Abstract

Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) collects a wealth of information on HH income and expenditure, such as source of income by industry, HH expenditure on goods and services, and income and expenditure associated with subsistence production and consumption. In addition to this, HIES collects information on sectoral and thematic areas, such as education, health, labour force, primary activities, transport, information and communication, transfers and remittances, food expenditure (as a proxy for HH food consumption and nutrition analysis), and gender.

The Pacific Islands regionally standardized HIES instruments and procedures were adopted by the Government of Tokelau for the 2015/16 Tokelau HIES. These standards were designed to feed high-quality data to HIES data end users for:

1. deriving expenditure weights and other useful data for the revision of the consumer price index;
2. supplementing the data available for use in compiling official estimates of various components in the System of National Accounts;
3. supplementing the data available for production of the balance of payments; and
4. gathering information on poverty lines and the incidence of poverty in Tokelau.

The data allow for the production of useful indicators and information on the sectors covered in the survey, including providing data to inform indicators under the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report, the above listed outputs, and any thematic analyses of HIES data, collectively provide information to assist with social and economic planning and policy formation.

Geographic coverage

National coverage.

Analysis unit

Households and Individuals.

Universe

The universe of the 2015/16 Tokelau Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) is all occupied households (HHs) in Tokelau. HHs are the sampling unit, defined as a group of people (related or not) who pool their money, cook and eat together. It is not the physical structure (dwelling) in which people live. The HH must have been living in Tokelau for a period of six months, or have had the intention to live in Tokelau for a period of twelve months in order to be included in the survey.

Household members covered in the survey include: -usual residents currently living in the HH; -usual residents who are temporarily away (e.g., for work or a holiday); -usual residents who are away for an extended period, but are financially dependent on, or supporting, the HH (e.g., students living in school dormitories outside Tokelau, or a provider working overseas who hasn't formed or joined another HH in the host country) and plan to return; -persons who frequently come and go from the HH, but consider the HH being interviewed as their main place of stay; -any person who lives with the HH and is employed (paid or in-kind) as a domestic worker and who shares accommodation and eats with the host HH; and -visitors currently living with the HH for a period of six months or more.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2015/16 Tokelau Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) sampling approach was designed to generate reliable results at the national level. That is, the survey was not designed to produce reliable results at any lower level, such as for the three individual atolls. The reason for this is partly budgetary constraint, but also because the HIES will serve its primary objectives with a sample size that will provide reliable national aggregates.

The sampling frame used for the random selection of HHs was from December 2013, i.e. the HH listing updated in the 2013 Population Count.

The 2015/16 Tokelau HIES had a quota of 120 HHs. The sample covered all three populated atolls in Tokelau (Fakaofo, Nukunonu and Atafu) and the sample was evenly allocated between the three atoll clusters (i.e., 40 HHs per atoll surveyed over a ten-month period). The HHs within each cluster were randomly selected using a single-stage selection process.

In addition to the 120 selected HHs, 60 HHs (20 per cluster) were randomly selected as replacement HHs to ensure that the desired sample was met. The replacement HHs were only approached for interview in the case that one of the primarily selected HHs could not be interviewed.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaires for this Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) are composed of a diary and 4 modules published in English and in Tokelauan. All English questionnaires and modules are provided as external resources.

Here is the list of the questionnaires for this 2015-2016 HIES: - Diary: week 1 an 2; - Module 1: Demographic information (Household listing, Demographic profile, Activities, Educational status, Communication status...); - Module 2: Household expenditure (Housing characteristics, Housing tenure expenditure, Utilities and communication, Land and home...etc); - Module 3: Individual expenditure (Education, Health, Clothing, Communication, Luxury items, Alcohonl & tobacco); - Module 4: Household and individual income (Wages and salary, Agricultural and forestry activities, Fishing gathering and hunting activities, livestock and aquaculture activities...etc).

Cleaning operations

All inconsistencies and missing values were corrected using a variety of methods: 1. Manual correction: verified on actual questionnaires (double check on the form, questionnaire notes, local knowledge, manual verifications) 2. Subjective: the answer is obvious and be deducted from other questions 3. Donor hot deck: the value is imputed based on similar characteristics from other HHs or individuals (see example below) 4. Donor median: the missing or outliers were imputed from similar items reported median value 5. Record deletion: the record was filled by mistake and had to be removed.

Several questions used the hotdeck method of imputation to impute missing and outlying values. This method can use one to three dimensions and is dependent on which section and module the question was placed. The process works by placing correct values in a coded matrix. For example in Tokelau the “Drink Alcohol” questions used a three dimension hotdeck to store in-range reported data. The constraining dimensions used are AGE, SEX and RELATIONSHIP questions and act as a key for the hotdeck. On the first pass the valid yes/no responses are place into this 3-dimension hotdeck. On the second pass the data in the matrix is updated one person at a time. If a “Drink Alcohol” question contained a missing response then the person's coded age, sex and relationship key is searched in the “valid” matrix. Once a key is found the result contained in the matrix is imputed for the missing value. The first preferred method to correct missing or outlying data is the manual correction (trying to obtain the real value, it could have been miss-keyed or reported incorrectly). If the manual correction was unsuccessful at correcting the values, a subjective approach was used, the next method would be the hotdeck, then the donor median and the last correction is the record deletion. The survey procedure and enumeration team structure allow for in-round data entry, which gives the field staff the opportunity to correct the data by manual review and by using the entry system-generated error messages. This process was designed to improve data quality. The data entry system used system-controlled entry, interactive coding and validity and consistency checks. Despite the validity and consistency checks put in place, the data still required cleaning. The cleaning was a two-stage process, which included manual cleaning while referencing the questionnaire, whereas the second stage involved computer-assisted code verification and, in some cases, imputation. Once the data were clean, verified and consistent, they were recoded to form a final aggregated database, consisting of: Person level record - characteristics of every (household) HH member, including activity and education profile; HH level record - characteristics of the dwelling and access to services; Final aggregated income - all HH income streams, by category and type; Final aggregated expenditure - all HH expenditure items, by category and type.

The cleaning was a two-stage process, which included manual cleaning while referencing the questionnaire, whereas the second stage involved computer-assisted code verification and, in some cases, imputation. Once the data were clean, verified and consistent, they were recoded to form a final aggregated database.

Response rate

Overall, 99% of the response rate objective was achieved.

Sampling error estimates

Refer to Appendix 2 of the Tokelau 2015/2016 Household Income and Expenditure Survey report attached as an external resource.

Abstract

The survey was conducted during December 2006, following an initial mini census listing exercise which was conducted about two months earlier in late September 2006. The objectives of the HIES were as follows: a) Provide information on income and expenditure distribution within the population; b) Provide income estimates of the household sector for the national accounts; c) Provide data for the re-base on the consumer price index; d) Provide data for the analysis of poverty and hardship.

Geographic coverage

National coverage: whole island was covered for the survey.

Analysis unit

• Household;
• Individual.

Universe

The survey covered all private households on the island of Nauru. When the survey was in the field, interviewers were further required to reduce the scope by removing those households which had not been residing in Nauru for the last 12 months and did not intend to stay in Nauru for the next 12 months. Persons living in special dwellings (Hospital, Prison, etc) were not included in the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample size adopted for the survey was 500 households which allowed for expected sample loss, whilst still maintaining a suitable responding sample for the analysis.

Before the sample was selected, the population was stratified by constituency in order to assist with the logistical issues associated with the fieldwork. There were eight constituencies in total, along with "Location" which stretches across the districts of Denigamodu and Aiwo, forming nine strata in total. Although constituency level analysis was not a priority for the survey, sample sizes within each stratum were kept to a minimum of 40 households, to enable some basic forms of analysis at this level if required.

The sample selection procedure within each stratum was then to sort each household on the frame by household size (number of people), and then run a systematic skip through the list in order to achieve the desirable sample size.

Sampling deviation

No deviations from the sample design took place.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey schedules adopted for the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) included the following: · Expenditure questionnaire; · Income questionnaire; · Miscellaneous questionnaire; · Diary (x2).

Whilst a Household Control Form collecting basic demographics is also normally included with the survey, this wasn't required for this HIES as this activity took place for all households in the mini census.

Information collected in the four schedules covered the following: -Expenditure questionnaire: Covers basic details about the dwelling structure and its access to things like water and sanitation. It was also used as the vehicle to collect expenditure on major and infrequent expenditures incurred by the household. -Income questionnaire: Covers each of the main types of household income generated by the household such as wages and salaries, business income and income from subsistence activities. -Miscellaneous questionnaire: Covers topics relating to health access, labour force status and education. -Diary: Covers all day to day expenditures incurred by the household, consumption of items produced by the household such as fish and crops, and gifts both received and given by the household.

All questionnaires are provided as External Resources.

Cleaning operations

There were 3 phases to the editing process for the 2006 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) of Nauru which included: 1. Data Verification operations; 2. Data Editing operations; 3. Data Auditing operations.

The software used for data editting is CSPro 3.0. After each batch is completed the supervisor should check that all person details have been entered from the household listing form (HCF) and should review the income and expenditure questionnaires for each batch ensuring that all items have been entered correctly. Any omitted or incorrect items should be entered into the system. The supervisor is required to perform outlier checks (large or small values) on the batched diary data by calculating unit price (amount/quantity) and comparing prices for each item. This is to be conducted by loading the data into Excel files and sorting data by unit price for each item. Any changes to prices or quantities will be made on the batch file.

For more information on what each phase entailed go the document HIES Processing Instructions attached to this documentation.

Response rate

The survey response rates were a lot lower than expected, especially in some districts. The district of Aiwo, Uaboe and Denigomodu had the lowest response rates with 16.7%, 20.0% and 34.8% respectively. The area of Location was also extremely low with a responses rate of 32.2%. On a more positive note, the districts of Yaren, Ewa, Anabar, Ijuw and Anibare all had response rates at 80.0% or better.

The major contributing factor to the low response rates were households refusing to take part in the survey. The figures for responding above only include fully responding households, and given there were many partial responses, this also brought the values down. The other significant contributing factor to the low response rates was the interviewers not being able to make contact with the household during the survey period.

Unfortunately, not only do low response rates often increase the sampling error of the survey estimates, because the final sample is smaller, it will also introduce response bias into the final estimates. Response bias takes place when the households responding to the survey possess different characteristics to the households not responding, thus generating different results to what would have been achieved if all selected households responded. It is extremely difficult to measure the impact of the non-response bias, as little information is generally known about the non-responding households in the survey. For the Nauru 2006 HIES however, it was noted during the fieldwork that a higher proportion of the Chinese population residing in Nauru were more likely to not respond. Given it is expected their income and expenditure patterns would differ from the rest of the population, this would contribute to the magnitude of the bias.

Below is the list of all response rates by district: -Yaren: 80.5% -Boe: 70% -Aiwo: 16.7% -Buada: 62.5% -Denigomodu: 34.8% -Nibok: 68.4% -Uaboe: 20% -Baitsi: 47.8% -Ewa: 80% -Anetan: 76.5% -Anabar: 81.8% -Ijuw: 85.7% -Anibare: 80% -Meneng: 64.3% -Location: 32.2% -TOTAL: 54.4%

Sampling error estimates

To determine the impact of sampling error on the survey results, relative standard errors (RSEs) for key estimates were produced. When interpreting these results, one must remember that these figures don't include any of the non-sampling errors discussed in other sections of this documentation

To also provide a rough guide on how to interpret the RSEs provided in the main report, the following information can be used:

Category  Description
RSE < 5%  Estimate can be regarded as very reliable
5% < RSE < 10% Estimate can be regarded as good and usable
10% < RSE < 25% Estimate can be considered usable, with caution
RSE > 25%  Estimate should only be used with extreme caution

The actual RSEs for the key estimates can be found in Section 4.1 of the main report

As can be seen from these tables, the estimates for Total Income and Total Expenditure from the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) can be considered to be very good, from a sampling error perspective. The same can also be said for the Wage and Salary estimate in income and the Food estimate in expenditure, which make up a high proportion of each respective group.

Many of the other estimates should be used with caution, depending on the magnitude of their RSE. Some of these high RSEs are to be expected, due to the expected degree of variability for how households would report for these items. For example, with Business Income (RSE 56.8%), most households would report no business income as no household members undertook this activity, whereas other households would report large business incomes as it's their main source of income.

