As of 2024, an individual living in South Africa with less than 1,109 South African rand (roughly 62.14 U.S. dollars) per month was considered poor. Furthermore, individuals having 796 South African rand (approximately 44.60 U.S. dollars) a month available for food were living below the poverty line according to South African national standards. Absolute poverty National poverty lines are affected by changes in the patterns of household consumers and fluctuations in prices of services and goods. They are calculated based on the consumer price indices (CPI) of both food and non-food items separately. The national poverty line is not the only applicable threshold. For instance,13.2 million people in South Africa were living under 2.15 U.S. dollars, which is the international absolute poverty threshold defined by the World Bank. Most unequal in the globe A prominent aspect of South Africa’s poverty is related to extreme income inequality. The country has the highest income Gini index globally at 63 percent as of 2023. One of the crucial obstacles to combating poverty and inequality in the country is linked to job availability. In fact, youth unemployment was as high as 49.14 percent in 2023.

Historical chart and dataset showing South Africa poverty rate by year from 1993 to 2014.

As of 2024, around **** million people in South Africa are living in extreme poverty, with the poverty threshold at **** U.S. dollars daily. This means that ******* more people were pushed into poverty compared to 2023. Moreover, the headcount was forecast to increase in the coming years. By 2030, over **** million South Africans will live on a maximum of **** U.S. dollars per day. Who is considered poor domestically? Poverty is measured using several matrices. For example, local authorities tend to rely on the national poverty line, assessed based on consumer price indices (CPI) of a basket of goods of food and non-food components. In 2023, the domestic poverty line in South Africa stood at ***** South African rand per month (around ***** U.S. dollars per month). According to a survey, social inequality and poverty worried a significant share of the South African respondents. As of September 2024, some ** percent of the respondents reported that they were worried about the state of poverty and unequal income distribution in the country.   Eastern Cape residents received more grants South Africa’s labor market has struggled to absorb the country’s population. In 2023, almost a third of the economically active population was unemployed. Local authorities employ relief assistance and social grants in an attempt to reduce poverty and assist poor individuals. In 2023, almost ** percent of South African households received state support, with the majority share benefiting in the Eastern Cape.

South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at National Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 55.500 % in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 53.200 % for 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at National Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 58.800 % from Dec 2005 (Median) to 2014, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 66.600 % in 2005 and a record low of 53.200 % in 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at National Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. National poverty headcount ratio is the percentage of the population living below the national poverty lines. National estimates are based on population-weighted subgroup estimates from household surveys.; ; World Bank, Global Poverty Working Group. Data are compiled from official government sources or are computed by World Bank staff using national (i.e. country–specific) poverty lines.; ; This series only includes estimates that to the best of our knowledge are reasonably comparable over time for a country. Due to differences in estimation methodologies and poverty lines, estimates should not be compared across countries.

In 2025, nearly 11.7 percent of the world population in extreme poverty, with the poverty threshold at 2.15 U.S. dollars a day, lived in Nigeria. Moreover, the Democratic Republic of the Congo accounted for around 11.7 percent of the global population in extreme poverty. Other African nations with a large poor population were Tanzania, Mozambique, and Madagascar. Poverty levels remain high despite the forecast decline Poverty is a widespread issue across Africa. Around 429 million people on the continent were living below the extreme poverty line of 2.15 U.S. dollars a day in 2024. Since the continent had approximately 1.4 billion inhabitants, roughly a third of Africa’s population was in extreme poverty that year. Mozambique, Malawi, Central African Republic, and Niger had Africa’s highest extreme poverty rates based on the 2.15 U.S. dollars per day extreme poverty indicator (updated from 1.90 U.S. dollars in September 2022). Although the levels of poverty on the continent are forecast to decrease in the coming years, Africa will remain the poorest region compared to the rest of the world. Prevalence of poverty and malnutrition across Africa Multiple factors are linked to increased poverty. Regions with critical situations of employment, education, health, nutrition, war, and conflict usually have larger poor populations. Consequently, poverty tends to be more prevalent in least-developed and developing countries worldwide. For similar reasons, rural households also face higher poverty levels. In 2024, the extreme poverty rate in Africa stood at around 45 percent among the rural population, compared to seven percent in urban areas. Together with poverty, malnutrition is also widespread in Africa. Limited access to food leads to low health conditions, increasing the poverty risk. At the same time, poverty can determine inadequate nutrition. Almost 38.3 percent of the global undernourished population lived in Africa in 2022.

