Adult Mortality and Natural Resource Use in Rural South Africa: Evidence From the Agincourt Health and Demographic Surveillance Site

Abstract

There is little empirical evidence on the association between household experience with HIV/AIDS and shifts in the use of natural resources in developing countries, where residents of rural regions remain highly dependent on often-declining local supplies of natural resources. This study examines household strategies with regard to fuelwood and water among impoverished rural South African households having experienced a recent adult mortality and those without such mortality experience. Quantitative survey data reveal higher levels of natural resource dependence among mortality-affected households, as well as differences in collection strategies. Qualitative interview data provide insight into subtle and complex adjustments at the household level, revealing that impacts vary by the role of the deceased within the household economy. Resource management and public health implications are explored.

Keywords:

• Africa
• Agincourt
• fuelwood
• HIV/AIDS
• mortality
• natural resources
• resource collection
• rural livelihoods
• South Africa
• water

Acknowledgments

This research has been supported by the Programme on Population, Environment, and Development (PRIPODE) of the Committee for International Cooperation in International Research in Demography (CICRED). Supplemental funding was received through the Population Aging Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder (NIA 5-P-30-AG017248) and the Population Reference Bureau's Bixby Fellowship awarded to Lori Hunter. The authors thank Elly Mokoena for his assistance with fieldwork, Amy Vreeland for her assistance with data analyses, and the staff of the MRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt Unit) and residents of the Agincourt Health and Demographic Surveillance Site for their support and participation. Earlier versions of this work were presented at the 2005 meeting of the International Union for the Scientific Study of Population, Tours, France and the 2006 meeting of the Population Association of America, Los Angeles, CA.

Notes

Note. Statistical significance indicated by *p < .05; **p < .01. Data Source: MRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Unit.

Note. Logistic regression is used in all estimations except for level of water use, where ordinary least squares (OLS) is employed. All presented coefficients are betas. Significant differences indicated by *p < .05; **p < .01; p < .001. Data Source: MRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit.

^a Percent correctly classified for logistic models; R ² for OLS.

If the primary resource collector was unavailable, we queried as to their availability and made a return household visit. If the person was entirely unavailable, we spoke with another individual involved in natural resource collection. Nonresponse is extremely rare in this setting.

Unfortunately, our data do not allow for disaggregation of the possessions index into its composite parts so the index is incorporated within our models as an additive value ranging from 1 to 5 with 3.2 as mean.

It is important to note, however, that the overall explanatory power of the estimated models remains quite low—ranging from only 0.01 to 0.26. As such, factors not included within our analyses account for the bulk of variation in natural resource use and strategies within this study setting.