Data appraisal

Other than the non-response issues discussed in this documentation, other quality issues were identified which included: 1) Reporting errors Some of the different aspects contributing to the reporting errors generated from the survey, with some examples/explanations for each, include the following:

a) Misinterpretation of survey questions: A common mistake which takes place when conducting a survey is that the person responding to the questionnaire may interpret a question differently to the interviewer, who in turn may have interpreted the question differently to the people who designed the questionnaire. Some examples of this for a Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) can include people providing answers in dollars and cents, instead of just dollars, or the reference/recall period for an “income” or “expenditure” is misunderstood. These errors can often see reported amounts out by a factor of 10 or even 100, which can have major impacts on final results.

b) Recall problems for the questionnaire information: The majority of questions in both of the income and expenditure questionnaires require the respondent to recall what took place over a 12 month period. As would be expected, people will often forget what took place up to 12 months ago so some

Abstract

THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 50% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE CENTRAL AGENCY FOR PUBLIC MOBILIZATION AND STATISTICS (CAPMAS)

The Household Income, Expenditure and Consumption Survey (HIECS) is of great importance among other household surveys conducted by statistical agencies in various countries around the world. This survey provides a large amount of data to rely on in measuring the living standards of households and individuals, as well as establishing databases that serve in measuring poverty, designing social assistance programs, and providing necessary weights to compile consumer price indices, considered to be an important indicator to assess inflation.

The HIECS 2008/2009 is the tenth Household Income, Expenditure and Consumption Survey that was carried out in 2008/2009, among a long series of similar surveys that started back in 1955.

The survey main objectives are: - To identify expenditure levels and patterns of population as well as socio- economic and demographic differentials. - To estimate the quantities, values of commodities and services consumed by households during the survey period to determine the levels of consumption and estimate the current demand which is important to predict future demands. - To measure mean household and per-capita expenditure for various expenditure items along with socio-economic correlates. - To define percentage distribution of expenditure for various items used in compiling consumer price indices which is considered important indicator for measuring inflation. - To define mean household and per-capita income from different sources. - To provide data necessary to measure standard of living for households and individuals. Poverty analysis and setting up a basis for social welfare assistance are highly dependant on the results of this survey. - To provide essential data to measure elasticity which reflects the percentage change in expenditure for various commodity and service groups against the percentage change in total expenditure for the purpose of predicting the levels of expenditure and consumption for different commodity and service items in urban and rural areas. - To provide data essential for comparing change in expenditure against change in income to measure income elasticity of expenditure. - To study the relationships between demographic, geographical, housing characteristics of households and their income and expenditure for commodities and services. - To provide data necessary for national accounts especially in compiling inputs and outputs tables. - To identify consumers behavior changes among socio-economic groups in urban and rural areas. - To identify per capita food consumption and its main components of calories, proteins and fats according to its sources and the levels of expenditure in both urban and rural areas. - To identify the value of expenditure for food according to sources, either from household production or not, in addition to household expenditure for non food commodities and services. - To identify distribution of households according to the possession of some appliances and equipments such as (cars, satellites, mobiles ...) in urban and rural areas. - To identify the percentage distribution of income recipients according to some background variables such as housing conditions, size of household and characteristics of head of household.

Compared to previous surveys, the current survey experienced certain peculiarities, among which: 1- Doubling the number of area segments from 1200 in the previous survey to 2526 segments with decreasing the number of households selected from each segment to be (20) households instead of (40) in the previous survey to ensure appropriate representatives in the society. 2- Changing the survey period to 15 days instead of one month in the previous one 200412005, to lighten the respondent burden and encourage more cooperation. 3- Adding some additional questions: a- Participation or the benefits gained from pension and social security system. b- Participation in health insurance system. 4- Increasing quality control Procedures especially for fieldwork to ensure data accuracy and avoid any errors in suitable time.

The raw survey data provided by the Statistical Agency were cleaned and harmonized by the Economic Research Forum, in the context of a major project that started in 2009. During which extensive efforts have been exerted to acquire, clean, harmonize, preserve and disseminate micro data of existing household surveys in several Arab countries.

Geographic coverage

Covering a sample of urban and rural areas in all the governorates.

Analysis unit

1- Household/family. 2- Individual/person.

Universe

The survey covered a national sample of households and all individuals permanently residing in surveyed households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 50% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE CENTRAL AGENCY FOR PUBLIC MOBILIZATION AND STATISTICS (CAPMAS)

The sample of HIECS, 2008-2009 is a two-stage stratified cluster sample, approximately self-weighted, of nearly 48000 households. The main elements of the sampling design are described in the following.

1- Sample Size
It has been deemed important to retain the same sample size of the previous two HIECS rounds. Thus, a sample of about 48000 households has been considered. The justification of maintaining the sample size at this level is to have estimates with levels of precision similar to those of the previous two rounds: therefore trend analysis with the previous two surveys will not be distorted by substantial changes in sampling errors from round to another. In addition, this relatively large national sample implies proportional samples of reasonable sizes for smaller governorates. Nonetheless, over-sampling has been introduced to raise the sample size of small governorates to about 1000 households As a result, reasonably precise estimates could be extracted for those governorates. The over-sampling has resulted in a slight increase in the national sample to 48658 households.

2- Cluster size
An important lesson learned from the previous two HIECS rounds is that the cluster size applied in both surveys is found to be too large to yield an accepted design effect estimates. The cluster size was 40 households in the 2004-2005 round, descending from 80 households in the 1999-2000 round. The estimates of the design effect (deft) for most survey measures of the latest round were extraordinary large. As a result, it has been decided to decrease the cluster size to only 19 households (20 households in urban governorates to account for anticipated non-response in those governorates: in view of past experience non-response is almost nil in rural governorates).

A more detailed description of the different sampling stages and allocation of sample across governorates is provided in the Methodology document available among the documentation materials published in both Arabic and English.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three different questionnaires have been designed as following: 1- Expenditure and consumption questionnaire. 2- Diary questionnaire for expenditure and consumption. 3- Income questionnaire.

In designing the questionnaires of expenditure, consumption and income, we were taking into our consideration the following: - Using the recent concepts and definitions of International Labor Organization approved in the International Convention of Labor Statisticians held in Geneva, 2003. - Using the recent Classification of Individual Consumption according to Purpose (COICOP). - Using more than one approach of expenditure measurement to serve many purposes of the survey.

A brief description of each questionnaire is given next:

1- Expenditure and Consumption Questionnaire

This questionnaire comprises 14 tables in addition to identification and geographic data of household on the cover page. The questionnaire is divided into two main sections.

Section one: Household schedule and other information. It includes: - Demographic characteristics and basic data for all household individuals consisting of 18 questions for every person. - Members of household who are currently working abroad. - The household ration card. - The main outlets that provide food and beverage. - Domestic and foreign tourism. - The housing conditions including 15 questions. - Means of transportation used to go to work or school. - The household possession of appliances and means of transportation. - This section includes some questions which help to define the social and economic level of households which in turn, help interviewers to check the plausibility of expenditure, consumption and income data.

Section two: Expenditure and consumption data It includes 14 tables as follows: - The quantity and value of food and beverages commodities actually consumed. - The quantity and value of the actual consumption of alcoholic beverages, tobacco and narcotics. - The quantity and value of the clothing and footwear. - The household expenditure for housing. - The household expenditure for furnishings, household equipment and routine maintenance of the house. - The household expenditure for health care services. - The household expenditure for transportation. - The household

Abstract

THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 25% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS OF THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN

Surveys related to the family budget are considered one of the most important surveys types carried out by the Department Of Statistics, since it provides data on household expenditure and income and their relationship with different indicators. Therefore, most of the countries undertake periodic surveys on household income and expenditures. The Department Of Statistics, since established, conducted a series of Expenditure and Income Surveys during the years 1966, 1980, 1986/1987, 1992, 1997, 2002/2003, 2006/2007, and 2008/2009 and because of continuous changes in spending patterns, income levels and prices, as well as in the population internal and external migration, it was necessary to update data for household income and expenditure over time. Hence, the need to implement the Household Expenditure and Income Survey for the year 2010 arises. The survey was then conducted to achieve the following objectives: 1. Provide data on income and expenditure to enable computation of poverty indices and determine the characteristics of the poor and prepare poverty maps. 2. Provide data weights that reflect the relative importance of consumer expenditure items used in the preparation of the consumer price index. 3. Provide the necessary data for the national accounts related to overall consumption and income of the household sector. 4. Provide the data necessary for the formulation, follow-up and evaluation of economic and social development programs, including those addressed to eradicate poverty. 5. Identify consumer spending patterns prevailing in the society, and the impact of demographic, social and economic variables on those patterns. 6. Calculate the average annual income of the household and the individual, and identify the relationship between income and different socio-economic factors, such as profession and educational level of the head of the household and other indicators. 7. Study the distribution of individuals and households by income and expenditure categories and analyze the factors associated with it.

The raw survey data provided by the Statistical Agency were cleaned and harmonized by the Economic Research Forum, in the context of a major project that started in 2009. During which extensive efforts have been exerted to acquire, clean, harmonize, preserve and disseminate micro data of existing household surveys in several Arab countries.

Geographic coverage

The General Census of Population and Housing in 2004 provided a detailed framework for housing and households for different administrative levels in the Kingdom. Where the Kingdom is administratively divided into 12 governorates, each governorate is composed of a number of districts, each district (Liwa) includes one or more sub-district (Qada). In each sub-district, there are a number of communities (cities and villages). Each community was divided into a number of blocks. Where in each block, the number of houses ranged between 60 and 100 houses. Nomads, persons living in collective dwellings such as hotels, hospitals and prison were excluded from the survey framework.

Analysis unit

1- Household/family. 2- Individual/person.

Universe

The survey covered a national sample of households and all individuals permanently residing in surveyed households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 25% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS OF THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN

The Household Expenditure and Income survey sample, for the year 2010, was designed to serve the basic objectives of the survey through providing a relatively large sample in each sub-district to enable drawing a poverty map in Jordan. A two stage stratified cluster sampling technique was used. In the first stage, a cluster sample proportional to the size was uniformly selected, where the number of households in each cluster was considered the weight of the cluster. At the second stage, a sample of 8 households was selected from each cluster, in addition to another 4 households selected as a backup for the basic sample, using a systematic sampling technique. Those 4 households were sampled to be used during the first visit to the block in case the visit to the original household selected is not possible for any reason. For the purposes of this survey, each sub-district was considered a separate stratum to ensure the possibility of producing results on the sub-district level. In this respect, the survey framework adopted that provided by the General Census of Population and Housing Census in dividing the sample strata. To estimate the sample size, the coefficient of variation and the design effect of the expenditure variable provided in the Household Expenditure and Income Survey for the year 2008 was calculated for each sub-district. These results were used to estimate the sample size on the sub-district level so that the coefficient of variation for the expenditure variable in each sub-district is less than 10%, at a minimum, of the number of clusters in the same sub-district (6 clusters). This is to ensure adequate presentation of clusters in different administrative areas to enable drawing an indicative poverty map. It should be noted that in addition to the standard non response rate assumed, higher rates were expected in areas where poor households are concentrated in major cities. Therefore, those were taken into consideration during the sampling design phase, and a higher number of households were selected from those areas, aiming at well covering all regions where poverty spreads.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

To reach the survey objectives, 3 forms have been developed. Those forms were finalized after being tested and reviewed by specialists taking into account making the data entry, and validation, process on the computer as simple as possible.

(1) General Form/Questionnaire This form includes: - Housing characteristics such as geographic location variables, household area, building material predominant for external walls, type of tenure, monthly rent or lease, main source of water, lighting, heating and fuel cooking, sanitation type and water cycle, the number of rooms in the dwelling, in addition to providing ownership status of some home appliances and car. - Characteristics of household members: This form focused on the social characteristics of the family members such as relation to the head of the family, gender, age and educational status and marital status. It also included economic characteristics such as economic activity, and the main occupation, employment status, and the labor sector. to the additions of questions about individual continued to stay with the family, in order to update the information at the beginning of the second, third and fourth rounds. - Income section which included three parts · Family ownership of assets · Productive activities for the family · Current income sources

(2) Expenditure on food commodities form/Questionnaire This form indicates expenditure data on 17 consumption groups. Each group includes a number of food commodities, with the exception of the latter group, which was confined to some of the non-food goods and services because of their frequent spending pattern on daily basis like food commodities. For the purposes of the efficient use of results, expenditure data of the latter group was moved with the non-food commodities expenditure. The form also includes estimated amounts of own-produced food items and those received as gifts or in an in-kind form, as well as servants living with the family spending on themselves from their own wages to buy food.

(3) Expenditure on non-food commodities form/Questionnaire This form indicates expenditure data on 11 groups of non-food items, and 5 sets of spending on services, in addition to a group of consumption expenditure. It also includes an estimate of self-consumption, and non-food gifts or other items in an in-kind form received or sent by the household, as well as servants living with the family spending on themselves from their own wages to buy non-food items.