South Africa: Poverty, percent of population: The latest value from 2014 is 55.5 percent, an increase from 53.2 percent in 2010. In comparison, the world average is 25.08 percent, based on data from 48 countries. Historically, the average for South Africa from 2005 to 2014 is 59.35 percent. The minimum value, 53.2 percent, was reached in 2010 while the maximum of 66.6 percent was recorded in 2005.

South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data was reported at 18.900 % in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 16.500 % for 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 25.000 % from Dec 1993 (Median) to 2014, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 33.800 % in 1996 and a record low of 16.500 % in 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank: Poverty. Poverty headcount ratio at $1.90 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $1.90 a day at 2011 international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. The aggregated numbers for low- and middle-income countries correspond to the totals of 6 regions in PovcalNet, which include low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia). See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.20 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data was reported at 37.600 % in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 35.800 % for 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.20 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 47.800 % from Dec 1993 (Median) to 2014, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 53.900 % in 1996 and a record low of 35.800 % in 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.20 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Poverty headcount ratio at $3.20 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $3.20 a day at 2011 international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. The aggregated numbers for low- and middle-income countries correspond to the totals of 6 regions in PovcalNet, which include low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia). See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

Historical dataset showing South Africa poverty rate by year from 1993 to 2014.

In 2025, around ***** million people in Africa were living in extreme poverty, with the poverty threshold at **** U.S. dollars a day. The number of poor people on the continent dropped slightly compared to the previous year. Poverty in Africa is expected to decline slightly in the coming years, even in the face of a growing population. The number of inhabitants living below the extreme poverty line would decrease to around *** million by 2030.

In 2023, the international poverty (based on 2017 purchasing power parities (PPPs)) and the lower-income poverty rate (3.65 U.S. dollars in 2017 PPP), was highest for Mozambique within the Southern Africa region, with 74.7 percent and 88.7 percent, respectively. However, the upper middle-income poverty rate was highest for Zambia, at 93 percent.

South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $5.50 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data was reported at 57.100 % in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 56.200 % for 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $5.50 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 65.100 % from Dec 1993 (Median) to 2014, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 69.500 % in 1996 and a record low of 56.200 % in 2010. South Africa ZA: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $5.50 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank: Poverty. Poverty headcount ratio at $5.50 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $5.50 a day at 2011 international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. The aggregated numbers for low- and middle-income countries correspond to the totals of 6 regions in PovcalNet, which include low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia). See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

The index provides the only comprehensive measure available for non-income poverty, which has become a critical underpinning of the SDGs. Critically the MPI comprises variables that are already reported under the Demographic Health Surveys (DHS) and Multi-Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) The resources subnational multidimensional poverty data from the data tables published by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), University of Oxford. The global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) measures multidimensional poverty in over 100 developing countries, using internationally comparable datasets and is updated annually. The measure captures the severe deprivations that each person faces at the same time using information from 10 indicators, which are grouped into three equally weighted dimensions: health, education, and living standards. The global MPI methodology is detailed in Alkire, Kanagaratnam & Suppa (2023)

ZA: Survey Mean Consumption or Income per Capita: Total Population: Annualized Average Growth Rate data was reported at -1.230 % in 2014. ZA: Survey Mean Consumption or Income per Capita: Total Population: Annualized Average Growth Rate data is updated yearly, averaging -1.230 % from Dec 2014 (Median) to 2014, with 1 observations. ZA: Survey Mean Consumption or Income per Capita: Total Population: Annualized Average Growth Rate data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. The growth rate in the welfare aggregate of the total population is computed as the annualized average growth rate in per capita real consumption or income of the total population in the income distribution in a country from household surveys over a roughly 5-year period. Mean per capita real consumption or income is measured at 2011 Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) using the PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet). For some countries means are not reported due to grouped and/or confidential data. The annualized growth rate is computed as (Mean in final year/Mean in initial year)^(1/(Final year - Initial year)) - 1. The reference year is the year in which the underlying household survey data was collected. In cases for which the data collection period bridged two calendar years, the first year in which data were collected is reported. The initial year refers to the nearest survey collected 5 years before the most recent survey available, only surveys collected between 3 and 7 years before the most recent survey are considered. The final year refers to the most recent survey available between 2011 and 2015. Growth rates for Iraq are based on survey means of 2005 PPP$. The coverage and quality of the 2011 PPP price data for Iraq and most other North African and Middle Eastern countries were hindered by the exceptional period of instability they faced at the time of the 2011 exercise of the International Comparison Program. See PovcalNet for detailed explanations.; ; World Bank, Global Database of Shared Prosperity (GDSP) circa 2010-2015 (http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/brief/global-database-of-shared-prosperity).; ; The comparability of welfare aggregates (consumption or income) for the chosen years T0 and T1 is assessed for every country. If comparability across the two surveys is a major concern for a country, the selection criteria are re-applied to select the next best survey year(s). Annualized growth rates are calculated between the survey years, using a compound growth formula. The survey years defining the period for which growth rates are calculated and the type of welfare aggregate used to calculate the growth rates are noted in the footnotes.

