Abstract

Rwanda has experienced fast socio, demographic and economic transformation since the year 2000. It recorded on average 8 percent GDP annual growth since then, mainly driven by agriculture and services. In addition socio-demographic indicators have witnessed substantial improvement from 2000 onward. Following the crisis period; the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi era, the country developed a long term vision “Vision 2020” with five year development programs: PRSP, EDPRS1 and EDPRS2, the main objective of each of the programs was poverty reduction. The need to adequately plan interventions and monitor progress in poverty reduction, estimation of absolute monetary poverty in Rwanda started in a regular manner since 2001 when the first Household Living Condition Survey (Enquête Intégrale sur les Conditions de Vie des Ménages- EICV1) was carried out. EICV 2013-14 provided an update on the level of poverty based on 2013-14 Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey (EICV4) focusing on poverty as measured in consumption terms. The survey also highlighted other trend dimensions of living conditions captured in other surveys that complemented and provided a holistic understanding of poverty and living conditions.

The results of the 2013-14 EICV indicated substantial progress in poverty reduction and improvement in other socio-economic and demographic indicators in the last three years. The survey shows that poverty went down from 44.9 percent in 2011 to 39.1 percent in 2014 and extreme poverty from 24.1 percent to 16.3 percent. This follows similar reduction between 2006 and 2011 where poverty dropped from 56.7 percent to 44.9 percent and extreme poverty decreased from 35.8 percent to 24.1 percent. Inequality reduced with both the Gini coefficient dropping from 0.49 in 2011 to 0.45 in 2014. The ratio of the wealthiest 10 percent to the poorest 10 percent dropped from 6.36 to 6.01 during the same period.

Generally the progress was impressive, however challenges have remained. Many Rwandans are still poor and for many others living conditions still needed to be improved especially in areas of education and employment. The frequency of Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey is every three years, the survey was conducted by the National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR) in collaboration with different stakeholders in the country over a period of 12 months between October 2013 and October 2014.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Communities

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Rwanda used a basic needs approach to measure poverty. In this survey households were classified as poor or non-poor based on consumption per adult equivalent compared with a total poverty line of 159,375 RWF or an extreme poverty line of 105,064 RWF in January 2014 prices. The essential idea was to determine how much it would cost to buy enough food to provide an adequate amount of calories, and then to add a provision for non-food essentials such as shelter and clothing for an adult.

A sub-sample of 1,920 households interviewed in EICV3 (2010-11) was selected to be revisited in EICV4 (2013-14) to allow for a more complete analysis of movements into and out of poverty overtime. The sample was designed to provide representative results at the national and urban/rural levels. The sampling frame for the panel was the list of 1,431 villages visited in EICV3. Households that relocated or split were tracked in order to obtain current information for the corresponding household members. A total of 2,423 households that were visited in 2010-11 were revisited in 2013-14 of which 1,898 were original households and 525 were households that split off from the original households. The same survey questionnaire was administered to both non-panel and panel households, so they were considered to be an integral part of both the EICV3 and EICV4 samples.

The EICV3 and EICV4 samples were each drawn from the 2002 and 2012 census frames respectively, and the sampling was stratified by district. Suitable weights were calculated within the panel samples, and as needed were used for adjustment to reflect the national population. The sample selection procedures were done efficiently taking into consideration the replacement of panel households. Since the EICV3 and EICV4 samples were drawn from different frames, the effect of using different sampling frames and strategies is unclear both for the panel and cross section analysis. One response was to investigate whether the panel is representative of the larger cross-section of households. This was done by testing the hypothesis of equality of sub-sample (i.e. panel) means to the means for the rest of the full sample, for key indicators. The three indicators selected were adult equivalents, household size, and consumption per adult equivalent. Households were divided into two mutually exclusive subsamples: selected panel households, and non-selected households.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey was comprised of the following questionnaires: 1. Agriculture questionnaire 2. Non-agricultural activities questionnaire 3. Credit, durables and savings questionnaire 4. Education questionnaire 5. Employment questionnaire 6. Household roster questionnaire 7. Health questionnaire 8. Housing and infrastructure questionnaire 9. Migration questionnaire 10. Transfers and income sources questionnaire 11. Household expenditures questionnaire