Cleaning operations

Raw Data

The data collection phase was then followed by the data processing stage accomplished through the following procedures: 1- Organizing forms/questionnaires A compatible archive system, with the nature of the subsequent operations, was used to classify the forms according to different round throughout the year. This is to effectively enable extracting the forms when required for processing. A registry was prepared to indicate different stages of the process of data checking, coding and entry till forms are back to the archive system. 2- Data office checking This phase is achieved concurrently with the data collection phase in the field, where questionnaires completed in the fieldwork are immediately sent to data office checking phase. 3- Data coding A team was trained to work on the data coding phase, which in this survey is only limited to education specialization, profession and economic activity. In this respect, international classifications were use, while for the rest of the questions, all coding were predefined during

Abstract

The Household Income, Expenditure and Consumption Survey (HIECS) is of great importance among other household surveys conducted by statistical agencies in various countries around the world. This survey provides a large amount of data to rely on in measuring the living standards of households and individuals, as well as establishing databases that serve in measuring poverty, designing social assistance programs, and providing necessary weights to compile consumer price indices, considered to be an important indicator to assess inflation. The first survey that covered all the country governorates was carried out in 1958/1959 followed by a long series of similar surveys. The current survey, HIECS 2012/2013, is the eleventh in this long series. Starting 2008/2009, Household Income, Expenditure and Consumption Surveys were conducted each two years instead of five years. This would enable better tracking of the rapid changes in the level of the living standards of the Egyptian households. CAPMAS started in 2010/2011 to follow a panel sample of around 40% of the total household sample size. The current survey is the second one to follow a panel sample. This procedure will provide the necessary data to extract accurate indicators on the status of the society. The CAPMAS also is pleased to disseminate the results of this survey to policy makers, researchers and scholarly to help in policy making and conducting development related researches and studies The survey main objectives are: - To identify expenditure levels and patterns of population as well as socio- economic and demographic differentials. - To measure average household and per-capita expenditure for various expenditure items along with socio-economic correlates. - To Measure the change in living standards and expenditure patterns and behavior for the individuals and households in the panel sample, previously surveyed in 2008/2009, for the first time during 12 months representing the survey period. - To define percentage distribution of expenditure for various items used in compiling consumer price indices which is considered important indicator for measuring inflation. - To estimate the quantities, values of commodities and services consumed by households during the survey period to determine the levels of consumption and estimate the current demand which is important to predict future demands. - To define average household and per-capita income from different sources. - To provide data necessary to measure standard of living for households and individuals. Poverty analysis and setting up a basis for social welfare assistance are highly dependent on the results of this survey. - To provide essential data to measure elasticity which reflects the percentage change in expenditure for various commodity and service groups against the percentage change in total expenditure for the purpose of predicting the levels of expenditure and consumption for different commodity and service items in urban and rural areas. - To provide data essential for comparing change in expenditure against change in income to measure income elasticity of expenditure. - To study the relationships between demographic, geographical, housing characteristics of households and their income. - To provide data necessary for national accounts especially in compiling inputs and outputs tables. - To identify consumers behavior changes among socio-economic groups in urban and rural areas. - To identify per capita food consumption and its main components of calories, proteins and fats according to its nutrition components and the levels of expenditure in both urban and rural areas. - To identify the value of expenditure for food according to its sources, either from household production or not, in addition to household expenditure for non-food commodities and services. - To identify distribution of households according to the possession of some appliances and equipments such as (cars, satellites, mobiles ,…etc) in urban and rural areas that enables measuring household wealth index. - To identify the percentage distribution of income earners according to some background variables such as housing conditions, size of household and characteristics of head of household. - To provide a time series of the most important data related to dominant standard of living from economic and social perspective. This will enable conducting comparisons based on the results of these time series. In addition to, the possibility of performing geographical comparisons.

Compared to previous surveys, the current survey experienced certain peculiarities, among which : 1) The total sample of the current survey (24.9 thousand households) is divided into two sections: a -A new sample of 16.1 thousand households. This sample was used to study the geographic differences between urban governorates, urban and rural areas, and frontier governorates as well as other discrepancies related to households characteristics and household size, head of the household's education status, etc.
b -A panel sample of 2008/2009 survey data of around 8.8 thousand households were selected to accurately study the changes that may have occurred in the households' living standards over the period between the two surveys and over time in the future since CAPMAS will continue to collect panel data for HIECS in the coming years.

2) Some additional questions that showed to be important based on previous surveys results, were added to the survey questionnaire, such as: a - The extent of health services provided to monitor the level of services available in the Egyptian society. By collecting information on the in-kind transfers, the household received during the year; in order to monitor the assistance the household received from different sources government, association,..etc. b - Identifying the main outlet of fabrics, clothes and footwear to determine the level of living standards of the household.

3) Quality control procedures especially for fieldwork are increased, to ensure data accuracy and avoid any errors in suitable time, as well as taking all the necessary measures to guarantee that mistakes are not repeated, with the application of the principle of reward and punishment.

Geographic coverage

National coverage, covering a sample of urban and rural areas in all the governorates.

Analysis unit

• Household/family
• Individual/person

Universe

The survey covered a national sample of households and all individuals permanently residing in surveyed households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample of HIECS 2012/2013 is a self-weighted two-stage stratified cluster sample, of around 24.9 households. The main elements of the sampling design are described in the following:

Sample Size The sample has been proportionally distributed on the governorate level between urban and rural areas, in order to make the sample representative even for small governorates. Thus, a sample of about 24863 households has been considered, and was distributed between urban and rural with the percentages of 45.4 % and 54.6, respectively. This sample is divided into two parts: a) A new sample of 16094 households selected from main enumeration areas. b) A panel sample of 8769 households (selected from HIECS 2010/2011 and the preceding survey in 2008/2009).

Cluster Size The cluster size in the previous survey has been decreased compared to older surveys since large cluster sizes previously used were found to be too large to yield accepted design effect estimates (DEFT). As a result, it has been decided to use a cluster size of only 8 households (In HIECS 2011/2012 a cluster size of 16 households was used). While the cluster size for the panel sample was 4 households.

Core Sample The core sample is the master sample of any household sample required to be pulled for the purpose of studying the properties of individuals and families. It is a large sample and distributed on urban and rural areas of all governorates. It is a representative sample for the individual characteristics of the Egyptian society. This sample was implemented in January 2012 and its size reached more than 1 million household (1004800 household) selected from 5024 enumeration areas distributed on all governorates (urban/rural) proportionally with the sample size (the enumeration area size is around 200 households). The core sample is the sampling frame from which the samples for the surveys conducted by CAPMAS are pulled, such as the Labor Force Surveys, Income, Expenditure And Consumption Survey, Household Urban Migration Survey, ...etc, in addition to other samples that may be required for outsources.

New Households Sample: 1000 sample areas were selected across all governorates (urban/rural) using a proportional technique with the sample size. The number required for each governorate (urban/rural) was selected from the enumeration areas of the core sample using a systematic sampling technique.A more detailed description of the different sampling stages and allocation of sample across governorates is provided in the Methodology document available among external resources in Arabic.

Sampling deviation

Given the sample design, these weights will vary to some extent for the over-sampled governorates compared with the others. It is also important to calculate measures of sampling variability for key survey estimates.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three different questionnaires have been designed as following: 1) Expenditure and Consumption Questionnaire. 2) Diary Questionnaire (Assisting questionnaire).

The Household Market and Nonmarket Activities (HUS) project started as a joint research project between the Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research (IUI) and Göteborg University in 1980. The ambition was to build a consistent longitudinal micro data base on the use of time, money and public services of households. The first main survey was carried out in 1984. In addition to a contact interview with the selected individuals, all designated individuals participated in a personal interview and two telephone interviews. All respondents were asked about their family background, education, marital status, labor market experience, and employment. In addition, questions about the household were asked of the head of household, concerning family composition, child care, health status, housing, possession of vacation homes, cars, boats and other consumption durables. At the end of the personal interview the household head had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about financing of current home, construction costs for building a house, house value and loans, imputation of property values and loans, additions/renovations 1983, maintenance and repairs, leasing, sale of previous home, assets and liabilities, and non-taxable benefits. All the respondents had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about tax-return information 1983, employment income, and taxes and support payments. Two telephone interviews were used primarily to collect data on the household´s time use and consumption expenditures. The 1986 HUS-survey included both a follow-up of the 1984 sample (panel study) and a supplementary sample. The 1986 sample included 1) all respondents participating in the 1984 survey, 2) the household heads, partners and third persons who should have participated in 1984 but did not (1984 nonresponse), 3) those individuals who started living together after the 1984 interview with an selected individual who participated or was supposed to participate in 1984, 4) members of the 1984 household born in 1966 or 1967. If entering a new household, for example because of leaving their parental home, the household head and his/her partner were also interviewed. Respondents participating in the 1984 survey were interviewed by telephone in 1986. Questions dealt with changes in family composition, housing, employment, wages and child care, and it was not only recorded whether a change had occurred, and what sort of change, but also when it occurred. The respondents also received a questionnaire by mail with questions mainly concerning income and assets. Respondents not participating in the earlier survey were interviewed in person and were asked approximately the same questions as in the 1984 personal interview. The 1988 HUS-survey was considerably smaller than the previous ones. It was addressed exclusively to participants in the 1986 survey, and consisted of a self-enumerated questionnaire with a nonrespondent follow-up by telephone. The questions dealt with changes in housing conditions, employment and household composition. The questionnaire also contained some questions on household income. In many respect the 1991 HUS-survey replicated the 1988 survey. The questions were basically the same in content and range, and the survey was conducted as a self-enamurated questionnaire sent out by mail. This time, however, in contrast to the 1988 survey, an attempt was made to include in the survey the new household members who had moved into sample households since 1986, as well as young people who turned 18 after the 1986 survey. Earlier respondents received a questionnaire by mail containing questions about their home, their primary occupation and weekly work hours since May 1988 (event-history data), earnings in 1989, 1990 and 1991, household composition and any changes in it that might have occurred since 1988, child care and some questions on income. New respondents were also asked about their education and labor-market experience. With respect to its design and question wording, the 1993 survey is a new version of the 1986 survey. The survey is made up of four parts: 1) the panel survey, which was addressed mainly to respondents in the 1991 survey, with certain additions; 2) the so-called supplementary survey, which focused on a new random sample of individuals; 3) the so-called nonresponse survey, which encompassed respondents who had participated in at least one of the earlier surveys but had since dropped out; 4) the time-use survey, which included the same sample of respondents as those in the panel and supplementary surveys. Individuals in the nonresponse group were not included in the time-use survey. Most of the questions in the first three surveys were the same, but certain questions sequences were targeted to the respondents in a specific survey. Thus certain retrospective questions were asked of the nonresponse group, while specific questions on social background, labor market experience etc. were addressed to new respondents. In the case of respondents who had already participated in the panel, a combined contact and main interview was conducted by telephone, after which a self-enumerated questionnaire was sent out to each respondent by mail. The panel sample also included young people in panel households who were born in 1973 or 1974 as well as certain new household members who had not previously been interviewed. These individuals, like new respondents, were not interviewed by telephone until they had been interviewed personally. Thus technically they were treated in the same manner as individuals in the supplementary sample. The new supplementary sample was first contacted by telephone and then given a fairly lengthy personal interview, at the conclusion of which each respondent was asked to fill out a written questionnaire. In this respect the survey design for the nonresponse sample was the same as for the supplementary sample. The nonresponse sample also included young people born in 1973 or 1974 as well as certain new household members. The time-use interviews were conducted by telephone. For each respondent two days were chosen at random from the period from February 15, 1993 to February 14, 1994 and the respondents were interviewed about their time use during those two days. If possible, the time-use interviews were preceded by the other parts of the survey, but this was not always feasible. In each household the household head and spouse/partner were interviewed, as well as an additional person in certain households. Questions regarding the household as a whole were asked of only one person in the household, preferably the household head. As in earlier surveys, data from the interviews was subsequently supplemented by registry data, but only for those respondents who had given their express consent. There is registry information for 75-80 percent of the sample. The telephone interview is divided into following sections: administrative data; labor market experience; employment; job-seekers; not in labor force; education; family composition; child care; health status; other household members; housing conditions; vacation homes; and cars and boats. The questionnaire was divided into twelve sections: sale of previous home; acquisition of current home; construction costs for building a home; house value and loans; repairs; insurance; home-related expenses; sale of previous home; assets; household income; taxes; and respondent income 1992. The 1996 telephone interview is divided into following sections: administrative data; labor market experience; employment; job-seekers; not in labor force; education; family composition; child care; health status; other household members; housing conditions; vacation homes; cars and boats; and environment. The questionnaire was divided into twelve sections: sale of previous home; acquisition of current home; construction costs for building a home; house value and loans; repairs; insurance; home-related expenses; sale of previous home; assets; household income; taxes; and respondent income 1995. The 1998 telephone interview is divided into following sections: administrative data; labor market experience; employment; job-seekers; not in labor force; education; family composition; child care; health status; other household members; housing conditions; vacation homes; cars and boats; and municipal service. The questionnaire was divided into nine sections: sale of previous home; house value and loans; insurance; home-related expenses; assets; household income; inheritances and gifts; black-market work; and respondent income 1997.