The South African government initiated the Ilima-Letsema programme to promote sustainable agricultural activities and improve the livelihoods of households in farming communities. The purpose of the paper is to evaluate the Ilima-Letsema programme's contribution to job creation and poverty alleviation in the Midvaal Local Municipality of Gauteng Province, South Africa. The quantitative research approach and survey design were used to conduct the study. Data were collected from 196 beneficiaries of the programme through face-to-face interviews using structured questionnaires. Primary data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, T-test, Multiple Linear Regression (MLR), Correlation, Cochran's Q and McNemar tests. The results indicated that the Ilima-Letsema programme significantly increased farmers' income and created jobs. Net farm income was positively and significantly influenced by education level, farmland size and jobs created. Net farm income was a significant predictor of jobs created in the post-support era, whereas education level and farmland size had negative impact. In addition, the programme significantly uplifted the elite beneficiaries from the upper-bound poverty line (UPBL); however, it did not uplift poor farmers from the food poverty line (FPL) and lower bound poverty line (LBPL). Education, farmland size and income had a positive and significant correlation (p < 0.05) with the programme's ability to uplift the beneficiaries from FPL, UBPL and UPBL amounts. It is recommended that Ilima-Letsema's rollout and budget should be expanded to enable more farmers to generate income and create employment opportunities for unskilled laborers in the agricultural sector. Again, the criteria for the programme should be changed in favor of less educated and resource-poor smallholder farmers, and producers with low net income.

Abstract

The Project for Statistics on Living standards and Development was a coutrywide World Bank Living Standards Measurement Survey. It covered approximately 9000 households, drawn from a representative sample of South African households. The fieldwork was undertaken during the nine months leading up to the country's first democratic elections at the end of April 1994. The purpose of the survey was to collect statistical information about the conditions under which South Africans live in order to provide policymakers with the data necessary for planning strategies. This data would aid the implementation of goals such as those outlined in the Government of National Unity's Reconstruction and Development Programme.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Community

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample size is 9,000 households

The sample design adopted for the study was a two-stage self-weightingdesign in which the first stage units were Census Enumerator Subdistricts (ESDs, or their equivalent) and the second stage were households.

The advantage of using such a design is that it provides a representative sample that need not be based on accurate census population distribution.in the case of South Africa, the sample will automatically include many poor people, without the need to go beyond this and oversample the poor. Proportionate sampling as in such a self-weighting sample design offers the simplest possible data files for further analysis, as weights do not have to be added. However, in the end this advantage could not be retained and weights had to be added.

The sampling frame was drawn up on the basis of small, clearly demarcated area units, each with a population estimate. The nature of the self-weighting procedure adopted ensured that this population estimate was not important for determining the final sample, however. For most of the country, census ESDs were used. Where some ESDs comprised relatively large populations as for instance in some black townships such as Soweto, aerial photographs were used to divide the areas into blocks of approximately equal population size. In other instances, particularly in some of the former homelands, the area units were not ESDs but villages or village groups.

In the sample design chosen, the area stage units (generally ESDs) were selected with probability proportional to size, based on the census population. Systematic sampling was used throughout that is, sampling at fixed interval in a list of ESDs, starting at a randomly selected starting point. Given that sampling was self-weighting, the impact of stratification was expected to be modest. The main objective was to ensure that the racial and geographic breakdown approximated the national population distribution. This was done by listing the area stage units (ESDs) by statistical region and then within the statistical region by urban or rural. Within these sub-statistical regions, the ESDs were then listed in order of percentage African. The sampling interval for the selection of the ESDs was obtained by dividing the 1991 census population of 38,120,853 by the 300 clusters to be selected. This yielded 105,800. Starting at a randomly selected point, every 105,800th person down the cluster list was selected. This ensured both geographic and racial diversity (ESDs were ordered by statistical sub-region and proportion of the population African). In three or four instances, the ESD chosen was judged inaccessible and replaced with a similar one.

