African Knowledge Base(AKB) Platform
Integrated Essential Digital Resources on Africa

Republic of Guinea : Socioeconomic Impact of Ebola Using Mobile Phone Survey

There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in Collections:
World Bank (WB)

Abstract: The Ebola pandemic has been one of the most virulent pandemics in modern times. By the end of 2015, the epidemic had cost the lives of more than 11,300 people in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, including more than 500 frontline health care workers. After good growth performance between 2011 and 2013, Guinea’s economy has suffered a number of setbacks, including the Ebola crisis and a sharp drop in new investment in the mining sector. As part of the international effort to understand and manage the Ebola crisis and to obtain microeconomic data, the World Bank partnered with Guinea’s National Institute of Statistics (INS) to conduct a mobile phone survey to measure the socioeconomic impact of Ebola on households, following in the footsteps of similar mobile surveys conducted in Liberia and Sierra Leone in 2015. The study finds that the pandemic had ripple effects on the economic fabric and that the economic effects of Ebola have outlasted the epidemiological ones. In addition to the great loss of life, the epidemic has caused great damage to the countries’ economies. As part of the international response, the World Bank Group has significantly financed the Ebola-affected countries. Guinea was significantly affected by the Ebola pandemic, jeopardizing some of the gains in macroeconomic stability and poverty reduction during the last few years. The survey was conducted in all provinces of Guinea, with 60 percent of the respondents residing in the areas strongly affected by Ebola. Using newly collected data through a mobile phone survey, this study analyzes the socioeconomic impact of Ebola on households in Guinea. The survey shows that all parts of Guinea were economically affected by Ebola, with greater impacts in the southeast and the areas around Conakry. It is interesting to note that a quarter of respondents in the severely affected areas reported experiencing proven cases of Ebola in their neighborhood or village. In relation to agriculture, it is found that Ebola did not negatively affect agricultural production and food price. Another surprising finding is that despite Ebola and risk of contamination, households that needed treatment for malaria and diarrhea still visited a health facility, whereas a significant proportion of households reduced their attendance of health facilities. Income loss for rural households was much more related to difficulties in selling their production, than to lower agricultural production or lower food prices. However, Ebola has had a larger effect on urban employment, as illustrated by the increase in the urban unemployment rate. On the other hand, due to Ebola, children dropped out of school, and households adopted coping strategies by reducing their food consumption and selling key assets.
Type: Report
Economic & Sector Work :: General Economy, Macroeconomics, and Growth Study
Economic & Sector Work
Link: http://hdl.handle.net/10986/24724
Subject: PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION
BIRTH
COMMUNITIES
POVERTY POVERTY
RISKS
HOUSEHOLD SIZE
HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
TREATMENT
POVERTY LINE
ECONOMIC GROWTH
PEOPLE
EBOLA VIRUS
FOOD CONSUMPTION
INCOME
PREVENTION
POVERTY RATES
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONS
COUNTERFACTUAL
SERVICES
HEALTH CARE
HOUSING
PREVALENCE
NEIGHBORHOOD
RURAL INCOMES
EFFECTS
HEALTH
POOR PEOPLE
EPIDEMIC
EATING HABITS
PROJECTS
PROJECT
NEIGHBORHOODS
VIRUS INFECTION
NATIONAL LEVEL
CAPITA CONSUMPTION
MEASURES
DANGERS
PUBLIC HEALTH
SAFETY NETS
POVERTY REDUCTION
CONTAGION
KNOWLEDGE
MACROECONOMIC STABILITY
COST EFFECTIVENESS
LABOR MARKET
POPULATION CENSUS
RURAL HOUSEHOLDS
TRAINING
LIFE
PATIENTS
DWELLING
POVERTY GAP
MOBILITY
POVERTY INCIDENCE
MIGRATION
TRANSFERS
INHABITANTS
NATURAL DISASTERS
OBSERVATION
VIOLENCE
INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS
MARKETS
POOR INDIVIDUALS
EXPLANATORY VARIABLES
AVERAGE PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION
DISASTERS
HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FARMERS
MIGRANTS
INTERVIEW
EPIDEMICS
CASH TRANSFERS
MORTALITY
DESIGN
DISEASE OUTBREAKS
UNEMPLOYMENT
DIET
HOUSEHOLD LEVEL
SOCIAL SAFETY NETS
FOOD SECURITY
WORKERS
AGED
PANDEMICS
PARTICIPATION
RURAL AREA
GENDER
DIARRHEA
OCCUPATION
URBAN AREAS
HOUSEHOLD
AGRICULTURAL SECTOR
STD
EMPLOYMENT STATUS
MEDICAL SUPPLIES
STRESS
MALNUTRITION
RURAL
REFUGEES
MARKET
WORKSHOPS
MALARIA
POVERTY SEVERITY
QUALITY CONTROL
QUALITY OF LIFE
INTERNET
SEX
VIRUS
CHILDREN
POVERTY SITUATION
FOOD INTAKE
DISEASE
CLINICS
WORKING CONDITIONS
TRADITIONAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS
HOUSEHOLDS
RURAL AREAS
POVERTY
POOR FARMERS
INFECTION
ALL
FACILITIES
LIVING CONDITIONS
RESEARCH METHODS
HOUSEHOLD WELFARE
INTERVENTIONS
POVERTY RATE
COMMUNITY
POOR
STRATEGY
FAMILIES
EBOLA
FOOD PRICES
HOSPITALS
LABOR MARKETS
ILLNESSES
SAFETY
FEMALE
IMPLEMENTATION
CONTAMINATION
INEQUALITY
POOR HOUSEHOLDS




Country City Visitors