The study included four separate surveys:
The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.
The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)
The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.
Objectives
LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.
The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).
Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]
Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.
The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).
Sample survey data [ssd]
Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.
The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.
The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.
Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.
Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.
Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.
The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.
Face-to-face [f2f]
In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).
During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.
In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households
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.
National
The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents).
Sample survey data [ssd]
Sampling Frame and Units As in all probability sample surveys, it is important that each sampling unit in the surveyed population has a known, non-zero probability of selection. To achieve this, there has to be an appropriate list, or sampling frame of the primary sampling units (PSUs).The universe defined for the GLSS 5 is the population living within private households in Ghana. The institutional population (such as schools, hospitals etc), which represents a very small percentage in the 2000 Population and Housing Census (PHC), is excluded from the frame for the GLSS 5.
The Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) maintains a complete list of census EAs, together with their respective population and number of households as well as maps, with well defined boundaries, of the EAs. . This information was used as the sampling frame for the GLSS 5. Specifically, the EAs were defined as the primary sampling units (PSUs), while the households within each EA constituted the secondary sampling units (SSUs).
Stratification In order to take advantage of possible gains in precision and reliability of the survey estimates from stratification, the EAs were first stratified into the ten administrative regions. Within each region, the EAs were further sub-divided according to their rural and urban areas of location. The EAs were also classified according to ecological zones and inclusion of Accra (GAMA) so that the survey results could be presented according to the three ecological zones, namely 1) Coastal, 2) Forest, and 3) Northern Savannah, and for Accra.
Sample size and allocation The number and allocation of sample EAs for the GLSS 5 depend on the type of estimates to be obtained from the survey and the corresponding precision required. It was decided to select a total sample of around 8000 households nationwide.
To ensure adequate numbers of complete interviews that will allow for reliable estimates at the various domains of interest, the GLSS 5 sample was designed to ensure that at least 400 households were selected from each region.
A two-stage stratified random sampling design was adopted. Initially, a total sample of 550 EAs was considered at the first stage of sampling, followed by a fixed take of 15 households per EA. The distribution of the selected EAs into the ten regions or strata was based on proportionate allocation using the population.
For example, the number of selected EAs allocated to the Western Region was obtained as: 1924577/18912079*550 = 56
Under this sampling scheme, it was observed that the 400 households minimum requirement per region could be achieved in all the regions but not the Upper West Region. The proportionate allocation formula assigned only 17 EAs out of the 550 EAs nationwide and selecting 15 households per EA would have yielded only 255 households for the region. In order to surmount this problem, two options were considered: retaining the 17 EAs in the Upper West Region and increasing the number of selected households per EA from 15 to about 25, or increasing the number of selected EAs in the region from 17 to 27 and retaining the second stage sample of 15 households per EA.
The second option was adopted in view of the fact that it was more likely to provide smaller sampling errors for the separate domains of analysis. Based on this, the number of EAs in Upper East and the Upper West were adjusted from 27 and 17 to 40 and 34 respectively, bringing the total number of EAs to 580 and the number of households to 8,700.
A complete household listing exercise was carried out between May and June 2005 in all the selected EAs to provide the sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a fixed number of 15 households per EA was selected in all the regions. In addition, five households per EA were selected as replacement samples.The overall sample size therefore came to 8,700 households nationwide.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The Bandafassi HDSS is located in south-eastern Senegal, near the borders with Mali and Guinea. The area is 700 km from the national capital, Dakar. The population under surveillance is rural and in 2012 comprised 13 378 inhabitants living in 42 villages. Established in 1970, originally for genetic studies, and initially covering only villages inhabited by one subgroup of the population of the area (the Mandinka), the project was transformed a few years later into a HDSS and then extended to the two other subgroups living in the area: Fula villages in 1975, and Bedik villages in 1980. Data gathered include births, marriages, migrations and deaths (including their causes). One specific feature of the Bandafassi HDSS is the availability of genealogies.
Villages are quite small - 270 inhabitants in average - divided in hamlet pour a part. The population density is 19 inhabitants per km².
The population is divided in three living ethnical groups in distinct villages. In 2000, the ethnical groups are : 1 - Bedik (25 % of population). 2 - Malinke (17 %), 3 - Peul (58 %).
The housing unit is the square (or concession) which hosts members of an extended patrilineal family. It contains 17 people in average.Peul and Bedik squares are less populated (15 and 18 people in average) than Malinke squares (27 people in average). Polygamy is intense (160 maried women for 100 maried men). Women maried to the same men usually inhabit in the same square. Each wife has her own hu, sharing the same square courtyard.