In the second sampling stage the unit of analysis was the household. In each selected ESD a listing or enumeration of households was carried out by means of a field operation. From the households listed in an ESD a sample of households was selected by systematic sampling. Even though the ultimate enumeration unit was the household, in most cases "stands" were used as enumeration units. However, when a stand was chosen as the enumeration unit all households on that stand had to be interviewed.

Census population data, however, was available only for 1991. An assumption on population growth was thus made to obtain an approximation of the population size for 1993, the year of the survey. The sampling interval at the level of the household was determined in the following way: Based on the decision to have a take of 125 individuals on average per cluster (i.e. assuming 5 members per household to give an average cluster size of 25 households), the interval of households to be selected was determined as the census population divided by 118.1, i.e. allowing for population growth since the census. It was subsequently discovered that population growth was slightly over-estimated but this had little effect on the findings of the survey.

Individuals in hospitals, old age homes, hotels and hostels of educational institutions were not included in the sample. Migrant labour hostels were included. In addition to those that turned up in the selected ESDs, a sample of three hostels was chosen from a national list provided by the Human Sciences Research Council and within each of these hostels a representative sample was drawn on a similar basis as described abovefor the households in ESDs.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The main instrument used in the survey was a comprehensive household questionnaire. This questionnaire covered a wide range of topics but was not intended to provide exhaustive coverage of any single subject. In other words, it was an integrated questionnaire aimed at capturing different aspects of living standards. The topics covered included demography, household services, household expenditure, educational status and expenditure, remittances and marital maintenance, land access and use, employment and income, health status and expenditure and anthropometry (children under the age of six were weighed and their heights measured). This questionnaire was available to households in two languages, namely English and Afrikaans. In addition, interviewers had in their possession a translation in the dominant African language/s of the region.

In addition to the detailed household questionnaire referred to above, a community questionnaire was administered in each cluster of the sample. The purpose of this questionnaire was to elicit information on the facilities available to the community in each cluster. Questions related primarily to the provision of education, health and recreational facilities. Furthermore there was a detailed section for the prices of a range of commodities from two retail sources in or near the cluster: a formal source such as a supermarket and a less formal one such as the "corner cafe" or a "spaza". The purpose of this latter section was to obtain a measure of regional price variation both by region and by retail source. These prices were obtained by the interviewer. For the questions relating to the provision of facilities, respondents were "prominent" members of the community such as school principals, priests and chiefs.

Cleaning operations

All the questionnaires were checked when received. Where information was incomplete or appeared contradictory, the questionnaire was sent back to the relevant survey organization. As soon as the data was available, it was captured using local development platform ADE. This was completed in February 1994. Following this, a series of exploratory programs were written to highlight inconsistencies and outlier. For example, all person level files were linked together to ensure that the same person code reported in different sections of the questionnaire corresponded to the same person. The error reports from these programs were compared to the questionnaires and the necessary alterations made. This was a lengthy process, as several files were checked more than once, and completed at the beginning of August 1994. In some cases questionnaires would contain missing values, or comments that the respondent did not know, or refused to answer a question.

These responses are coded in the data files with the following values: VALUE MEANING -1 : The data was not available on the questionnaire or form -2 : The field is not applicable -3 : Respondent refused to answer -4 : Respondent did not know answer to question

Data appraisal

The data collected in clusters 217 and 218 should be viewed as highly unreliable and therefore removed from the data set. The data currently available on the web site has been revised to remove the data from these clusters. Researchers who have downloaded the data in the past should revise their data sets. For information on the data in those clusters, contact SALDRU http://www.saldru.uct.ac.za/.

South Africa ZA: Income Share Held by Lowest 10% data was reported at 0.900 % in 2014. This stayed constant from the previous number of 0.900 % for 2010. South Africa ZA: Income Share Held by Lowest 10% data is updated yearly, averaging 1.000 % from Dec 1993 (Median) to 2014, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.300 % in 2000 and a record low of 0.900 % in 2014. South Africa ZA: Income Share Held by Lowest 10% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

According to monthly surveys conducted in South Africa, September 2024 revealed that a ** percent share of the respondents in the country were worried about poverty and social inequalities. During the period under review, the share of participants in South Africa concerned about social injustices and poverty fluctuated between ** percent, observed in December 2022, and ** percent, reaching a peak in August 2023.

