Search

Family planning programs are believed to have substantial long-term benefits for women's health and well-being, yet few studies have established either extent or direction of long-term effects. The Matlab, Bangladesh, maternal and child health/family planning (MCH/FP) program afforded a 12-y period of well-documented differential access to services. We evaluate its impacts on women's lifetime fertility, adult health, and economic outcomes 35 y after program initiation. We followed 1,820 women who were of reproductive age during the differential access period (born 1938-1973) from 1978 to 2012 using prospectively collected data from the Matlab Health and Demographic Surveillance System and the 1996 and 2012 Matlab Health and Socioeconomic Surveys. We estimated intent-to-treat single-difference models comparing treatment and comparison area women. MCH/FP significantly increased contraceptive use, reduced completed fertility, lengthened birth intervals, and reduced age at last birth, but had no significant positive impacts on health or economic outcomes. Treatment area women had modestly poorer overall health (+0.07 SD) and respiratory health (+0.12 SD), and those born 1950-1961 had significantly higher body mass index (BMI) in 1996 (0.76 kg/m2) and 2012 (0.57 kg/m2); fewer were underweight in 1996, but more were overweight or obese in 2012. Overall, there was a +2.5 kg/m2 secular increase in BMI. We found substantial changes in lifetime contraceptive and fertility behavior but no long-term health or economic benefits of the program. We observed modest negative health impacts that likely result from an accelerated nutritional transition among treated women, a transition that would, in an earlier context, have been beneficial.

BackgroundTemporary labor migration is an increasingly important mode of migration that generates substantial remittance flows, but raises important concerns for migrant well-being. The migration and health literature has seen a growing call for longitudinal, binational surveys that compare migrants to relevant non-migrant counterfactual groups in the sending country, in order to answer the basic question "Is migration good for health?" This study compares the health of male international migrants, internal migrants, and non-migrants using a unique representative panel survey of the Matlab subdistrict of Bangladesh.Methods and findingsA cohort of 5,072 respondents born 1958-1992 were interviewed in 1996-1997, and reinterviewed in 2012-2014. Extensive migrant follow-up yielded a 92% reinterview rate. We explored health and income outcomes for respondents who at the time of the follow-up interview were current international migrants (n = 790), returned international migrants (n = 209), internal migrants (n = 1,260), and non-migrants (n = 2,037). Compared to non-migrants, current international migrants were younger (mean 32.9 years versus 35.8 years), had more schooling (7.6 years versus 5.8 years), and were more likely to have an international migrant father (9.7% versus 4.0%) or brother (49.1% versus 30.3%). We estimated multivariate ordinary least squares and logistic regression models controlling for a wide range of control variables measured as far back as 1982. Results show that current international migrants had substantially better health status on factors that likely relate to self-selection such as grip strength and self-rated health. Current international migrants had no excess risk of injury in the past 12 months compared to non-migrants (adjusted mean risk = 6.0% versus 9.3%, p = 0.084). Compared to non-migrants, current international migrants had roughly twice the risk of overweight/obesity (adjusted mean risk = 51.7% versus 23.3%, p < 0.001), obesity (6.9% versus 3.4%, p = 0.012), and stage 1 or higher hypertension (13.0% versus 7.0%, p = 0.014). Compared to internal migrants, current international migrants had significantly higher levels of overweight/obesity (adjusted mean risk = 51.7% versus 37.7%, p < 0.001). Current international migrants showed above average levels of depressive symptoms on a 12-item standardized short-form Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (+0.220 SD, 95% CI 0.098-0.342), significantly higher than internal migrants (-0.028 SD, 95% CI -0.111, 0.055; p < 0.001). Depressive symptoms differed significantly from those reported by non-migrants when restricting to items on negative emotions (international migrant score = 0.254 SD, non-migrant score = 0.056 SD, p = 0.004). Key limitations include the descriptive nature of the analysis, the use of both in-person and phone survey data for international migrants, the long recall period for occupational and mental health risk measures, and the coverage of a single out-migration area of origin.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that international migrants had comparable or lower injury and mortality risks compared to respondents remaining in Bangladesh, due in part to the high risks present in Bangladesh. International migrants also showed higher levels of self-rated health and physical strength, reflective of positive self-selection into migration. They had substantially higher risks of overweight/obesity, hypertension, and depression. Negative health impacts may reflect the effects of both harsh migration conditions and assimilation into host population conditions. Our results suggest the need for bilateral cooperation to improve the health of guest workers.

Conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs are the antipoverty program of choice in many developing countries, aiming to improve human capital and break the intergenerational transmission of poverty. A decade after a randomized 3 year CCT program began, earlier exposure during primary school ages when children were at risk of dropout led to higher labor market participation for young men and women and higher earnings for men. The findings highlight the roles of the different CCT program components with variation in timing of access to nutrition, health, and education investments translating into substantial differential effects on learning outcomes for men and reproductive health outcomes for women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The focus of this study is on the impact of World Bank structural adjustment operations on health expenditures and outcomes. We compare trends and levels of real per capita public spending on health, private consumption (which is the resource base for private health expenditures), and groupings child mortality indicators in four groups of countries. These are: (i) countries that started to borrow for the adjustment process early - Early Adjustment Lending (EAL) countries, (ii) Other Adjustment Lending (OAL) countries, (iii) Non-Adjustment Lending countries whose economies grew during the period 1985-1990 (NAL+), and (iv) Non-Adjustment Lending countries whose economies did not grow (NAL-). The NAL- group provides a 'counterfactual' for comparison with the two groups of adjusting countries. The results show that the fear about possible declines in health care spending in adjusting countries is unwarranted for EAL countries, that is those countries that started the adjustment process early and took it seriously. Government spending on health care increased on average for this group of countries, as did private consumption levels. Government health care expenditures also continued to increase in OAL countries, but mixed GDP growth performance has left little room for increased private spending. However, those countries that showed negative growth in the late eighties and did not start an adjustment process, fared worse throughout: real per capita public health care spending declined during the late eighties and increased less than in the other countries during 1989-1993, while private consumption has declined steadily. The trends in child mortality indicators show tremendous and continuing progress during the past two or three decades with few discernible differences among the four country groupings. Key words - structural adjustment, health, health expenditures, health indicators, World Bank