Individual
At the census, a person was considered a member of the compound if the head of the compound declared it to be so. This definition was broad and resulted in a de jure population under study. Thereafter, a criterion was used to decide whether and when a person was to be excluded or included in the population.
A person was considered to exit from the study population through either death or emigration. Part of the population of Mlomp engages in seasonal migration, with seasonal migrants sometimes remaining 1 or 2 years outside the area before returning. A person who is absent for two successive yearly rounds, without returning in between, is regarded as having emigrated and no longer resident in the study population at the date of the second round. This definition results in the inclusion of some vital events that occur outside the study area. Some births, for example, occur to women classified in the study population but physically absent at the time of delivery, and these births are registered and included in the calculation of rates, although information on them is less accurate. Special exit criteria apply to babies born outside the study area: they are considered emigrants on the same date as their mother.
A new person enters the study population either through birth to a woman of the study population or through immigration. Information on immigrants is collected when the list of compounds of a village is checked ("Are there new compounds or new families who settled since the last visit?") or when the list of members of a compound is checked ("Are there new persons in the compound since the last visit?"). Some immigrants are villagers who left the area several years before and were excluded from the study population. Information is collected to determine in which compound they were previously registered, to match the new and old information.
Information is routinely collected on movements from one compound to another within the study area. Some categories of the population, such as older widows or orphans, frequently move for short periods of time and live in between several compounds, and they may be considered members of these compounds or of none. As a consequence, their movements are not always declared.
Event history data
One round of data collection took place annual except in 1970 and 2015.
No samplaing is done
None
Proxy Respondent [proxy]
List of questionnaires: - Household book (used to register informations needed to define outmigrations) - Delivery questionnaire (used to register information of dispensaire ol mlomp) - New household questionnaire - New member questionnaire - Marriage and divorce questionnaire - Birth and marital histories questionnaire (for a new member) - Death questionnaire (used to register the date of death)
On data entry data consistency and plausibility were checked by 455 data validation rules at database level. If data validaton failure was due to a data collection error, the questionnaire was referred back to the field for revisit and correction. If the error was due to data inconsistencies that could not be directly traced to a data collection error, the record was referred to the data quality team under the supervision of the senior database scientist. This could request further field level investigation by a team of trackers or could correct the inconsistency directly at database level.
No imputations were done on the resulting micro data set, except for:
a. If an out-migration (OMG) event is followed by a homestead entry event (ENT) and the gap between OMG event and ENT event is greater than 180 days, the ENT event was changed to an in-migration event (IMG). b. If an out-migration (OMG) event is followed by a homestead entry event (ENT) and the gap between OMG event and ENT event is less than 180 days, the OMG event was changed to an homestead exit event (EXT) and the ENT event date changed to the day following the original OMG event. c. If a homestead exit event (EXT) is followed by an in-migration event (IMG) and the gap between the EXT event and the IMG event is greater than 180 days, the EXT event was changed to an out-migration event (OMG). d. If a homestead exit event (EXT) is followed by an in-migration event (IMG) and the gap between the EXT event and the IMG event is less than 180 days, the IMG event was changed to an homestead entry event (ENT) with a date equal to the day following the EXT event. e. If the last recorded event for an individual is homestead exit (EXT) and this event is more than 180 days prior to the end of the surveillance period, then the EXT event is changed to an out-migration event (OMG)
In the case of the village that was added (enumerated) in 2006, some individuals may have outmigrated from the original surveillance area and setlled in the the new village prior to the first enumeration. Where the records of such individuals have been linked, and indivdiual can legitmately have and outmigration event (OMG) forllowed by and enumeration event (ENU). In a few cases a homestead exit event (EXT) was followed by an enumeration event in these cases. In these instances the EXT events were changed to an out-migration event (OMG).
On an average the response rate is about 99% over the years for each round.
Not applicable
CenterId Metric Table QMetric Illegal Legal Total Metric Rundate
SN011 MicroDataCleaned Starts 26293 2017-05-20 00:00
SN011 MicroDataCleaned Transitions 0 85058 85058 0 2017-05-20 00:00
SN011 MicroDataCleaned Ends 26293 2017-05-20 00:00
SN011 MicroDataCleaned SexValues 50 85008 85058 0 2017-05-20 00:00
SN011 MicroDataCleaned DoBValues 85058 2017-05-20 00:00
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
The study included four separate surveys:
The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.
The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)
The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.
Objectives
LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.
The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).
Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]
Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.
The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).
Sample survey data [ssd]
Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.
The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.
The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.
Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.
Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.
Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.
The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.
Face-to-face [f2f]
In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).
During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.
In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households