Abstract

South Africa's first Living Conditions Survey (LCS) was conducted by Statistics South Africa over a period of one year between 13 October 2014 and 25 October 2015. The main aim of this survey is to provide data that will contribute to a better understanding of living conditions and poverty in South Africa for monitoring levels of poverty over time. Data was collected from 27 527 households across the country. The survey used a combination of the diary and recall methods. Households were asked to record their daily acquisitions in diaries provided by Statistics SA for a period of a month. The survey also employed a household questionnaire to collect data on household expenditure, subjective poverty, and income.

Geographic coverage

The survey had national coverage.

Analysis unit

Households and individuals

Universe

The sample for the survey included all domestic households, holiday homes and all households in workers' residences, such as mining hostels and dormitories for workers, but excludes institutions such as hospitals, prisons, old-age homes, student hostels, and dormitories for scholars, boarding houses, hotels, lodges and guesthouses.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Living Conditions Survey 2014-2015 sample was based on the LCS 2008-2009 master sample of 3 080 PSUs. However, there were 40 PSUs with no DU sample, thus the sample of 30 818 DUs was selected from only 3 040 PSUs. Amongst the PSUs with no DU sample, 25 PSUs were non-respondent because 19 PSUs were not captured on the dwelling frame, and 6 PSUs had an insufficient DU count. The remaining 15 PSUs were vacant and therefore out-of-scope. Among the PSUs with a DU sample, 2 974 PSUs were respondent, 50 PSUs were non-respondent and 16 PSUs were out-of-scope. The scope of the Master Sample (MS) is national coverage of all households in South Africa. It was designed to cover all households living in private dwelling units and workers living in workers' quarters in the country.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Living Conditions Survey 2014-2015 used three data collection instruments, namely a household questionnaire, a weekly diary, and the summary questionnaire. The household questionnaire was a booklet of questions administered to respondents during the course of the survey month. The weekly diary was a booklet that was left with the responding household to track all acquisitions made by the household during the survey month. The household (after being trained by the Interviewer) was responsible for recording all their daily acquisitions, as well as information about where they purchased the item and the purpose of the item. A household completed a different diary for each of the four weeks of the survey month. Interviewers then assigned codes for the classification of individual consumption according to purpose (COICOP) to items recorded in the weekly diary, using a code list provided to them.

Data appraisal

Anthropometric data collected during the survey are not included in the dataset.

Abstract

The Community Survey (CS) is a nationally representative, large-scale household survey which was conducted from February to March 2007. The Community Survey is designed to provide information on the trends and levels of demographic and socio-economic data, such as population size and distribution; the extent of poor households; access to facilities and services, and the levels of employment/unemployment at national, provincial and municipality level. The data can be used to assist government and the private sector in the planning, evaluation and monitoring of programmes and policies. The information collected can also be used to assess the impact of socio-economic policies and provide an indication as to how far the country has gone in its strides to eradicate poverty.

Censuses 1996 and 2001 are the only all-inclusive censuses that Statistics South Africa has thus far conducted under the new democratic dispensation. Demographic and socio-economic data were collected and the results have enabled government and all other users of this information to make informed decisions. When cabinet took a decision that Stats SA should not conduct a census in 2006, it created a gap in information or data between Census 2001 and the next Census scheduled to be carried out in 2011. A decision was therefore taken to carry out the Community Survey in 2007.

The main objectives of the survey were: · To provide estimates at lower geographical levels than existing household surveys; · To build human, management and logistical capacities for Census 2011; and · To provide inputs into the preparation of the mid-year population projections.

The wider project strategic theme is to provide relevant statistical information that meets user needs and aspirations. Some of the main topics that are covered by the survey include demography, migration, disability and social grants, educational levels, employment and economic activities.

Geographic coverage

The survey covered the whole of South Africa, including all nine provinces as well as the four settlement types - urban-formal, urban-informal, rural-formal (commercial farms) and rural-informal (tribal areas).

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

The Community Survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents) in South Africa. The survey excluded collective living quarters (institutions) and some households in EAs classified as recreational areas or institutions. However, an approximation of the out-of-scope population was made from the 2001 Census and added to the final estimates of the CS 2007 results.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample Design

The sampling procedure that was adopted for the CS was a two-stage stratified random sampling process. Stage one involved the selection of enumeration areas, and stage tow was the selection of dwelling units.

Since the data are required for each local municipality, each municipality was considered as an explicit stratum. The stratification is done for those municipalities classified as category B municipalities (local municipalities) and category A municipalities (metropolitan areas) as proclaimed at the time of Census 2001. However, the newly proclaimed boundaries as well as any other higher level of geography such as province or district municipality, were considered as any other domain variable based on their link to the smallest geographic unit - the enumeration area.

