618]
Indicators of agricultural land-use rights
Stopassigned to individuals 0.328
18.354
LandBus
rights
[1.627]
[0.027]
LandBank
transactions occurred
66.361
0.834
[0.022]
[9.633]
Pasture
access is regulated
0.206
Electricity
73.061
[0.024]
[4.903]
Forest access is regulated
0.084
Telephone
45.46
[0.016]
[3.165]
Land transactions require permit
3.192
[0.639]
16.408
0.452
[2.160]
[0.035]
31.200
0.864
[0.024]
[3.998]
0.261
39.800
[0.031]
[4.133]
0.06
32.862
[0.017]
[2.934]
Difference
-337.378***
[114.797]
1.004
[0.889]
1.946
-0.125***
[2.704]
[0.045]
35.161***
-0.030
[0.033]
[10.429]
-0.055
33.261***
[0.039]
[6.412]
0.024
12.598***
[0.023]
[4.316]
Cont
Dista
0.389
0.256
0.132***
[0.028]
[0.031]
[0.042]
Table 2: Mean, standard deviation and difference between treated and control areas in 1975
[0.022]
[0.024]
[0.033]
Pasture
access is regulatedand Institutional
0.206
0.261
-0.055
Disease,
Demography
Development
[0.024]
[0.031]
[0.039]
Motivation | Data | Method
| Results
Forest access is regulated
0.084
0.06
0.024
[0.016] differ
[0.017] at baseline?
[0.023]
Do treated and control villages
Land transactions require permit
0.389
0.256
0.132***
Markets and water
sources
[0.028]
[0.031] Difference
[0.042]
ference
Treated Control
Treated
Control
Difference
Continued from previous column
37.378***
Village population
Cont
1130.703
1468.08
-337.378***
Distance
from
village
to
nearest
public
amenity
(km)
Distance from village to nearest public amenity (km)
14.797]
Dista
[70.242] [90.799] [114.797]
Road
4.196
3.192
1.004
Public Market
9.092
5.934
3.158**
[0.618] [0.713]
[0.639]
[0.889]
[1.390]
Indicators of agricultural land-use [1.194]
rights
Livestock
Market 25.140
Stopassigned
.125*** LandBus
10.127**
18.354 15.013
16.408
1.946
rights
to individuals
0.328
0.452
-0.125***
0.045]
[3.584]
[4.233]
[1.627] [2.253]
[2.160]
[2.704]
[0.027]
[0.035]
[0.045]
Private
Shop
0.030
6.231
1.481
LandBank
transactions
occurred
66.361 4.750
31.200
0.834
0.864 35.161***
-0.030
0.033]
[1.470]
[1.784]
[0.022]
[0.024]
[0.033]
[9.633] [1.011]
[3.998]
[10.429]
Well
0.055
1.658
1.230*
Pasture
access Water
is regulated
0.206
0.261 33.261***
-0.055
Electricity
73.061 0.429
39.800
0.039]
[0.694]
[0.709]
[0.024]
[0.031]
[0.039]
[4.903] [0.143]
[4.133]
[6.412]
Forest access isBorehole
0.024
0.833
2.154
-1.321
0.084
0.06
0.024
Telephone regulated
45.46
32.862
12.598***
0.023]
[0.833]
[1.951]
[0.016] [1.764]
[0.017]
[0.023]
[3.165]
[2.934]
[4.316]
Dam
require permit
132*** Land transactions
24.96
8.625
16.335***
0.389
0.256
0.132***
[0.028] [1.823]
[0.031]
[0.042]
0.042]
[3.490]
[3.937]
Table 2: Mean, standard deviation
difference
between treated
areas in 1975
Primary and
School
11.818
9.068and control
2.750**
