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.

As of 2024, an individual living in South Africa with less than 1,109 South African rand (roughly 60 U.S. dollars) per month was considered poor. Furthermore, individuals who have roughly 796 South African rand (approximately 43 U.S. dollars) a month available for food were living below the poverty line, according to South African national standards.

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

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.

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.

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 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)

South Africa ZA: Income Share Held by Lowest 20% data was reported at 2.400 % in 2014. This records a decrease from the previous number of 2.500 % for 2010. South Africa ZA: Income Share Held by Lowest 20% data is updated yearly, averaging 2.600 % from Dec 1993 (Median) to 2014, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.100 % in 2000 and a record low of 2.400 % in 2014. South Africa ZA: Income Share Held by Lowest 20% 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. Percentage shares by quintile may not sum to 100 because of rounding.; ; 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.

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/.

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

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.

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.

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.

During the South African apartheid, Black people were forced to move to homelands during the 1960s and 1970s, resulting in one of history’s largest segregation policy experiments. We examine how and why relocation to the homelands affected human capital attainment. Exploiting the staggered timing of homeland establishment in a cross-cohort identification strategy, we find that moving to the homelands during childhood significantly reduces educational attainment, labor earnings and employment rates in adulthood. The data suggest an important role for place effects. Moving to the homelands in childhood implies greater exposure to poorer neighborhoods and it disproportionally reduces human capital attainment.

Introduction/objectivesMore than half of South Africa’s population lives in poverty, with significant health disparities across different regions. This study investigates the effects of regional poverty and historical economic factors on the efficacy of public health expenditure to understand how socioeconomic contexts influence overall public health outcomes.MethodsOur study utilized annual data from 2005 to 2019 for 9 provinces, drawing from the General Household Survey, Health Systems Trust database, and National Treasury’s Intergovernmental Fiscal Review. The primary health outcome was life expectancy at birth, while public health expenditure per capita was the main independent variable. We developed the Provincial Index of Multiple Deprivation to assess poverty, incorporating dimensions such as health, education, and living standards. We employed a two-way fixed effects model to examine the complex relationships between regional poverty, public health spending, and health outcomes.ResultsThe study found that poverty levels moderate the impact of public health spending on health outcomes, as evidenced by varying results across different provincial regions. Health outcomes in poorer provinces were less influenced by public health spending than wealthier regions. Additionally, the study established that income per capita, along with its lagged values and the lagged values of public health expenditure per capita, did not significantly affect health outcomes as measured by life expectancy.Conclusion/recommendationsThe impact of health expenditure in South Africa is influenced by regional poverty levels. To maximize the effectiveness of health spending, equitable, region-specific interventions tailored to address the unique health challenges of each area should be implemented.

Abstract

South African policymakers are endeavouring to ensure that the poor have better access to financial services. However, a lack of understanding of the financial needs of poor households impedes a broad strategy to attend to this need.
The Financial Diaries study addresses this knowledge gap by examining financial management in rural and urban households. The study is a year-long household survey based on fortnightly interviews in Diepsloot (Gauteng), Langa (Western Cape) and Lugangeni (Eastern Cape). In total, 160 households were involved in this pioneering study which promises to offer important insights into how poor people manage their money as well as the context in which poor people make financial decisions. The study paints a rich picture of the texture of financial markets in townships, highlighting the prevalence of informal financial products, the role of survivalist business and the contribution made by social grants. The Financial Diaries dataset includes highly detailed, daily cash flow data on income, expenditure and financial flows on both a household and individual basis.

Geographic coverage

Langa in Cape Town, Diepsloot in Johannesburg and Lugangeni, a rural village in the Eastern Cape

Analysis unit

Units of analysis in the Financial Diaries Study 2003-2004 include households and individuals

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

To create the sampling frame for the Financial Diaries, the researchers echoed the method used in the Rutherford (2002) and Ruthven (2002), a participatory wealth ranking (PWR). Within South Africa, the participatory wealth ranking method is used by the Small Enterprise Foundation (SEF), a prominent NGO microlender based in the rural Limpopo Province. Simanowitz (1999) compared the PWR method to the Visual Indicator of Poverty (VIP) and found that the VIP test was seen to be at best 70% consistent with the PWR tests. At times one third of the list of households that were defined as the poorest by the VIP test was actually some of the richest according to the PWR. The PWR method was also implicitly assessed in van der Ruit, May and Roberts (2001) by comparing it to the Principle Components Analysis (PCA) used by CGAP as a means to assess client poverty. They found that three quarters of those defined as poor by the PCA were also defined as poor by the PWR. We closely followed the SEF manual to conduct our wealth rankings, and consulted with SEF on adapting the method to urban areas.

The first step is to consult with community leaders and ask how they would divide their community. Within each type of areas, representative neighbourhoods of about 100 households each were randomly chosen. Townships in South Africa are organised by street - with each street or zone having its own street committee. The street committees are meant to know everyone on their street and to serve as stewards of all activity within the street. Each street committee in each area was invited to a central meeting and asked to map their area and give a roster of household names. Following the mapping, each area was visited and the maps and rosters were checked by going door to door with the street committee.

Two references groups were then selected from the street committee and senior members of the community with between four and eight people in each reference group. Each reference group was first asked to indicate how they define a poor household versus those that are well off. This discussion had a dual purpose. First, it relayed information about what each community believes is rich or poor. Second, it started the reference group thinking about which households belong under which heading.

Following this discussion, each reference group then ranked each household in the neighbourhood according to their perceived wealth. The SEF methodology of wealth ranking is de-normalised in that reference groups are invited to put households into as many different wealth piles as they feel in appropriate. Only households that are known by both reference groups were kept in the sample.

The SEF guidelines were used to assign a score to each household in a particular pile. The scores were created by dividing 100 by the number of piles multiplied by the level of the pile. This means that if the poorest pile was number 1, then every household in the pile was assigned a score of 100, representing 100% poverty. If the wealthiest pile was pile number 6, then every household in that pile received a score of 16.7 and every household in pile 5 received a score of 33.3. An average score for both reference groups was taken for the distribution.

One way of assessing how good the results are is to analyse how consistent the rankings were between the two reference groups. According to the SEF methodology, a result is consistent if the scores between the two reference groups have no more than a 25 points difference. A result is inconsistent if the difference between the scores is between 26 and 50 points while a result is unreliable is the difference between the scores is above 50 points. SEF uses both consistent and inconsistent rankings, as long as they use the average across two reference groups - this would mean that 91% of the sample could be used. However, because only used two reference groups were used, only the consistent household for the final sample selection was considered.

To test this further,the number of times that the reference groups put a household in the exact same category was counted. The extent of agreement at either end of the wealth spectrum between the two reference groups was also assessed. This result would be unbiased by how many categories the reference groups put households into.

Following the example used in India and Bangladesh, the sample was divided into three different wealth categories depending on the household's overall score. Making a distinction between three different categories of wealth allowed the following of a similar ranking of wealth to Bangladesh and India, but also it kept the sample from being over-stratified. A sample of 60 households each was then drawn randomly from each area. To draw the sample based on a proportion representation of each wealth ranking within the population would likely leave the sample lacking in wealthier households of some rankings to draw conclusions. Therefore the researchers drew equally from each ranking.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

🏳️‍🌈 국제기구