Search

Background: Age is one of the predominant reasons for perceived discrimination in developing world where older people are considered a non-contributing burden. The present study explores the prevalence and correlates of perceived age discrimination among older Indian adults.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a large representative survey data from the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India conducted during 2017-18. Participants included 31,464 older adults aged 60 years and above. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to test the associations between selected background characteristics and perceived age discrimination.Results: The analysis revealed that 10.33 percent of older adults perceived their age as the main reason for discrimination, which was 11.86% among the oldest-old. Older adults with more than 10 years of schooling were 32% [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.68; confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.89] less likely to perceive age discrimination compared to their uneducated counterparts. The odds of perceived age discrimination were higher among older adults who earlier worked [AOR: 1.73; CI: 1.46-2.05] and currently working [AOR: 1.61; CI: 1.31-1.96] as compared to those who never worked. Further, having difficulty in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) [AOR: 1.43; CI: 1.25 -1.65] and having one chronic condition [AOR: 1.16; CI: 1.02 -1.34] were associated with increased odds of perceived age discrimination among older adults.Conclusion: Older adults with lower socioeconomic status, currently working, having more chronic conditions, difficulty in IADL and belonging to rural areas were found to perceive higher age discrimination than their counterparts. The findings of the study have important implications for policy makers with respect to strategies such as making the vulnerable populations aware of their legal rights that help in the prevention of age-based discrimination in the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflict caused by wild herbivores damaging crops is an almost universal problem in conservation. We designed and implemented a game‐theory‐based system for supporting farmers whose crops were being heavily damaged by wild herbivores. In this community‐operated system, farmers self‐report their production, which is endorsed by neighboring farmers. The average deficit in production is compensated for by a payment that is directly proportional to the average deficit in production of the group and to the individual farmer's productivity. As a result, farmers are compensated for the average damage (support) and rewarded for individual productivity (reward) (i.e., support cum reward [SuR]). The design of the game is such that only honest reporting gives maximum returns. Farmers who underreport receive less payment because the SuR amount is proportionate to their self‐reported productivity. The endorsing farmers, in their own self‐interest, prevent overreporting. The system involves multiple game situations, the combined result of which is a stable strategy based on honesty and hard work. In 2 villages along the western boundary of Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve in central India, we tested the system with 75 farmers over 6 crop seasons. After a few initial attempts to cheat, honesty prevailed throughout the group. Average crop productivity increased 2.5‐fold, in spite of damage, owing to increased effort by farmers. Apart from wildlife conflict resolution, the model offers a promising alternative to crop insurance and a potential behavioral green revolution in agriculture. Article impact statement: A novel scheme of payment for damage and reward for productivity helped resolve farmer–wildlife conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]