The Household Market and Nonmarket Activities (HUS) project started as a joint research project between the Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research (IUI) and Göteborg University in 1980. The ambition was to build a consistent longitudinal micro data base on the use of time, money and public services of households. The first main survey was carried out in 1984. In addition to a contact interview with the selected individuals, all designated individuals participated in a personal interview and two telephone interviews. All respondents were asked about their family background, education, marital status, labor market experience, and employment. In addition, questions about the household were asked of the head of household, concerning family composition, child care, health status, housing, possession of vacation homes, cars, boats and other consumption durables. At the end of the personal interview the household head had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about financing of current home, construction costs for building a house, house value and loans, imputation of property values and loans, additions/renovations 1983, maintenance and repairs, leasing, sale of previous home, assets and liabilities, and non-taxable benefits. All the respondents had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about tax-return information 1983, employment income, and taxes and support payments. Two telephone interviews were used primarily to collect data on the household´s time use and consumption expenditures. The 1986 HUS-survey included both a follow-up of the 1984 sample (panel study) and a supplementary sample. The 1986 sample included 1) all respondents participating in the 1984 survey, 2) the household heads, partners and third persons who should have participated in 1984 but did not (1984 nonresponse), 3) those individuals who started living together after the 1984 interview with an selected individual who participated or was supposed to participate in 1984, 4) members of the 1984 household born in 1966 or 1967. If entering a new household, for example because of leaving their parental home, the household head and his/her partner were also interviewed. Respondents participating in the 1984 survey were interviewed by telephone in 1986. Questions dealt with changes in family composition, housing, employment, wages and child care, and it was not only recorded whether a change had occurred, and what sort of change, but also when it occurred. The respondents also received a questionnaire by mail with questions mainly concerning income and assets. Respondents not participating in the earlier survey were interviewed in person and were asked approximately the same questions as in the 1984 personal interview. The 1988 HUS-survey was considerably smaller than the previous ones. It was addressed exclusively to participants in the 1986 survey, and consisted of a self-enumerated questionnaire with a nonrespondent follow-up by telephone. The questions dealt with changes in housing conditions, employment and household composition. The questionnaire also contained some questions on household income. In many respect the 1991 HUS-survey replicated the 1988 survey. The questions were basically the same in content and range, and the survey was conducted as a self-enamurated questionnaire sent out by mail. This time, however, in contrast to the 1988 survey, an attempt was made to include in the survey the new household members who had moved into sample households since 1986, as well as young people who turned 18 after the 1986 survey. Earlier respondents received a questionnaire by mail containing questions about their home, their primary occupation and weekly work hours since May 1988 (event-history data), earnings in 1989, 1990 and 1991, household composition and any changes in it that might have occurred since 1988, child care and some questions on income. New respondents were also asked about their education and labor-market experience. With respect to its design and question wording, the 1993 survey is a new version of the 1986 survey. The survey is made up of four parts: 1) the panel survey, which was addressed mainly to respondents in the 1991 survey, with certain additions; 2) the so-called supplementary survey, which focused on a new random sample of individuals; 3) the so-called nonresponse survey, which encompassed respondents who had participated in at least one of the earlier surveys but had since dropped out; 4) the time-use survey, which included the same sample of respondents as those in the panel and supplementary surveys. Individuals in the nonresponse group were not included in the time-use survey. Most of the questions in the first three surveys were the same, but certain questions sequences were targeted to the respondents in a specific survey. Thus certain retrospective questions were asked of the nonresponse group, while specific questions on social background, labor market experience etc. were addressed to new respondents. In the case of respondents who had already participated in the panel, a combined contact and main interview was conducted by telephone, after which a self-enumerated questionnaire was sent out to each respondent by mail. The panel sample also included young people in panel households who were born in 1973 or 1974 as well as certain new household members who had not previously been interviewed. These individuals, like new respondents, were not interviewed by telephone until they had been interviewed personally. Thus technically they were treated in the same manner as individuals in the supplementary sample. The new supplementary sample was first contacted by telephone and then given a fairly lengthy personal interview, at the conclusion of which each respondent was asked to fill out a written questionnaire. In this respect the survey design for the nonresponse sample was the same as for the supplementary sample. The nonresponse sample also included young people born in 1973 or 1974 as well as certain new household members. The time-use interviews were conducted by telephone. For each respondent two days were chosen at random from the period from February 15, 1993 to February 14, 1994 and the respondents were interviewed about their time use during those two days. If possible, the time-use interviews were preceded by the other parts of the survey, but this was not always feasible. In each household the household head and spouse/partner were interviewed, as well as an additional person in certain households. Questions regarding the household as a whole were asked of only one person in the household, preferably the household head. As in earlier surveys, data from the interviews was subsequently supplemented by registry data, but only for those respondents who had given their express consent. There is registry information for 75-80 percent of the sample. The telephone interview is divided into following sections: administrative data; labor market experience; employment; job-seekers; not in labor force; education; family composition; child care; health status; other household members; housing conditions; vacation homes; and cars and boats. The questionnaire was divided into twelve sections: sale of previous home; acquisition of current home; construction costs for building a home; house value and loans; repairs; insurance; home-related expenses; sale of previous home; assets; household income; taxes; and respondent income 1992. The 1996 telephone interview is divided into following sections: administrative data; labor market experience; employment; job-seekers; not in labor force; education; family composition; child care; health status; other household members; housing conditions; vacation homes; cars and boats; and environment. The questionnaire was divided into twelve sections: sale of previous home; acquisition of current home; construction costs for building a home; house value and loans; repairs; insurance; home-related expenses; sale of previous home; assets; household income; taxes; and respondent income 1995. The 1998 telephone interview is divided into following sections: administrative data; labor market experience; employment; job-seekers; not in labor force; education; family composition; child care; health status; other household members; housing conditions; vacation homes; cars and boats; and municipal service. The questionnaire was divided into nine sections: sale of previous home; house value and loans; insurance; home-related expenses; assets; household income; inheritances and gifts; black-market work; and respondent income 1997.

U.S. citizens with a professional degree had the highest median household income in 2023, at 172,100 U.S. dollars. In comparison, those with less than a 9th grade education made significantly less money, at 35,690 U.S. dollars. Household income The median household income in the United States has fluctuated since 1990, but rose to around 70,000 U.S. dollars in 2021. Maryland had the highest median household income in the United States in 2021. Maryland’s high levels of wealth is due to several reasons, and includes the state's proximity to the nation's capital. Household income and ethnicity The median income of white non-Hispanic households in the United States had been on the rise since 1990, but declining since 2019. While income has also been on the rise, the median income of Hispanic households was much lower than those of white, non-Hispanic private households. However, the median income of Black households is even lower than Hispanic households. Income inequality is a problem without an easy solution in the United States, especially since ethnicity is a contributing factor. Systemic racism contributes to the non-White population suffering from income inequality, which causes the opportunity for growth to stagnate.

Abstract

The main purpose of the Household Income Expenditure Survey (HIES) 2016 was to offer high quality and nationwide representative household data that provided information on incomes and expenditure in order to update the Consumer Price Index (CPI), improve National Accounts statistics, provide agricultural data and measure poverty as well as other socio-economic indicators. These statistics were urgently required for evidence-based policy making and monitoring of implementation results supported by the Poverty Reduction Strategy (I & II), the AfT and the Liberia National Vision 2030. The survey was implemented by the Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS) over a 12-month period, starting from January 2016 and was completed in January 2017. LISGIS completed a total of 8,350 interviews, thus providing sufficient observations to make the data statistically significant at the county level. The data captured the effects of seasonality, making it the first of its kind in Liberia. Support for the survey was offered by the Government of Liberia, the World Bank, the European Union, the Swedish International Development Corporation Agency, the United States Agency for International Development and the African Development Bank. The objectives of the 2016 HIES were:

1. Update the Consumer Price Index (CPI): To obtain a new set of weights for the basket of goods and services that upgrade the Monrovia Consumer Price Index (MCPI) and the National Consumer Price Index (NCPI) and to revise the CPI basket of goods and services in Liberia to reflect the current consumption pattern of residence.
2. Improve National Accounts Statistics: To get information on annual household expenditure patterns in order to update the household component of the National Accounts.
3. Measure Poverty: To prepare robust poverty indices that enable the understanding of poverty dynamics across the country and of the factors influencing them.
4. Improve Agricultural Statistics: To obtain nationally representative and policy relevant agricultural statistics in order to undertake in-depth analysis of agricultural households.
5. Capture Socio-economic Impact of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD): To obtain a post-EVD dataset which allows for an in-depth analysis of the socioeconomic impact of EVD on households.
6. Benchmark Agenda for Transformation Indicators: To provide an update on selected socioeconomic indicators used to benchmark the government’s policies embedded within the Agenda for Transformation.
7. Develop Statistical Capacity: Emphasize capacity building and development of sustainable statistical systems through every stage of the project to produce accurate and timely information about Liberia.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The original sample design for the HIES exploited two-phased clustered sampling methods, encompassing a nationally representative sample of households in every quarter and was obtained using the 2008 National Housing and Population Census sampling frame. The procedures used for each sampling stage are as follows:
i. First stage
Selection of sample EAs. The sample EAs for the 2016 HIES were selected within each stratum systematically with Probability Proportional to Size from the ordered list of EAs in the sampling frame. They are selected separately for each county by urban/rural stratum. The measure of size for each EA was based on the number of households from the sampling frame of EAs based on the 2008 Liberia Census. Within each stratum the EAs were ordered geographically by district, clan and EA codes. This provided implicit geographic stratification of the sampling frame.

ii. Second stage
Selection of sample households within a sample EA. A random systematic sample of 10 households were selected from the listing for each sample EA. Using this type of table, the supervisor only has to look up the total number of households listed, and a specific systematic sample of households is identified in the corresponding row of the table.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

There were three questionnaires administered for this survey: 1. Household and Individual Questionnaire 2. Market Price Questionnaire 3. Agricultural Recall Questionnaire

Cleaning operations

The data entry clerk for each team, using data entry software called CSPro, entered data for each household in the field. For each household, an error report was generated on-site, which identified key problems with the data collected (outliers, incorrect entries, inconsistencies with skip patterns, basic filters for age and gender specific questions etc.). The Supervisor along with the Data Entry Clerk and the Enumerator that collected the data reviewed these errors. Callbacks were made to households if necessary to verify information and rectify the errors while in that EA.

Once the data were collected in each EA, they were sent to LISGIS headquarters for further processing along with EA reports for each area visited. The HIES Technical committee converted the data into STATA and ran several consistency checks to manage overall data quality and prepared reports to identify key problems with the data set and called the field teams to update them about the same. Monthly reports were prepared by summarizing observations from data received from the field alongside statistics on data collection status to share with the field teams and LISGIS Management.

Abstract

The Household Income and Expenditure Survey is a survey collecting data on income, consumption and expenditure patterns of households, in accordance with methodological principles of statistical enquiries, which are linked to demographic and socio-economic characteristics of households. A Household Income and expenditure Survey is the sole source of information on expenditure, consumption and income patterns of households, which is used to calculate poverty and income distribution indicators. It also serves as a statistical infrastructure for the compilation of the national basket of goods used to measure changes in price levels. Furthermore, it is used for updating of the national accounts.

The main objective of the NHIES 2009/2010 is to comprehensively describe the levels of living of Namibians using actual patterns of consumption and income, as well as a range of other socio-economic indicators based on collected data. This survey was designed to inform policy making at the international, national and regional levels within the context of the Fourth National Development Plan, in support of monitoring and evaluation of Vision 2030 and the Millennium Development Goals. The NHIES was designed to provide policy decision making with reliable estimates at regional levels as well as to meet rural - urban disaggregation requirements.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage

Analysis unit

Individuals and Households

Universe

Every week of the four weeks period of a survey round all persons in the household were asked if they spent at least 4 nights of the week in the household. Any person who spent at least 4 nights in the household was taken as having spent the whole week in the household. To qualify as a household member a person must have stayed in the household for at least two weeks out of four weeks.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The targeted population of NHIES 2009/2010 was the private households of Namibia. The population living in institutions, such as hospitals, hostels, police barracks and prisons were not covered in the survey. However, private households residing within institutional settings were covered. The sample design for the survey was a stratified two-stage probability sample, where the first stage units were geographical areas designated as the Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) and the second stage units were the households. The PSUs were based on the 2001 Census EAs and the list of PSUs serves as the national sample frame. The urban part of the sample frame was updated to include the changes that take place due to rural to urban migration and the new developments in housing. The sample frame is stratified first by region followed by urban and rural areas within region. In urban areas further stratification is carried out by level of living which is based on geographic location and housing characteristics. The first stage units were selected from the sampling frame of PSUs and the second stage units were selected from a current list of households within each selected PSU, which was compiled just before the interviews.

