Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

1. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2002

2. The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.

3. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)

4. The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.

Objectives

LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.

The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).

Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]

Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.

Geographic coverage

The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.

The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.

The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.

Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.

Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.

Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.

The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).

Response rate

During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.

In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households

The Research Definition resource describes the conditional state (population and any exposures being compared within the population) and outcome (if specified) that the knowledge (evidence, assertion, recommendation) is about.

Characteristics used by authors in their rural definitions (106 studies included 177 cited characteristics; 37 studies had no definition of rural and many articles used more than one definition).

Abstract

The survey on financial literacy among the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina was conducted within a larger project that aims at creating the Action Plan for Consumer Protection in Financial Services.

The conclusion about the need for an Action Plan was reached by the representatives of the World Bank, the Federal Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina, supervisory authorities for entity financial institutions and non-governmental organizations for the protection of consumer rights, based on the Diagnostic Review on Consumer Protection and Financial Literacy in Bosnia and Herzegovina conducted by the World Bank in 2009-2010. This diagnostic review was conducted at the request of the Federal Ministry of Finance, as part of a larger World Bank pilot program to assess consumer protection and financial literacy in developing countries and middle-income countries. The diagnostic review in Bosnia and Herzegovina was the eighth within this project.

The financial literacy survey, whose results are presented in this report, aims at establishing the basic situation with respect to financial literacy, serving on the one hand as a preparation for the educational activities plan, and on the other as a basis for measuring the efficiency of activities undertaken.

Geographic coverage

Data collection was based on a random, nation-wide sample of citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina aged 18 or older (N = 1036).

Analysis unit

Household, individual

Universe

Population aged 18 or older

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SUMMARY

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, as is well known, there is no completely reliable sample frame or information about universe. The main reasons for such a situation are migrations caused by war and lack of recent census data. The last census dates back to 1991, but since then the size and distribution of population has significantly changed. In such a situation, researchers have to combine all available sources of population data to estimate the present size and structure of the population: estimates by official statistical offices and international organizations, voters? lists, list of polling stations, registries of passport and ID holders, data from large random surveys etc.

The sample was three-stage stratified: in the first stage by entity, in the second by county/region and in the third by type of settlement (urban/rural). This means that, in the first stage, the total sample size was divided in two parts proportionally to number of inhabitants by entity, while in the second stage the subsample size for each entity was further divided by regions/counties. In the third stage, the subsample for each region/county was divided in two categories according to settlement type (rural/urban).

Taking into the account the lack of a reliable and complete list of citizens to be used as a sample frame, a multistage sampling method was applied. The list of polling stations was used as a frame for the selection of primary sampling units (PSU). Polling station territories are a good choice for such a procedure since they have been recently updated, for the general elections held in October 2010. The list of polling station territories contains a list of addresses of housing units that are certainly occupied.

In the second stage, households were used as a secondary sampling unit. Households were selected randomly by a random route technique. In total, 104 PSU were selected with an average of 10 respondents per PSU. The respondent from the selected household was selected randomly using the Trohdal-Bryant scheme.

In total, 1036 citizens were interviewed with a satisfactory response rate of around 60% (table 1). A higher refusal rate is recorded among middle-age groups (table 2). The theoretical margin of error for a random sample of this size is +/-3.0%.

Due to refusals, the sample structure deviated from the estimated population structure by gender, age and education level. Deviations were corrected by RIM weighting procedure.

MORE DETAILED INFORMATION

IPSOS designed a representative sample of approximately 1.000 residents age 18 and over, proportional to the adult populations of each region, based on age, sex, region and town (settlement) type.

For this research we designed three-stage stratified representative sample. First we stratify sample at entity level, regional level and then at settlement type level for each region.

Sample universe:

Population of B&H -18+; 1991 Census figures and estimated population dynamics, census figures of refugees and IDPs, 1996. Central Election Commision - 2008; CIPS - 2008;

Sampling frame:

Polling stations territory (approximate size of census units) within strata defined by regions and type of settlements (urban and rural) Polling stations territories are chosen to be used as primary units because it enables the most reliable sample selection, due to the fact that for these units the most complete data are available (dwelling register - addresses)

Type of sample:

Three stage random representative stratified sample

Definition and number of PSU, SSU, TSU, and sampling points

• PSU - Polling station territory Definition: Polling stations territories are defined by street(s) name(s) and dwelling numbers; each polling station territory comprises approximately 300 households, with exception of the settlements with less than 300 HH which are defined as one unite. Number of PSUs in sample universe: 4710
• SSU - Household Definition: One household comprises people living in the same apartment and sharing the expenditure for food
• TSU - Respondent Definition: Member of the HH , 18+ Number of TSUs in sample universe: = 2.966.766
• Sampling points Approximately 10 respondents per one PSU, total 104

Stratification, purpose and method

• First level strata: Federation of B&H Republika Srpska Brc ko District
• Second level strata: 10 cantons 2 regions -
• Third level strata: urban and rural settlements
• Purpose: Optimisation of the sample plan, and reducing the sampling error

• Method: The strata are defined by criteria of optimal geographical and cultural uniformity

• Selection procedure of PSU, SSU, and respondent Stratification, purpose and method

• PSU Type of sampling of the PSU: Polling station territory chosen with probability proportional to size (PPS) Method of selection: Cumulative (Lachirie method)

• SSU Type of sampling of the SSU: Sample random sampling without replacement Method of selection: Random walk - Random choice of the starting point

• TSU - Respondent Type of sampling of respondent: Sample random sampling without replacement Method of selection: TCB (Trohdal-Bryant scheme)

• Sample size N=1036 respondents

• Sampling error Marginal error +/-3.0%

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey was modelled after the identical survey conducted in Romania. The questionnaire used in the Financial Literacy Survey in Romania was localized for Bosnia and Herzegovina, including adaptations to match the Bosnian context and methodological improvements in wording of questions.

Cleaning operations

Before data entry, 100% logic and consistency controls are performed first by local supervisors and once later by staff in central office.

Verification of correct data entry is assured by using BLAISE system for data entry (commercial product of Netherlands statistics), where criteria for logical and consistency control are defined in advance.

Response rate

• Nobody at home: 2,8%
• Eligible person is not home: 2,8%
• Refusal : 32,79%
• Given up after a minimum of two visits: 0,82%
• Other (excluded after control): 0,29%
• Finished: 60,5%