In 2005, from a stratified cluster sample of 3,101 rural households we identified 375 households that might be at risk of catastrophic payments, by searching through NCMS claims and interviewing key informants. We interviewed these 375 households and confirmed that 239 had had catastrophic payments (= 40% of the household’s capacity to pay) during 2004. A validity test of our screening method found another 8 cases among immediate neighbours of these 375 households; by extrapolation, we obtained an adjusted total of 289 catastrophic households in the sample of 3,101. We measured the impact of the NCMS on hardship alleviation by counterfactual analysis, comparing catastrophic payments before and after NCMS reimbursements.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia in its series Discussion Papers Series with number
344.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)