PSUs were selected using probability proportional to size sampling coupled with the systematic sampling procedure where the size measure was the number of households within the PSU in the 2001 Population and Housing Census. The households were selected from the current list of households using systematic sampling procedure.

The sample size was designed to achieve reliable estimates at the region level and for urban and rural areas within each region. However the actual sample sizes in urban or rural areas within some of the regions may not satisfy the expected precision levels for certain characteristics. The final sample consists of 10 660 households in 533 PSUs. The selected PSUs were randomly allocated to the 13 survey rounds.

Sampling deviation

All the expected sample of 533 PSUs was covered. However a number of originally selected PSUs had to be substituted by new ones due to the following reasons.

Urban areas: Movement of people for resettlement in informal settlement areas from one place to another caused a selected PSU to be empty of households.

Rural areas: In addition to Caprivi region (where one constituency is generally flooded every year) Ohangwena and Oshana regions were badly affected from an unusual flood situation. Although this situation was generally addressed by interchanging the PSUs betweensurvey rounds still some PSUs were under water close to the end of the survey period. There were five empty PSUs in the urban areas of Hardap (1), Karas (3) and Omaheke (1) regions. Since these PSUs were found in the low strata within the urban areas of the relevant regions the substituting PSUs were selected from the same strata. The PSUs under water were also five in rural areas of Caprivi (1), Ohangwena (2) and Oshana (2) regions. Wherever possible the substituting PSUs were selected from the same constituency where the original PSU was selected. If not, the selection was carried out from the rural stratum of the particular region. One sampled PSU in urban area of Khomas region (Windhoek city) had grown so large that it had to be split into 7 PSUs. This was incorporated into the geographical information system (GIS) and one PSU out of the seven was selected for the survey. In one PSU in Erongo region only fourteen households were listed and one in Omusati region listed only eleven households. All these households were interviewed and no additional selection was done to cover for the loss in sample.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The instruments for data collection were as in the previous survey the questionnaires and manuals. Form I questionnaire collected demographic and socio-economic information of household members, such as: sex, age, education, employment status among others. It also collected information on household possessions like animals, land, housing, household goods, utilities, household income and expenditure, etc.

Form II or the Daily Record Book is a diary for recording daily household transactions. A book was administered to each sample household each week for four consecutive weeks (survey round). Households were asked to record transactions, item by item, for all expenditures and receipts, including incomes and gifts received or given out. Own produce items were also recorded. Prices of items from different outlets were also collected in both rural and urban areas. The price collection was needed to supplement information from areas where price collection for consumer price indices (CPI) does not currently take place.

Cleaning operations

The questionnaires received from the regions were registered and counterchecked at the survey head office. The data processing team consisted of Systems administrator, IT technician, Programmers, Statisticians and Data typists.

Data capturing

The data capturing process was undertakenin the following ways: Form 1 was scanned, interpreted and verified using the “Scan”, “Interpret” & “Verify” modules of the Eyes & Hands software respectively. Some basic checks were carried out to ensure that each PSU was valid and every household was unique. Invalid characters were removed. The scanned and verified data was converted into text files using the “Transfer” module of the Eyes & Hands. Finally, the data was transferred to a SQL database for further processing, using the “TranScan” application. The Daily Record Books (DRB or form 2) were manually entered after the scanned data had been transferred to the SQL database. The reason was to ensure that all DRBs were linked to the correct Form 1, i.e. each household’s Form 1 was linked to the corresponding Daily Record Book. In total, 10 645 questionnaires (Form 1), comprising around 500 questions each, were scanned and close to one million transactions from the Form 2 (DRBs) were manually captured.

Response rate

Household response rate: Total number of responding households and non-responding households and the reason for non-response are shown below. Non-contacts and incomplete forms, which were rejected due to a lot of missing data in the questionnaire, at 3.4 and 4.0 percent, respectively, formed the largest part of non-response. At the regional level Erongo, Khomas, and Kunene reported the lowest response rate and Caprivi and Kavango the highest. See page 17 of the report for a detailed breakdown of response rates by region.

Data appraisal

To be able to compare with the previous survey in 2003/2004 and to follow up the development of the country, methodology and definitions were kept the same. Comparisons between the surveys can be found in the different chapters in this report. Experiences from the previous survey gave valuable input to this one and the data collection was improved to avoid earlier experienced errors. Also, some additional questions in the questionnaire helped to confirm the accuracy of reported data. During the data cleaning process it turned out, that some households had difficulty to separate their household consumption from their business consumption when recording their daily transactions in DRB. This was in particular applicable for the guest farms, the number of which has shown a big increase during the past five years. All households with extreme high consumption were examined manually and business transactions were recorded and separated from private consumption.

The Household Market and Nonmarket Activities (HUS) project started as a joint research project between the Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research (IUI) and Göteborg University in 1980. The ambition was to build a consistent longitudinal micro data base on the use of time, money and public services of households.

The first main survey was carried out in 1984. In addition to a contact interview with the selected individuals, all designated individuals participated in a personal interview and two telephone interviews. All respondents were asked about their family background, education, marital status, labor market experience, and employment. In addition, questions about the household were asked of the head of household, concerning family composition, child care, health status, housing, possession of vacation homes, cars, boats and other consumption durables. At the end of the personal interview the household head had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about financing of current home, construction costs for building a house, house value and loans, imputation of property values and loans, additions/renovations 1983, maintenance and repairs, leasing, sale of previous home, assets and liabilities, and non-taxable benefits. All the respondents had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about tax-return information 1983, employment income, and taxes and support payments. Two telephone interviews were used primarily to collect data on the household´s time use and consumption expenditures.

The 1986 HUS-survey included both a follow-up of the 1984 sample (panel study) and a supplementary sample. The 1986 sample included 1) all respondents participating in the 1984 survey, 2) the household heads, partners and third persons who should have participated in 1984 but did not (1984 nonresponse), 3) those individuals who started living together after the 1984 interview with an selected individual who participated or was supposed to participate in 1984, 4) members of the 1984 household born in 1966 or 1967. If entering a new household, for example because of leaving their parental home, the household head and his/her partner were also interviewed. Respondents participating in the 1984 survey were interviewed by telephone in 1986. Questions dealt with changes in family composition, housing, employment, wages and child care, and it was not only recorded whether a change had occurred, and what sort of change, but also when it occurred. The respondents also received a questionnaire by mail with questions mainly concerning income and assets. Respondents not participating in the earlier survey were interviewed in person and were asked approximately the same questions as in the 1984 personal interview.

The 1988 HUS-survey was considerably smaller than the previous ones. It was addressed exclusively to participants in the 1986 survey, and consisted of a self-enumerated questionnaire with a nonrespondent follow-up by telephone. The questions dealt with changes in housing conditions, employment and household composition. The questionnaire also contained some questions on household income.

In many respect the 1991 HUS-survey replicated the 1988 survey. The questions were basically the same in content and range, and the survey was conducted as a self-enamurated questionnaire sent out by mail. This time, however, in contrast to the 1988 survey, an attempt was made to include in the survey the new household members who had moved into sample households since 1986, as well as young people who turned 18 after the 1986 survey. Earlier respondents received a questionnaire by mail containing questions about their home, their primary occupation and weekly work hours since May 1988 (event-history data), earnings in 1989, 1990 and 1991, household composition and any changes in it that might have occurred since 1988, child care and some questions on income. New respondents were also asked about their education and labor-market experience.

With respect to its design and question wording, the 1993 survey is a new version of the 1986 survey. The survey is made up of four parts: 1) the panel survey, which was addressed mainly to respondents in the 1991 survey, with certain additions; 2) the so-called supplementary survey, which focused on a new random sample of individuals; 3) the so-called nonresponse survey, which encompassed respondents who had participated in at least one of the earlier surveys but had since dropped out; 4) the time-use survey, which included the same sample of respondents as those in the panel and supplementary surveys. Individuals in the nonresponse group were not included in the time-use survey. Most of the questions in the first three surveys were the same, but certain questions sequences were targeted to the respondents in a specific survey. Thus certain retrospective questions were asked of the nonresponse group, while specific questions on social background, labor market experience e

Abstract

Tonga Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2009 (HIES), undertaken by the Tonga Statistics Department during the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009. This is the second survey of its kind in Tonga. The last one was carried out in 2000/01, and the results were used in November 2002 to rebase the Consumer Price Index (CPI). A report from that survey was produced in December 2002, and where possible, results from this report will be made to be comparable to the previous report.

• To provide updated information for the expenditure item weights for the CPI;

• To provide some data for the components of National Accounts; and

• To provide information on the nature and distribution of household income and expenditure for planners, policy makers, and the general public.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage and Island Division.

Analysis unit

Private Households, individuals, Income and expenditure items.

Universe

The survey covered all members of the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample design was done in such a way that promoted estimates primarily at the national level, but also at the island division level. For that reason a higher sample fraction was selected in the smaller island divisions.

Rural Tongatapu received the smallest sample fraction (8.3%) as it had the highest population. On the other hand the Ongo Niua received the largest sample fraction (21.5%) as their population was the smallest. Overall a sample of roughly 10 per cent was selected for Tonga.

The sample was selected independently within each of the 6 target areas. Firstly, extremely remote areas were removed from the frame (and thus not given a chance of selection) as it was considered too expensive to cover these areas. These areas only represented about 3.5 per cent of the total population for Tonga, so the impact of their removal was considered very minimal.

The sampling in each area was then undertaken using a two-stage process. The first stage involved the selection of census blocks using Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) sampling, where the size measure was the expected number of households in that block. For the second stage, a fixed number (twelve) of households were selected from each selected census block using systematic sampling. The household lists for all selected blocks were updated just prior to the second stage of selection.

Given the sample was spread out over four quarters during the 2009 calendar year, every 4th selected census block was allocated to a respective quarter. To ensure an equally distribution of sample to each quarter, the number of census blocks selected for each of the six target group was made divisible by four. This therefore meant the sample size for each target group was adjusted so that it was divisible by (4*12)=48, as can be seen in Table 1 of Section 1 of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

There were 4 main survey schedules used to collect the information for the survey were published in English: 1) Household Questionnaire 2) Individual Questionnaire - Part 1 3) Individual Questionnaire - Part 2 4) Individual Diary (x2)

Household Questionnaire

This questionnaire is primarily used to collect information on large expenditure items, but also collects information about the dwelling characteristics. In total there are 14 sections to this uestionnaire which cover: 1 Dwelling Characteristics 2 Household Possessions 3 Dwelling Tenure 4 Construction of Dwellings 5 Household Bills 6 Transport Expenses 7 Major Consumer Durables 8 Education/Recreation 9 Medical & Health 10 Overseas Travel 11 Special Events 12 Subsistence Activity Sales 13 Remittances 14 Contributions to Church/Village/School As stated above, the first section is devoted to collecting information about key dwelling characteristics, whereas the second section collects information on household possessions. Sections 3-11, and Section 14, focus on expenses the household incurs, whereas Section 13 focuses on remittances both paid by and received by the household. Finally, Section 12 collects information from households about the income they generate from subsistence activities. This section is the main question collecting income from the household questionnaire, as was included here as it was considered more appropriate to collect this data at the household level. The front page of this Questionnaire is also used for collecting the Roster of Household Members.

Individual Questionnaire - Part 1

This questionnaire collects basic demographic information about each individual in the household, including: • Relationship to Household Head • Sex • Age • Ethnicity • Marital Status

Also collected in this form is information about health problems each individual may have encountered in the last 3 months, followed by education information. For the education section, if a person is currently attending an education institution, then current level is asked, whereas if the person attended an education institution but no longer attends, then the highest level completed is collected. The last main section of this form collects information about labour force and is only asked of individuals aged 10 years and above. These questions aim to classify each person in scope for this section as either: • In the Labour Force - Employed • In the Labour Force - Unemployed • Not in the Labour Force

Individual Questionnaire - Part 2

This questionnaire is focused on collecting information from individuals regarding their income. There are eight sections to this questionnaire of which six are devoted to income. They include: 1 Wages and Salary 2 Self-Employment
3 Previous Jobs
4 Ad-hoc Jobs 5 Pensions/Welfare Benefits 6 Other Income 7 Loan Information 8 Contributions to Benefit Schemes

As stated above, the first six sections of this questionnaire focus on income. Section 7 collects information pertaining to loans for i) households, ii) cars, iii) special events and iv) other, and finally the last question is an expense related question covering contributions to benefit schemes which was considered best covered at an individual level.