Livestock Market 25.140
0.125***
10.127**
[0.022] 15.013
[0.024]
[0.033]
[0.045]Disease,
[3.584]
[4.233]
Pasture
access is regulatedand Institutional
Demography
Development
0.206 [2.253]
0.261
-0.055
Private Shop
-0.030
6.231
1.481
[0.024] 4.750
[0.031]
[0.039]
Motivation
|
Data
|
Method
|
Results
[0.033]
[1.470]
[1.784]
Forest access is regulated
0.084 [1.011]
0.06
0.024
Water Well
-0.055
1.658
1.230*
[0.016] 0.429
[0.017]
[0.023]
[0.039]
[0.143]
[0.709]
Land transactions require permit [0.694]
0.389
0.256
0.132***
Borehole
0.024
2.154
-1.321
Schooling,
health and0.833
religious
services
[0.028]
[0.031]
[0.042]
[0.023]
[0.833]
[1.764]
[1.951]
Treated
Control
Difference
Dam
0.132*** Village population
24.96
8.625
16.335***
Cont
1130.703
1468.08
-337.378***
Distance
from
village
to
nearest
public
amenity
(km)
[0.042]
[3.490]
[3.937]
Dista
[70.242] [1.823]
[90.799] [114.797]
Road
4.196
3.192
1.004
Primary School
11.818
9.068
2.750**
[0.618] [1.112]
[0.639]
[0.889]
[0.820]
[1.382]
Indicators of agricultural land-use rights
Secondary
Sch.
Stopassigned
1.004 LandBus
56.294
11.335**
18.354 44.958
16.408
1.946
rights
to individuals
0.328
0.452
-0.125***
[0.889]
[3.221]
[5.284]
[1.627] [4.190]
[2.160]
[2.704]
[0.027]
[0.035]
[0.045]
Health
Clinic
1.946 LandBank
16.603
0.775
transactions
occurred
66.361 15.828
31.200
0.834
0.864 35.161***
-0.030
[2.704]
[1.086]
[1.803]
[0.022]
[0.024]
[0.033]
[9.633] [1.440]
[3.998]
[10.429]
Church
5.161*** Pasture
9.692
1.692
access is
regulated
0.206
0.261 33.261***
-0.055
Electricity
73.061 8.000
39.800
10.429]
[1.052]
[1.146]
[1.556]
[0.024]
[0.031]
[0.039]
[4.903]
[4.133]
[6.412]
3.261*** Forest access is Mosque
6.236
4.200
2.036*
0.084
0.06
0.024
Telephone regulated
45.46
32.862
12.598***
[6.412]
[1.006]
[1.201]
[0.016] [0.657]
[0.017]
[0.023]
[3.165]
[2.934]
[4.316]
Temple
2.598*** Land transactions
10.189
8.580
1.610
require permit
0.389
0.256
0.132***
[4.316]
[1.263]
[1.687]
[0.028] [1.119]
[0.031]
[0.042]
Table 2: Mean, standard deviation and difference between treated and control areas in 1975
Do treated and control villages differ at baseline?
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Regression specification
Our regressions are:
Pop jt  1  11 (Treat j  Timet )  12 (Timet )   1 j   1 jt
(1)
I kjt   2 k   21k (Treat j  Timet )   22 k (Timet )   2 kj   2 kjt (2)
I kjt   3 k   31k ( Pop jt )   32 k (Timet )   3kj   3kjt
(3)
Where:
I is the institutional outcome of interest for the village,
Pop is population of the village,
 are fixed effects for all villages, and
β is the “difference-in-difference” estimator of treatment effects.
In Equation (3), Pop is endogenous so we instrument it with the
predicted value from equation (1), using 2SLS.