The Frame

The Census 2001 enumeration areas were used because they give a full geographic coverage of the country without any overlap. Although changes in settlement type, growth or movement of people have occurred, the enumeration areas assisted in getting a spatial comparison over time. Out of 80 787 enumeration areas countrywide, 79 466 were considered in the frame. A total of 1 321 enumeration areas were excluded (919 covering institutions and 402 recreational areas).

On the second level, the listing exercise yielded the dwelling frame which facilitated the selection of dwellings to be visited. The dwelling unit is a structure or part of a structure or group of structures occupied or meant to be occupied by one or more households. Some of these structures may be vacant and/or under construction, but can be lived in at the time of the survey. A dwelling unit may also be within collective living quarters where applicable (examples of each are a house, a group of huts, a flat, hostels, etc.).

The Community Survey universe at the second-level frame is dependent on whether the different structures are classified as dwelling units (DUs) or not. Structures where people stay/live were listed and classified as dwelling units. However, there are special cases of collective living quarters that were also included in the CS frame. These are religious institutions such as convents or monasteries, and guesthouses where people stay for an extended period (more than a month). Student residences - based on how long people have stayed (more than a month) - and old-age homes not similar to hospitals (where people are living in a communal set-up) were treated the same as hostels, thereby listing either the bed or room. In addition, any other family staying in separate quarters within the premises of an institution (like wardens' quarters, military family quarters, teachers' quarters and medical staff quarters) were considered as part of the CS frame. The inclusion of such group quarters in the frame is based on the living circumstances within these structures. Members are independent of each other with the exception that they sleep under one roof.

The remaining group quarters were excluded from the CS frame because they are difficult to access and have no stable composition. Excluded dwelling types were prisons, hotels, hospitals, military barracks, etc. This is in addition to the exclusion on first level of the enumeration areas (EAs) classified as institutions (military bases) or recreational areas (national parks).

The Selection of Enumeration Areas (EAs)

The EAs within each municipality were ordered by geographic type and EA type. The selection was done by using systematic random sampling. The criteria used were as follows: In municipalities with fewer than 30 EAs, all EAs were automatically selected. In municipalities with 30 or more EAs, the sample selection used a fixed proportion of 19% of all sampled EAs. However, if the selected EAs in a municipality were less than 30 EAs, the sample in the municipality was increased to 30 EAs.

The Selection of Dwelling Units

The second level of the frame required a full re-listing of dwelling units. The listing exercise was undertaken before the selection of DUs. The adopted listing methodology ensured that the listing route was determined by the lister. Thisapproach facilitated the serpentine selection of dwelling units. The listing exercise provided a complete list of dwelling units in the selected EAs. Only those structures that were classified as dwelling units were considered for selection, whether vacant or occupied. This exercise yielded a total of 2 511 314 dwelling units.

The selection of the dwelling units was also based on a fixed proportion of 10% of the total listed dwellings in an EA. A constraint was imposed on small-size EAs where, if the listed dwelling units were less than 10 dwellings, the selection was increased to 10 dwelling units. All households within the selected dwelling units were covered. There was no replacement of refusals, vacant dwellings or non-contacts owing to their impact on the probability of selection.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Consultation on Questionnaire Design Ten stakeholder workshops were held across the country during August and September 2004. Approximately 367 stakeholders, predominantly from national, provincial and local government departments, as well as from research and educational institutions, attended. The workshops aimed to achieve two objectives, namely to better understand the type of information stakeholders need to meet their objectives, and to consider the proposed data items to be included in future household surveys. The output from this process was a set of data items relating to a specific, defined focus area and outcomes that culminated with the data collection instrument (see Annexure B for all the data items).

Questionnaire Design The design of the CS questionnaire was household-based and intended to collect information on 10 people. It was developed in line with the household-based survey questionnaires conducted by Stats SA. The questions were based on the data items generated out of the consultation process described above. Both the design and questionnaire layout were pre-tested in October 2005 and adjustments were made for the pilot in February 2006. Further adjustments were done after the pilot results had been finalised.

Cleaning operations

Editing The automated cleaning was implemented based on an editing rules specification defined with reference to the approved questionnaire. Most of the editing rules were categorised into structural edits looking into the relationship between different record type, the minimum processability rules that removed false positive readings or noise, the logical editing that determine the inconsistency between fields of the same statistical unit, and the inferential editing that search similarities across the domain. The edit specifications document for the structural, population, mortality and housing edits was developed by a team of Stats SA subject-matter specialists, demographers, and programmers. The process was successfully