Individual Diary

The last form used for the survey was the Individual Diary which each individual aged 10 years and over was required to fill in for two weeks (two one-week diaries).

Each diary had 4 sections covering the following: 1) Items Purchased: This section had a separate page for each day and was for recording all items bought in a store, street vendors, market or any other place (including credit) 2) Home Grown/Produced Items: This section was for recording home grown/produced items consisting of items such as food grown at home or at the family plantation, self caught or gathered fish and homemade handicrafts and other goods grown and produced at home. Information is recorded for these items consumed by the household which they produced themselves, these items they gave away as a gift, and these items they received as a gift. 3) Gifts Given and Received: This section of the diary is for recording gifts given and received including both cash and purchased goods (but not home produced). If any member of the household receives a gift that meets this criteria during the diary keeping period from someone who is not a member of their household it is recorded here. 4) Winnings from Gambling: The last section of the Diary is for recording all winnings from gambling during the diary keeping period.

Cleaning operations

Batch edits in CSPro were performed on the data after data entry was completed. The batch edits were aimed at identifying any values falling outside acceptable ranges, as well as other inconsistencies in the data. As this process was done at the batch level, questionnaires were often referred to and manual changes to the data were performed to amend identified errors.

One significant problem which was identified during this process was the incorrect coding of phone card purchase to the purchase of actual phones. As there were many such cases, an automatic code change was applied to any purchase of phones which was less than $40 - recoding them to purchase of phone cards.

Response rate

The final Response Rates for the survey was high, which will assist in yielding statistically significant estimates. Across all six target groups the response rate was in excess of 95 per cent, with the exception of Ongo Niua who only reported 50 per cent. The reason the number was so low in the Ongo Niua was because this target area was only visited in the 2nd quarter, where half the total sample were enumerated (to make up for the sample loss in the first quarter), and was not visited again in quarter 3 and 4.

The reason behind the high response rates in other areas was due to the updated lists for selected census blocks excluding vacant dwellings. As such, it was mostly refusals that impacted on the final response rates.

Sampling error estimates

Sampling errors refer to those errors that are implicit in any sample survey, where only a portion of the population is covered. Non-sampling errors refer to all other types of error. These can arise at any stage of the survey process. Examples of activities that are likely to increase the level of non-sampling error are: failing to select a proper sample, poor questionnaire design, weak field supervision, inaccurate data entry, insufficient data editing, or failure to analyze or report on the data

The Household Market and Nonmarket Activities (HUS) project started as a joint research project between the Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research (IUI) and Göteborg University in 1980. The ambition was to build a consistent longitudinal micro data base on the use of time, money and public services of households.

The first main survey was carried out in 1984. In addition to a contact interview with the selected individuals, all designated individuals participated in a personal interview and two telephone interviews. All respondents were asked about their family background, education, marital status, labor market experience, and employment. In addition, questions about the household were asked of the head of household, concerning family composition, child care, health status, housing, possession of vacation homes, cars, boats and other consumption durables. At the end of the personal interview the household head had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about financing of current home, construction costs for building a house, house value and loans, imputation of property values and loans, additions/renovations 1983, maintenance and repairs, leasing, sale of previous home, assets and liabilities, and non-taxable benefits. All the respondents had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about tax-return information 1983, employment income, and taxes and support payments. Two telephone interviews were used primarily to collect data on the household´s time use and consumption expenditures.

The 1986 HUS-survey included both a follow-up of the 1984 sample (panel study) and a supplementary sample. The 1986 sample included 1) all respondents participating in the 1984 survey, 2) the household heads, partners and third persons who should have participated in 1984 but did not (1984 nonresponse), 3) those individuals who started living together after the 1984 interview with an selected individual who participated or was supposed to participate in 1984, 4) members of the 1984 household born in 1966 or 1967. If entering a new household, for example because of leaving their parental home, the household head and his/her partner were also interviewed. Respondents participating in the 1984 survey were interviewed by telephone in 1986. Questions dealt with changes in family composition, housing, employment, wages and child care, and it was not only recorded whether a change had occurred, and what sort of change, but also when it occurred. The respondents also received a questionnaire by mail with questions mainly concerning income and assets. Respondents not participating in the earlier survey were interviewed in person and were asked approximately the same questions as in the 1984 personal interview.

The 1988 HUS-survey was considerably smaller than the previous ones. It was addressed exclusively to participants in the 1986 survey, and consisted of a self-enumerated questionnaire with a nonrespondent follow-up by telephone. The questions dealt with changes in housing conditions, employment and household composition. The questionnaire also contained some questions on household income.

In many respect the 1991 HUS-survey replicated the 1988 survey. The questions were basically the same in content and range, and the survey was conducted as a self-enamurated questionnaire sent out by mail. This time, however, in contrast to the 1988 survey, an attempt was made to include in the survey the new household members who had moved into sample households since 1986, as well as young people who turned 18 after the 1986 survey. Earlier respondents received a questionnaire by mail containing questions about their home, their primary occupation and weekly work hours since May 1988 (event-history data), earnings in 1989, 1990 and 1991, household composition and any changes in it that might have occurred since 1988, child care and some questions on income. New respondents were also asked about their education and labor-market experience.

With respect to its design and question wording, the 1993 survey is a new version of the 1986 survey. The survey is made up of four parts: 1) the panel survey, which was addressed mainly to respondents in the 1991 survey, with certain additions; 2) the so-called supplementary survey, which focused on a new random sample of individuals; 3) the so-called nonresponse survey, which encompassed respondents who had participated in at least one of the earlier surveys but had since dropped out; 4) the time-use survey, which included the same sample of respondents as those in the panel and supplementary surveys. Individuals in the nonresponse group were not included in the time-use survey. Most of the questions in the first three surveys were the same, but certain questions sequences were targeted to the respondents in a specific survey. Thus certain retrospective questions were asked of the nonresponse group, while specific questions on social background, labor market experience e

Abstract

Survey based Harmonized Indicators (SHIP) files are harmonized data files from household surveys that are conducted by countries in Africa. To ensure the quality and transparency of the data, it is critical to document the procedures of compiling consumption aggregation and other indicators so that the results can be duplicated with ease. This process enables consistency and continuity that make temporal and cross-country comparisons consistent and more reliable.

Four harmonized data files are prepared for each survey to generate a set of harmonized variables that have the same variable names. Invariably, in each survey, questions are asked in a slightly different way, which poses challenges on consistent definition of harmonized variables. The harmonized household survey data present the best available variables with harmonized definitions, but not identical variables. The four harmonized data files are

a) Individual level file (Labor force indicators in a separate file): This file has information on basic characteristics of individuals such as age and sex, literacy, education, health, anthropometry and child survival. b) Labor force file: This file has information on labor force including employment/unemployment, earnings, sectors of employment, etc. c) Household level file: This file has information on household expenditure, household head characteristics (age and sex, level of education, employment), housing amenities, assets, and access to infrastructure and services. d) Household Expenditure file: This file has consumption/expenditure aggregates by consumption groups according to Purpose (COICOP) of Household Consumption of the UN.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Individual level for datasets with suffix _I and _L
• Household level for datasets with suffix _H and _E

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample Design The 1999/2000 Household Income, Consurnption, and Expendi.ture Survey covered both the urban and the sedentary rural parts of the country. The survey has not covered six zones in Somalia Region and two zones in Afar Region that are inhabited mainly by nomadic population. For the purpose of the survey, the country was divided into three categories . That is, the rural parts of the country and the urban areas that were divided into two broad categories taking into account sizes of their population. Category I: Rural parts of nine Regional States and two administrative regions were grouped in this category each of which were the survey dornains (reporting levels). These regions are Tigrai,Afar, Amhara, Oromia, Sornalia, Eenishangul-Gunuz, SNNP,Gambela, Flarari, Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa.

Category II: All Regional capitals and five major urban centers of the country were grouped in this category. Each of the urban centers in this category was the survey domain (reporting level) for which separate survey results for rnajor survey characteristics were reported.

Category III: Urban centers in the country other than the urban centers in category II were grouped in this category and formed a single reporting level. Other than the reporting levels defined in category II and category III one additional domain, namely total urban (country level) can be constructed by eombining the basic domains defined in the two categories. All in all 35'basie rural and urban domains (reporting levels) were defined for the survey. In addition to the above urban and rural domains, survey results are to be reported at regional and eountry levels by aggregating the survey results for the conesponding urban and rural areas. Definition of the survey dornains was based on both technical and resource considerations. More specifically, sample size for the domains were determined to enable provision of major indicators with reasonable precision subject to the resources that were available for the survey.

Selection Scheme and Sample Size in Each Category CategoryI : A stratified two-stage sample design was used to select the sample in which the primary sampling units (PSUs) were EAs. Sample enumeration areas( EAs) from each domain were selected using systematic sampling that is probability proportional to the size being number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing census.A total of 722 EAs were selected from the rural parts of the country. Within each sample EA a fresh list of households was prepared at the beginning of the survey's field work and for the administration of the survey questionnaire 12 households per sample EA for rural areas were systematically selected.

Category II: In this category also,a stratified two-stage sample design was used to select the sample. Here a strata constitutes all the "Regional State Capitals" and the five "Major Urban Centers" in the country and are grouped as a strata in this category. The primary sampling units (PSUs) are the EA's in the Regional State Capitals and the five Major Urban Centers and excludes the special EAs (non-conventional households). Sample enumeration areas( EAs) from each strata were selected using systematic sampling probability proportional to size, size being number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. A total of 373 EAs were selected from this domain of study. Within each sample EAs a fresh list of households was prepared at the beginning of the survey's field work and for the administration of the questionnaire 16 household per sample EA were systematically selected-

Category III: Three-stage stratified sample design was adopted to select the sample from domains in category III. The PSUs were other urban centers selected using systematic sampling that is probability proportional to size; size being number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. The secondary sampling units (SSUs) were EAs which were selected using systematic sampling that is probability proportional to size; size being number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. A total of 169 sample EAs were selected from the sample of other urban centers and was determined by proportional allocation to their size of households from the 1994 census. Ultimately, 16 households within each of the sample EAs were selected systematically from a fresh list of households prepared at the beginning of the survey's fieldwork for the administration of the survey questionnaire.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Household Income, Consumption and Expenditure Survey questionnaire contains the following forms: - Form 1: Area Identification and Household Characteristics - Form 2A: Quantity and value of weekly consumption of food and drinks consumed at home and tobacco/including quantity purchased, own produced, obtained, etc for first and second week. - Form 2B: Quantity and value of weekly consumption of food and drinks consumed at home and tobacco/including quantity purchased, own produced, obtained, etc for third and fourth week . - Form 3A: All transaction (income, expenditure and consumption) for the first and second weeks except what is collected in Forms 2A and 2B - Form 3B: All transaction (income, expenditure and consumption) for the third and fourth weeks except what is collected in Forms 2A and 2B - Form 4: All transaction (expenditure and consumption) for last 6 months for Household expenditure on some selected item groups - Form 5: Cash income and receipts received by household and type of tenure. The survey questionnaire is provided as external resource.

Abstract

The purpose of the HIES survey is to obtain information on the income, consumption pattern, incidence of poverty, and saving propensities for different groups of people in Nauru. This information will be used to guide policy makers in framing socio-economic developmental policies and in initiating financial measures for improving economic conditions of the people.

Some more specific outputs from the survey are listed below: a) To obtain expenditure weights and other useful data for the revision of the consumer price index; b) To supplement the data available for use in compiling official estimates of household accounts in the systems of national accounts; c) To supply basic data needed for policy making in connection with social and economic planning; d) To provide data for assessing the impact on household living conditions of existing or proposed economic and social measures, particularly changes in the structure of household expenditures and in household consumption; e) To gather information on poverty lines and incidence of poverty throughout Nauru.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Person
• Expenditure Commodity

Universe

The survey covered all private households on the island of Nauru. When the survey was in the field, interviewers were further required to reduce the scope by removing those households which had not been residing in Nauru for the last 12 months and did not intend to stay in Nauru for the next 12 months.

Persons living in special dwellings (Hospital, Prison, etc) were not included in the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample size adopted for the survey was 500 households which allowed for expected sample loss, whilst still maintaining a suitable responding sample for the analysis.

Before the sample was selected, the population was stratified by constituency in order to assist with the logistical issues associated with the fieldwork. There were eight constituencies in total, along with "Location" which stretches across the districts of Denigamodu and Aiwo, forming nine strata in total. Although constituency level analysis was not a priority for the survey, sample sizes within each stratum were kept to a minimum of 40 households, to enable some basic forms of analysis at this level if required.

The sample selection procedure within each stratum was then to sort each household on the frame by household size (number of people), and then run a systematic skip through the list in order to achieve the desirable sample size.