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
OLS estimates of equation (1)
Dependent variable:
log of village population
Post-75
(1)
Treated X Post-75 (1985-2006)
Treated X Post-85 (1996-2006)
Treated X 1985
Treated X 1996
Treated X 2006
Post-75 (1985-2006)
Post-85 (1996-2006)
Year = 1985
Year = 1996
Year = 2006
Constant
R-squared
0.33***
Post-85
(2)
Annual Data
(3)
0.25***
0.24***
0.39***
0.39***
0.09
-0.09*
6.68***
0.47
6.88***
0.45
0.21***
0.17**
-0.11
6.68***
0.48
Table 3: OLS results for village population on Onchocerciasis treatment status and time
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
OLS estimates of equation (2)
Main results for land rights only
Dependent variable:
Land rights
assigned to
individuals
(1)
Land
transactions
occurred
(2)
Pasture
access is
regulated
(3)
Forest
access is
regulated
(4)
Land
transactions
require permit
(5)
Panel A: Post-1975
Treated X Post-75
(1985-2006)
0.02
0.04***
0.02
0.03*
-0.04***
Time = 1985-2006 0.02**
0.00
0.11***
0.04***
0.04***
Constant
0.39***
0.84***
0.23***
0.08***
0.34***
R-squared
0.96
0.92
0.83
0.83
0.96
Panel B: Post-1985
Treated X Post-85
(1996-2006)
0.02**
0.04***
0.05***
0.02*
-0.05***
Time = 1996-2006
0.02***
0.00*
0.09***
0.05***
0.04***
Constant
0.39***
0.85***
0.26***
0.09***
0.34***
R-squared
0.96
0.93
0.84
0.84
0.96
Panel
C: Annual
(reportedrights
in paper
- not shown here)
Table
4: OLS
resultsData
for property
on Onchocerciasis
treatment status and time
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
OLS estimates of equation (3)
Main results for land rights only
Dependent variable:
Land rights
assigned to
individuals
(1)
Land
transactions
occurred
(2)
Pasture
access is
regulated
(3)
Panel A: Post-1975
Population (log)
-0.00
0.02***
-0.01
Time = 1985-2006
0.03***
0.03***
0.13***
Constant
0.39***
0.74***
0.29***
R-squared
0.96
0.93
0.83
Panel B: Post-1985
Population (log)
0.00
0.02***
-0.00
Time = 1996-2006
0.03***
0.03***
0.12***
Constant
0.38***
0.74***
0.27***
R-squared
0.96
0.93
0.84
Panel C: Annual Data (reported in paper - not shown here)
Forest
access is
regulated
(4)
Land
transactions
require permit
(5)
-0.00
0.05***
0.10**
0.83
0.00
0.01**
0.34***
0.95
0.00
0.06***
0.09**
0.84
0.00
0.02***
0.34***
0.96
Table 5: OLS results for property rights on village population and time
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
2SLS estimates of equation (3)
Main results for land rights only
Dependent variable:
Land rights Land
Pasture
assigned to transactions access is
individuals occurred
regulated
Forest
access is
regulated
Land
transactions
require permit
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
0.05
0.13***
0.06
0.08*
-0.13**
-0.01
0.11***
0.03*
0.05***
0.15***
0.19**
0.09
-0.19***
0.02***
0.11***
0.06***
0.03***
Panel A: Post-1975
Population (log)
Time = 1985-2006 0.01
Panel B: Post-1985
Population (log)
0.08*
Time = 1996-2006 0.03***
Panel C: Annual Data (reported in paper - not shown here)
Table 6: 2SLS results for property rights on predicted village population and time
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
Conclusion
• Oncho-affected villages had been smaller, with similar or less
market-oriented institutions before 1975
• After OCP treatment (after 1975-1985) treated villages:
• expanded population by 25-33% faster than other villages,
• became 4-5% more likely to assign property rights to individuals,
and 4-5% less likely to require permit before transactions
• some of that may have been due to population growth alone, in
addition to increased productivity for those already there
• treated villages also came to be more closely served by rural
amenities, especially public markets and also primary schooling
and telephone service (results not shown in slides)
Disease, Demography and Institutional Development
Motivation | Data | Method | Results
So what?
We hope this paper will lead to:
• Methodological improvements
• Other papers using villagers’ recall data to
measure social changes
• Replication of results
• Other papers testing whether disease (control)
explains poor (better) social choices
• Policy change
• More evidence to guide those willing to help
geographically impaired places get richer