1 / 40

Household Budget Survey 2006-07

Household Budget Survey 2006-07. Presentation of preliminary results National Bureau of Statistics Oxford Policy Management University of Nottingham. Outline of presentation. Overview of survey Social sector indicators Housing, household amenities and assets

azura
Download Presentation

Household Budget Survey 2006-07

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Household Budget Survey2006-07 Presentation of preliminary results National Bureau of Statistics Oxford Policy Management University of Nottingham

  2. Outline of presentation • Overview of survey • Social sector indicators • Housing, household amenities and assets • Household productive activities and banking • Discussion • Consumption and consumption poverty • Discussion • Conclusions and next steps • Discussion

  3. Sample • Sample drawn from 2002 census EAs, with new HH listing undertaken • Stratified households within EAs based on socio-economic information • Listing figures often quite different from census figures and overall lower • Weights take into account these factors • 10,466 of intended 10,752 HHs analysed (97%) • Around 12% replacements

  4. Sample breakdown

  5. Data quality • Around 10,000 HHs, smaller than last time but still fairly large • NBS recent experience, some more supervision but probably still too few supervisors • Change in diary item codes complicated analysis • Data entry was quick, but should have been better controlled (eg HHID) • Hard to judge, but data quality probably similar to last time • Worth identifying lessons for next time

  6. Social sector indicators:- demographic, health, education

  7. Demographics • Small decline on reported average household size (4.9 to 4.8 -to check) • Continued rise in female-headed households • Small increase in proportion of total population and HH heads over 65

  8. Female-headed households

  9. Health • Compared with 2000/01: • Similar proportions reporting illness in the last four weeks, and similar patterns by area (rural>other urban>Dar) • No change in proportions consulting any provider when sick (69%), but • Increase in consultation at government facilities (55% to 65%) • Small increase in proportion satisfied with services in govt facilities, fewer reporting lack of drugs

  10. Consultation with govt providers

  11. Education • Compared with 2000/01: • Little change in overall adult literacy levels (but examine younger age groups) • Large increase in enrolment rates, both primary and secondary (- though sec still low) • Improvements in class attended for age of child (eg 30% of 9 year olds in school in St III, cf 13%)

  12. Net enrolment ratios - primary, lower secondary

  13. Housing, amenities and assets

  14. Housing and household amenities • Substantial improvements in use of ‘permanent’ housing materials - in all areas (Dar/OU/rural) • No change in proportion without a toilet (7%)* • Drinking water: apparent decline in piped water; partly classification changes?

  15. House construction materials (%)

  16. Drinking water supply (%)

  17. Ownership of selected consumer assets

  18. Households’ cooking energy

  19. Electricity

  20. Household productive activities and banking

  21. Household productive activities • Main activity of adults: - decline in farming - rise employment and self-employment - issue of comparability of questions (to check)

  22. Household banking and finance • Since 2000/01, modest increases in households with at least one member: - having a bank account, (but large drop 91-01) - taking a bank loan , - participating in informal (and formal) savings groups • Overall levels still low and more concentrated in urban areas

  23. Household banking and saving (% HHs with at least one member with…)

  24. Consumption and Consumption Poverty

  25. Consumption Aggregate • Two consumption aggregates were calculated: - a complete aggregate and - a more refined aggregate for the poverty estimates • Complete aggregate includes: food, durables, non durables, medical, education, telecommunications • Poverty aggregate includes food, and some durables and non durables: linen, hh equipment, clothes, personal effects, personal care, recreation, cleaning products, domestic services, contributions, fuel, petrol, soap and cigarettes

  26. Food Prices • Not straight forward given the change in item codes • matched as many item codes as possible • excluded items that could not be measured in a standard unit • or had too few observations • Left with100 food items • Laspeyres: 1.96 • National Food CPI: 1.52

  27. Non Food Prices • Began with the national CPI basket • matched item codes with the 2000/01 and 2007 surveys • dropped items with no quantity information and • dropped items with less than 10 observations • Left with 67 items • Laspeyres: 2.01 • National Non Food CPI: 1.29

  28. Non Food Prices • Constructed new basket using frequency of purchases from HBS • took items in 2007 with more than 100 records • matched item codes with the 2000/01 survey • dropped items with no quantity information • Left with 41 items • New basket: 2.37 • Results driven by large increase in prices on fuels and their increased share of expenditure, in particular firewood • Without firewood: 2.01

  29. Combining • Weighted average of food and non food used as price deflator • Combined according to the share of food and non food expenditure for the bottom 25% of the sample: 0.72and 0.28 respectively • Laspeyres 1.98 (national CPI 1.42) • Fisher 1.93

  30. Poverty Line • 2000/01 poverty line inflated using Fisher index 2000/01 2007 Food 5,295 10,219 Basic Needs 7,253 13,998

  31. Incidence of poverty - headcount

  32. % Share of expenditure for poverty aggregate

  33. % Share of expenditure for total consumption aggregate

  34. Results highly sensitive to price index • Analysis has been based on a comparable estimate • In the future thought should be given to possible changes to the consumption aggregate and basket

  35. Preliminary conclusions - I • Substantial improvements in schooling, no change in curative health services use but apparent shift to using more govt services • Worsening of water supplies and no improvement in sanitation • Improvements in housing materials and increase in the ownership of many consumer goods

  36. Preliminary conclusions - II • Continuing shift from farming to other activities • Very modest increase in real consumption levels • Very modest decline in consumption poverty (may well not be stat. significant) • However, sensitivity of poverty estimates to price index and consumption aggregate (and contrast with assets) • No changes in inequality on ‘poverty’ consumption aggregate: but increases with overall consumption aggregate

More Related