Sampling deviation

No deviations from the sample design took place.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f] for questionnaires, self-enumeration for the diaries

Research instrument

The survey schedules adopted for the HIES included the following: · Expenditure questionnaire · Income questionnaire · Miscellaneous questionnaire · Diary (x2)

Whilst a Household Control Form collecting basic demographics is also normally included with the survey, this wasn't required for this HIES as this activity took place for all households in the mini census.

Information collected in the four schedules covered the following:

Expenditure questionnaire: Covers basic details about the dwelling structure and its access to things like water and sanitation. It was also used as the vehicle to collect expenditure on major and infrequent expenditures incurred by the household.

Income questionnaire: Covers each of the main types of household income generated by the household such as wages and salaries, business income and income from subsistence activities.

Miscellaneous questionnaire: Covers topics relating to health access, labour force status and education.

Diary: Covers all day to day expenditures incurred by the household, consumption of items produced by the household such as fish and crops, and gifts both received and given by the household.

Cleaning operations

There were 3 phases to the editing process for the 2006 Nauru HIES which included: 1. Data Verification operations 2. Data Editing operations 3. Data Auditing operations

For more information on what each phase entailed go the document HIES Processing Instructions attached to this documentation.

Response rate

The survey response rates were a lot lower than expected, especially in some districts. The district of Aiwo, Uaboe and Denigomodu had the lowest response rates with 16.7%, 20.0% and 34.8% respectively. The area of Location was also extremely low with a responses rate of 32.2%. On a more positive note, the districts of Yaren, Ewa, Anabar, Ijuw and Anibare all had response rates at 80.0% or better.

The major contributing factor to the low response rates were households refusing to take part in the survey. The figures for responding above only include fully responding households, and given there were many partial responses, this also brought the values down. The other significant contributing factor to the low response rates was the interviewers not being able to make contact with the household during the survey period.

Unfortunately, not only do low response rates often increase the sampling error of the survey estimates, because the final sample is smaller, it will also introduce response bias into the final estimates. Response bias takes place when the households responding to the survey possess different characteristics to the households not responding, thus generating different results to what would have been achieved if all selected households responded. It is extremely difficult to measure the impact of the non-response bias, as little information is generally known about the non-responding households in the survey. For the Nauru 2006 HIES however, it was noted during the fieldwork that a higher proportion of the Chinese population residing in Nauru were more likely to not respond. Given it is expected their income and expenditure patterns would differ from the rest of the population, this would contribute to the magnitude of the bias.

Sampling error estimates

To determine the impact of sampling error on the survey results, relative standard errors (RSEs) for key estimates were produced. When interpreting these results, one must remember that these figures don't include any of the non-sampling errors discussed in other sections of this documentation

To also provide a rough guide on how to interpret the RSEs provided in the main report, the following information can be used:

Category  Description
RSE < 5%  Estimate can be regarded as very reliable
5% < RSE < 10% Estimate can be regarded as good and usable
10% < RSE < 25% Estimate can be considered usable, with caution
RSE > 25%  Estimate should only be used with extreme caution

The actual RSEs for the key estimates can be found in Section 4.1 of the main report

As can be seen from these tables, the estimates for Total Income and Total Expenditure from the HIES can be considered to be very good, from a sampling error perspective. The same can also be said for the Wage and Salary estimate in income and the Food estimate in expenditure, which make up a high proportion of each respective group.

Many of the other estimates should be used with caution, depending on the magnitude of their RSE. Some of these high RSEs are to be expected, due to the expected degree of variability for how households would report for these items. For example, with Business Income (RSE 56.8%), most households would report no business income as no household members undertook this activity, whereas other households would report large business incomes as it's their main source of income.

Data appraisal

Other than the non-response issues discussed in this documentation, other quality issues were identified which included: 1) Reporting errors Some of the different aspects contributing to the reporting errors generated from the survey, with some examples/explanations for each, include the following:

a) Misinterpretation of survey questions: A common mistake which takes place when conducting a survey is that the person responding to the questionnaire may interpret a question differently to the interviewer, who in turn may have interpreted the question differently to the people who designed the questionnaire. Some examples of this for a HIES can include people providing answers in dollars and cents, instead of just dollars, or the reference/recall period for an “income” or “expenditure” is misunderstood. These errors can often see reported amounts out by a factor of 10 or even 100, which can have major impacts on final results.

b) Recall problems for the questionnaire information: The majority of questions in both of the income and expenditure questionnaires require the respondent to recall what took place over a 12 month period. As would be expected, people will often forget what took place up to 12 months ago so some information will be forgotten.

c) Intentional under-reporting for some items: For whatever reasons, a household may still participate in a survey but not be willing to provide accurate responses for some questions. Examples for a HIES include people not fully disclosing their total income, and intentionally under-reporting expenditures on items such as alcohol and tobacco.

d) Accidental under-reporting in the household diaries: Although the two diaries are left with the household for a period of two weeks, it is easy for the household to forget to enter all expenditures throughout this period - this problem most likely increases as the two

Abstract

The 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) had the following primary objectives:

1) to gather data on family income and family expenditure and related information affecting income and expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines; 2) to determine the sources of income and income distribution, levels of living and spending patterns, and the degree of inequality among families; 3) to provide benchmark information to update weights for the estimation of consumer price index; and 4) to provide information for the estimation of the country's poverty threshold and incidence.

Geographic coverage

The 2003 Master Sample (MS) considers the country's 17 administrative regions as the sampling domains. A domain is referred to as a subdivision of the country for which estimates with adequate level of precision are generated. It must be noted that while there is demand for data at the provincial level (and to some extent municipal and barangay levels), the provinces were not treated as sampling domains because there are more than 80 provinces which would entail a large resource requirement.

Analysis unit

The unit of analysis is the family. A family consists of the household head, spouse, unmarried children, ever-married children, son-in-law/daughter-in-law, parents of the head/spouse and other relatives who are members of the household.

In households where there are two or more persons not related to each other by blood, marriage or adoption, only the income and expenditure of the member who is considered as the household head is included.

Institutional population is not within the scope of the survey.

Universe

All households and members of households nationwide

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2003 Master Sample (MS) considers the country's 17 administrative regions as defined in Executive Orders (EO) 36 and 131 as the sampling domains. A domain is referred to as a subdivision of the country for which estimates with adequate level of precision are generated. It must be noted that while there is demand for data at the provincial level (and to some extent municipal and barangay levels), the provinces were not treated as sampling domains because there are more than 80 provinces which would entail a large resource requirement.

As in most household surveys, the 2003 MS made use of an area sample design. For this purpose, the Enumeration Area Reference File (EARF) of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) was utilized as sampling frame. The EARF contains the number of households by enumeration area (EA) in each barangay.

This frame was used to form the primary sampling units (PSUs). With consideration of the period for which the 2003 MS will be in use, the PSUs were formed/defined as a barangay or a combination of barangays with at least 500 households.

The 2003 MS considers the 17 regions of the country as the primary strata. Within each region, further stratification was performed using geographic groupings such as provinces, highly urbanized cities (HUCs), and independent component cities (ICCs). Within each of these substrata formed within regions, the PSUs were further stratified, to the extent possible, using the proportion of strong houses (PSTRONG), indicator of engagement in agriculture of the area (AGRI), and a measure of per capita income (PERCAPITA) as stratification factors.

The 2003 MS consists of a sample of 2,835 PSUs. The entire MS was divided into four sub-samples or independent replicates, such as a quarter sample contains one fourth of the total PSUs; a half sample contains one-half of the four sub-samples or equivalent to all PSUs in two replicates. The final number of sample PSUs for each domain was determined by first classifying PSUs as either selfrepresenting (SR) or non-self-representing (NSR). In addition, to facilitate the selection of sub-samples, the total number of NSR PSUs in each region was adjusted to make it a multiple of 4. SR PSUs refers to a very large PSU in the region/domain with a selection probability of approximately 1 or higher and is outright included in the MS; it is properly treated as a stratum; also known as certainty PSU. NSR PSUs refers to a regular too small sized PSU in a region/domain; also known as non certainty PSU. The 2003 MS consists of 330 certainty PSUs and 2,505 non-certainty PSUs. To have some control over the sub-sample size, the PSUs were selected with probability proportional to some estimated measure of size. The size measure refers to the total number of households from the 2000 CPH. Because of the wide variation in PSU sizes, PSUs with selection probabilities greater than 1 were identified and were included in the sample as certainty selections.

At the second stage, enumeration areas (EAs) were selected within sampled PSUs, and at the third stage, housing units were selected within sampled EAs. Generally, all households in sampled housing units were enumerated, except for few cases when the number of households in a housing unit exceeds three. In which case, a sample of three households in a sampled housing unit was selected at random with equal probability.

An EA is defined as an area with discernable boundaries within barangays consisting of about 150 contiguous households. These EAs were identified during the 2000 CPH. A housing unit, on the other hand, is a structurally separate and independent place of abode which, by the way it has been constructed, converted, or arranged, is intended for habitation by a household.

The 2006 FIES involved the interview of a national sample of about 51,000 sample households deemed sufficient to gather data on family income and family expenditure and related information affecting income and expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines at the national and regional level. The sample households covered in the survey were the same households interviewed in the July 2006 and January 2007 round of the LFS.

Sampling deviation

The estimates from the 2006 FIES include results of the first FIES visit for the NCR based on questionnaires recovered from fire. The fire that hit the NCR’s Statistics Office on October 3, 2006 damaged 58 percent of the total questionnaires for the FIES first visit. Questionnaires that were encoded and processed cover around 42 percent of these questionnaires. In the preliminary results, values for the burned questionnaires were imputed using a ratio which requires data from the recovered questionnaires and data from corresponding questionnaires from the second visit. The ratio was computed by getting the sums of the total income and total expenditure in the recovered questionnaires from the first visit and the sums of the same data from corresponding second visit questionnaires and then by dividing the sums from the second visit by the sums from the first visit. The annual estimates on income and expenditure for NCR were computed by dividing the second visit values by the computed ratio. For the final results, the annual estimates for the NCR were computed by multiplying by 2 the second visit data. This imputation procedure was opted after it has been established that there was no significant difference between using the ratio and the multiplier ‘2’.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2006 FIES adopts a questionnaire design wherein separate questionnaire with the same sets of questions for both visits will be used. The sample household is interviewed in two separate operations each time using the half-year period preceding the interview as reference period. This scheme envisions to improve the quality of data gathered since it minimizes memory bias of respondents and at the same time captures the seasonality of income and expenditure patterns. The use of separate questionnaire with the same set of questions for both visits was used starting 2003 FIES. In previous FIES, the same set of questions for each semester (two enumeration periods) were contained in one questionnaire.

To further reduce memory bias, the concept of "average week" consumption for all food items shall be utilized for the 2006 FIES. Moreover, the reference period for Fuel, Light and Water, Transportation and Communication, Household Operations and Personal Care and Effects is limited to the past month and in some specified cases, the concept of average month consumption shall be used. For all other expenditure groups, the past six months shall be used as reference period.

The questionnaire has four main parts consisting of the following:

Part I. Identification and Other Information (page 1-3) (Geographic Identification, Other Information and Particulars about the Family)

Part II. Expenditures (page 4-45) Section A. Food, Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco Section B. Fuel, Light and Water, Transportation and Communication, and Household Operations Section C. Personal Care and Effects, Clothing Footwear and Other Wear Section D. Education, Recreation, and Medical Care Section E. Furnishings and Equipment Section F. Taxes Section G. Housing, House Maintenance and Minor Repairs Section H. Miscellaneous Expenditures Section I. Other Disbursements

Part III. Income (page 46-55) Section A. Salaries and Wages from Employment Section B. Net Share of Crops, Fruits and Vegetables Produced and/or Livestock and Poultry Raised by Other Households Section C. Other Sources of Income Section D. Other Receipts Section

Comparable household income measures are crucial for most social science analyses of cross-national public opinion survey data. However, income questions in many cross-national surveys suffer from comparability and interpretability limitations that have not been adequately addressed by the existing literature. In this article, we examine the income measure in one major survey, the World Values Survey (WVS), arguing that a variety of problems arise when drawing inferences - descriptive or causal, individual or aggregate - using the standard 10-category measure. We then propose and implement a number of corrections to these potential biases and present a series of diagnostics that confirm the importance of our proposed corrections. We conclude by documenting some of the same challenges in the income measures used in other cross-national surveys. The accompanying data set can be merged with the WVS to make better use of the income measure.

Abstract

The main purpose of a HIES survey was to present high quality and representative national household data on income and expenditure in order to update Consumer Price Index (CPI), improve statistics on National Accounts and measure poverty within the country. These statistics are a requirement for evidence based policy-making in reducing poverty within the country and monitor progress in the national strategic plan "Te Kakeega 3".

The 2015-16 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) is the third HIES that was conducted by the Central Statistics Division since Tuvalu gained political independence in 1978. With great assitance from the Pacific Community (SPC) experts, the HIES was conducted over a period of 12 months in urban (Funafuti) and rural (4 outer islands) areas. From a total of 1,872 households on Tuvalu, an amount of 38 percent sample of all households in Tuvalu was selected to provide valid response.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage.

Analysis unit

Household and Individual.

Universe

The scope of the 2015/2016 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) was all occupied households in Tuvalu. Households are the sampling unit, defined as a group of people (related or not) who pool their money, and cook and eat together. It is not the physical structure (dwelling) in which people live. HIES covered all persons who were considered to be usual residents of private dwellings (must have been living in Tuvalu for a period of 12-months, or have intention to live in Tuvalu for a period of 12-months in order to be included in the survey). Usual residents who are temporary away are included as well (e.g., for work or a holiday).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Out of the total 1,872 households (HHs) listed in 2015, a sample 706 households which is 38 percent of the the total households were succesfully interviewed for a response rate of 98%.

SAMPLING FRAME: The 2010 (Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) sample was spread over 12 months rounds - one each quarter - and the specifications of the final responding households are summarised below: Tuvalu urban: Selected households: 259 = 217 responded; Tuvalu rural: Selected households: 346 = 324 responded.

In 2010, 605 HHs were selected and 541 sufficiently responded. The 2010 HIES provided solid estimates for expenditure aggregates at the national level (sampling error for national expenditure estimate is 3.1%).

Similarly to the 2010 HIES, private occupied dwellings were the statistical unit for the 2015/2016 HIES. Institutions and vacant dwellings were removed from the sampling frame. Some areas in Tuvalu are very difficult to reach due to the cost of transportation and the remoteness of some islands, which is why they are excluded from the sample selection. The following table presents the distribution of the HHs according to their location (main island or outer islands in each domain) based on the 2012 Population and Housing Census: -Urban - Funafuti: 845 (48%); -Rural - Nanumea: 115 (7%); -Rural - Nanumaga: 116 (7%); -Rural - Niutao: 123 (7%); -Rural - Nui: 138 (8%); -Rural - Vaitupu: 226 (13%); -Rural - Nukufetau: 124 (%); -Rural - Nukulaelae: 67 (%); -Rural - Niulakita: 7 (%); -TOTAL: 1761 (100%).

The 2012 Population and Household Census (PHC) wsa used to select the island to interview, and then in each selected island the HH listing was updated for selection. For budget and logistics reasons the islands of Nui, Nukufetau, Nukulaelae and Niukalita were excluded from the sample selection. In total 19% of the HHs were excluded from the selection but this decision should not affect the HIES outputs as those 19% show similar profile as other HHs who live in the outer islands. This exclusion will be take into consideration in the sampling weight computation in order to cover 100% of the outer island HHs.

SAMPLE SELECTION AND SAMPLE SIZE: A simple random selection was used in each of the selected island (HHs were selected directly from the sampling frame). Based on the findings from the 2010 Tuvalu HIES, the sample in Funafuti has been increased and the one in rural remains stable. Within each rural selected atolls, the allocation of the sample size is proportional to its size (baed on the 2012 population census). The table below shows the number of HHs to survey: Urban - Funafuti: 384; Rural - Vaitupu: 126; Rural - Nanumea: 63; Rural - Niutao: 84; Rural - Nanumaga: 63; TUVALU: 720.

The expected sample size has been increased by one third (361 HHs) with the aim of pre-empting the non contacted HHs (refusals, absence….). The 2015/2016 HIES adopted the standardized HIES methodology and survey instruments for the Pacific Islands region. This approach, developed by the Pacific Community (SPC), has resulted in proven survey forms being used for data collection. It involves collection of data over a 12-month period to account for seasonal changes in income and expenditure patterns, and to keep the field team to a smaller and more qualified group. Their implementation had the objective of producing consistent and high quality data.

Sampling deviation

For budget and logistics reasons the islands of Nui, Nukufetau, Nukulaelae and Niukalita were excluded from the sample selection. In total 19% of the HHs were excluded from the selection but this decision should not affect the HIES outputs as those 19% show similar profile as other HHs who live in the outer islands. This exclusion will be take into consideration in the sampling weight computation in order to cover 100% of the outer island HHs.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey contain 4 modules and 2 Diaries (1 diary for each of the two weeks that a household was enumerated). The purpose of a Diary is to record all the daily expenses and incomes of a Household as shown by its topics below; - DIARY
The Diary module contains questions such as "What did your Household buy Today (Food and Non-Food Items)?", "Payments for Services made Today", "Food, Non-Food and Services Received for Free", "Home-Produced Items Today", "Overflow Sheet for Items Bought This Week", "Overflow Sheet for Services Paid for This Week", "Overflow Sheet for Items Received for Free this Week", and an "Overflow Sheet for Home-Produced Items This Week".

The 4 modules are detailed below; - MODULE 1 - DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION The module contains individual demograhic questions on their Demographic Profiles, Labour Force status (Activities), Education status, Health status, Communication status and questions on "Household members that have left the household". - MODULE 2 - HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE The module contains household expenditure questions the housing characteristics, Housing tenure expenditures, Utilities and Communication, Land, Household goods and assets, Vehicles and accessories, Private Travel details, Household services expenditures, Cash contributions, Provisions of Financial support, Household asset insurance and taxes and questions on Personal insurance. - MODULE 3 - INDIVIDUAL EXPENDITURE This module contains individual expenditure questions on Education, Health, Clothing, Communication, Luxury Items, Alcohol, Kava and Tobacco, and Deprivation questions. - MODULE 4 - HOUSEHOLD & INDIVIDUAL INCOME
This module contains household and individual questions on their income, on topics such as Wages and Salary, Agricultural and Forestry Activities, Fishing, Gathering and Hunting Activities, Livestock and Aquaculture Activities, Handicraft/Home-processed Food Activities, Income from Non-subsistence Business, Property income, transfer income & other Receipts, and Remmitances and other Cash gifts.

Depending on the information being collected, a recall period (ranging from the last 7 days to the last 12 months) is applied to various sections of the questionnaire. The forms were completed by face-to-face interview, usually with the HH head providing most of the information, with other household (HH) members being interviewed when necessary. The interviews took place over a 2-week period such that the HH diary, which is completed by the HH on a daily basis for 2 weeks, can be monitored while the module interviews take place. The HH diary collects information on the HH's daily expenditure on goods and services; and the harvest, capture, collection or slaughter of primary produce (fruit, vegetables and animals) by intended purpose (home consumption, sale or to give away). The income and expenditure data from the modules and the diary are concatenated (ensuring that double counting does not occur), annualised, and extrapolated to form the income and expenditure aggregates presented herein.

Cleaning operations

The survey procedure and enumeration team structure allowed for in-round data entry, which gives the field staff the opportunity to correct the data by manual review and by using the entry system-generated error messages. This process was designed to improve data quality. The data entry system used system-controlled entry, interactive coding and validity and consistency checks. Despite the validity and consistency checks put in place, the data still required cleaning. The cleaning was a 2-stage process, which included manual cleaning while referencing the questionnaire, whereas the second stage involved computer-assisted code verification and, in some cases, imputation. Once the data were clean, verified and consistent, they were recoded to form a final aggregated database, consisting of: 1. Person level record - characteristics of every HH member, including activity

The Household Market and Nonmarket Activities (HUS) project started as a joint research project between the Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research (IUI) and Göteborg University in 1980. The ambition was to build a consistent longitudinal micro data base on the use of time, money and public services of households. The first main survey was carried out in 1984. In addition to a contact interview with the selected individuals, all designated individuals participated in a personal interview and two telephone interviews. All respondents were asked about their family background, education, marital status, labor market experience, and employment. In addition, questions about the household were asked of the head of household, concerning family composition, child care, health status, housing, possession of vacation homes, cars, boats and other consumption durables. At the end of the personal interview the household head had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about financing of current home, construction costs for building a house, house value and loans, imputation of property values and loans, additions/renovations 1983, maintenance and repairs, leasing, sale of previous home, assets and liabilities, and non-taxable benefits. All the respondents had to fill out a questionnaire including questions about tax-return information 1983, employment income, and taxes and support payments. Two telephone interviews were used primarily to collect data on the household´s time use and consumption expenditures. The 1986 HUS-survey included both a follow-up of the 1984 sample (panel study) and a supplementary sample. The 1986 sample included 1) all respondents participating in the 1984 survey, 2) the household heads, partners and third persons who should have participated in 1984 but did not (1984 nonresponse), 3) those individuals who started living together after the 1984 interview with an selected individual who participated or was supposed to participate in 1984, 4) members of the 1984 household born in 1966 or 1967. If entering a new household, for example because of leaving their parental home, the household head and his/her partner were also interviewed. Respondents participating in the 1984 survey were interviewed by telephone in 1986. Questions dealt with changes in family composition, housing, employment, wages and child care, and it was not only recorded whether a change had occurred, and what sort of change, but also when it occurred. The respondents also received a questionnaire by mail with questions mainly concerning income and assets. Respondents not participating in the earlier survey were interviewed in person and were asked approximately the same questions as in the 1984 personal interview. The 1988 HUS-survey was considerably smaller than the previous ones. It was addressed exclusively to participants in the 1986 survey, and consisted of a self-enumerated questionnaire with a nonrespondent follow-up by telephone. The questions dealt with changes in housing conditions, employment and household composition. The questionnaire also contained some questions on household income. In many respect the 1991 HUS-survey replicated the 1988 survey. The questions were basically the same in content and range, and the survey was conducted as a self-enamurated questionnaire sent out by mail. This time, however, in contrast to the 1988 survey, an attempt was made to include in the survey the new household members who had moved into sample households since 1986, as well as young people who turned 18 after the 1986 survey. Earlier respondents received a questionnaire by mail containing questions about their home, their primary occupation and weekly work hours since May 1988 (event-history data), earnings in 1989, 1990 and 1991, household composition and any changes in it that might have occurred since 1988, child care and some questions on income. New respondents were also asked about their education and labor-market experience. With respect to its design and question wording, the 1993 survey is a new version of the 1986 survey. The survey is made up of four parts: 1) the panel survey, which was addressed mainly to respondents in the 1991 survey, with certain additions; 2) the so-called supplementary survey, which focused on a new random sample of individuals; 3) the so-called nonresponse survey, which encompassed respondents who had participated in at least one of the earlier surveys but had since dropped out; 4) the time-use survey, which included the same sample of respondents as those in the panel and supplementary surveys. Individuals in the nonresponse group were not included in the time-use survey. Most of the questions in the first three surveys were the same, but certain questions sequences were targeted to the respondents in a specific survey. Thus certain retrospective questions were asked of the nonresponse group, while specific questions on social background, labor market experience...

Long-term longitudinal dataset with information on generational links and socioeconomic and health conditions of individuals over time. The central foci of the data are economic and demographic, with substantial detail on income sources and amounts, wealth, savings, employment, pensions, family composition changes, childbirth and marriage histories, and residential location. Over the life of the PSID, the NIA has funded supplements on wealth, health, parental health and long term care, housing, and the financial impact of illness, thus also making it possible to model retirement and residential mobility. Starting in 1999, much greater detail on specific health conditions and health care expenses is included for respondent and spouse. Other enhancements have included a question series about emotional distress (2001); the two stem questions from the Composite International Diagnostic Interview to assess symptoms of major depression (2003); a supplement on philanthropic giving and volunteering (2001-03); a question series on Internet and computer use (2003); linkage to the National Death Index with cause of death information for more than 4,000 individuals through the 1997 wave, updated for each subsequent wave; social and family history variables and GIS-linked environmental data; basic data on pension plans; event history calendar methodology to facilitate recall of employment spells (2001). The reporting unit is the family: single person living alone or sharing a household with other non-relatives; group of people related by blood, marriage, or adoption; unmarried couple living together in what appears to be a fairly permanent arrangement. Interviews were conducted annually from 1968 through 1997; biennial interviewing began in 1999. There is an oversample of Blacks (30%). Waves 1990 through 1995 included a 20% Hispanic oversample; within the Hispanic oversample, Cubans and Puerto Ricans were oversampled relative to Mexicans. All data from 1994 through 2001 are available as public release files; prior waves can be obtained in archive versions. The special files with weights for families are also available. Restricted files include the Geocode Match File with information for 1968 through 2001, the 1968-2001 Death File, and the 1991 Medicare Claims File. * Dates of Study: 1968-2003 * Study Features: Longitudinal, Minority Oversampling * Sample Size: 65,000+ Links * ICPSR Series: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/series/00131 * ICPSR 1968-1999: Annual Core Data: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/07439 * ICPSR 1968-1999: Supplemental Files: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03202 * ICPSR 1989-1990: Latino Sample: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03203