The Egypt Labor Market Panel Survey 2006 (ELMPS06) is the first full-fledged panel study of its scale in Egypt. This panel follows a nationally representative sample of 4,816 households visited in 1998, households that split from that sample, plus a refresher sample of 2,500 households. The total number of households reached in 2006 is 8,349. The ELMPS06 provides estimates of employment, unemployment and underemployment. The survey also collects information on job characteristics, mobility, and earnings. Collected data covers issues of household socio-economic characteristics, demographic characteristics, family enterprises and women’s status and work. A separate community level questionnaire has been administered to collect data on access to services and work opportunities in sampled localities. This report provides information on the different methodological issues related to the survey including sampling, questionnaire design, training of field staff, data collection, office review, and data entry.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
The sample was designed to provide estimates of the indicators at the national level, for urban and rural areas, and for all regions.
Unit of Analysis
The survey covered a national sample of households and all individuals permanently residing in surveyed households.
Producers and sponsors
Authoring entity/Primary investigators
Economic Research Forum (ERF)
Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics
The ELMPS06 sample consists of three types of households:
1. Households visited in 1998
2. Split households
3. A refresher sample of 2,500 households
In this section we describe in details the sampling techniques for both the 1998 and 2006 samples. We also describe the attrition to the 1998 sample due to loss of some household identification data, which were kept by CAPMAS.
The Selection Process of the 2006 New Sample
This sample was selected from the CAPMAS 2005 Master Sample. This is a nationally representative two-stage self-weighted (to the extent possible) sample. Each governorate is allocated a number of PSUs in the master sample that is proportionate to its size and its
The master sample was prepared through a two-stage process. First, shiekha's and villages are selected by probability proportionate-to-size method from two different sampling frames (one urban and another rural). In the second stage, these selected primary sample units are divided into secondary sampling units of 700 households each. A total of 1200 sampling units are then randomly selected to constitute the final master sample of CAPMAS.
The ELMPS06 2006 new sample was proportionately selected from the CAPMAS master sample.
Primary sampling units were then randomly selected from the CAPMAS master sample. Then within each PSU (containing 700 households in the master sample) we randomly selected 25 households. The 5,000 households that constitute the initial survey sample in 1998 were selected from a CAPMAS master sample prepared in 1995. The master sample consists of 750,000 households in 500 primary sampling units (PSUs) each consisting of 1,500 households. The CAPMAS master sample was selected through a two-stage process. The country is first divided into two strata: urban and rural. Each stratum is in turn divided into sub-strata
representing each governorate. All the villages (in the case of rural strata) or shiyakhas (urban quarter, in the case of urban strata) in each substratum were listed and assigned a weight based on their population. The first stage consisted of choosing the villages and shiyakhas that would be represented in the sample based on the principal of probability proportional to size. This meant that a shiyakha or a village is possibly selected more than once if its size warrants that. The selected shiyakhas and villages are then divided into PSUs of approximately 1500 housing units each; then one or more PSUs are selected from each shiyakha or village. The selected PSUs were then re-listed in 1995 to enumerate all the households selected. As shown in Table 6, the master sample contains 306 urban PSUs and 194 rural PSUs.
An analysis of the attrition from the sample showed that it was essentially due to the random loss of identifying records rather than any systematic attrition process. No significant association was found between the probability of attrition and household and individual characteristics in 1998. Weights based on the probability of non-response were used to correct for attrition in the panel data.
Dates of Data Collection (YYYY/MM/DD)
Mode of data collection
The division of labor within the data collection team is highly scripted following regular CAPMAS data collection procedures. Female researchers visit households escorted by supervisors and reviewers. Since most of the supervisors and reviewers were males, they did not usually stay with the researcher. Instead, they wait for the whole team to return at a meeting point (a café or a certain landmark). The researcher fills in the questionnaire during the interview. Researchers were instructed to visit the household at least three times in order to get data from the individual him/herself. For the panel sample, researchers also compare
the data collected to the 1998 data. They also make sure they get the exact address for individuals who move out of the household and form new households. As a bonus, researchers make the visits to the split households identified and this way they add to their production and final pay.
During training, researchers were instructed to stop the interviewing process if they find that they are not in the correct household as identified in the panel sample list. They were also instructed to report the problem to the supervisor who would contact the Cairo hotline using his cell phone to make sure s/he gets the right identification information. Field reviewers, by definition, review the questionnaires during the data collection process and compare the 1998 data to that collected during the 2006 interview. Reviewers are also
instructed to visit households with researchers when in doubt of the collected data. Supervisors are responsible for the stock of blank questionnaires and for the collection of questionnaires after they are reviewed by field reviewers. They are also responsible for the distribution of the sample assigned to the team among researchers. During the ELMPS06 study, the supervisors had added responsibilities:
1. To follow up on the completion of the household questionnaire section on split households, including informing teams in other governorates with addresses of splits to get their data. Question 214 in the household questionnaire, which inquires on whether a split household was reached, was the responsibility of the supervisor.
2. To arrange for the transportation of gifts to researchers and to keep an inventory of gifts. Supervisors contacted the ERF team in cases of shortage of gifts.
3. To arrange for the transportation of completed questionnaires to the CAPMAS office in Cairo.
Type of Research Instrument
Questionnaire design was finalized by the ERF team prior to the conclusion of the agreement between CAPMAS and ERF.
The household-level research instruments comprise of three interrelated questionnaires for each household. The household questionnaire collects data on the different demographic characteristics of household members, household assets and access to services. This questionnaire also includes a module that tracks individuals who were part of the 1998 sample. The questionnaire allows space for 20 individuals as members of the household and for 10 splits. The individual questionnaire includes modules on the education and work characteristics for individuals six years and up. The printed version allows space for only five individuals, but more than one individual questionnaire can be used for a household depending on its size.
The third questionnaire in the household-level research instrument is the “Migration, Family Enterprises and Non-wage Income” questionnaire, which includes the modules on migration, remittances, non-work-related income sources, and non-agricultural household enterprises.
Additions and changes to the 1998 Questionnaire
New sections were added to the 1998 questionnaires and a number of questions were deleted because they did not produce useful results after the analysis. The following are the major changes to the 1998 questionnaire:
1. The panel design mandated a number of changes, including the addition of a new section, Section 0.2, which gathered information on the basic characteristics of members who lived in household in1998 but no longer live in household in 2006 and their new addresses to track them. The cover page also included a question regarding the type of the household (whether it is originally visited in 1998, is a split household, or from the new sample). Section 0.1, the household roster, also included an additional question (0105), which inquires about the individual’s person number (pn) in the 1998 data set. Data collectors were able to get this information from the data sheets that were printed for each household containing basic demographic characteristics and a summary of her/his work and education characteristics.
2. Questions about land ownership and cultivation were added in section 0.3. Although they do not quite fit under housing and services, this was the best place to include them. Instructions during training were to write zero if no land was owned or rented by household.
3. The section on durable goods, section 0.4, now includes questions on whether the item was bought at the time of marriage and whether an item is bought to be used by a household member after she/he marries.
4. A short section on siblings (section 1.3) was added, which refers to total number of siblings, and whether or not they reside in the same household.
5. The section on education is expanded significantly. It now includes questions about the characteristics of secondary, preparatory, and primary schools, where relevant. Questions about repetitions and interruptions of schooling are included in order to gain better understanding of the number of years of schooling as opposed to grade level achieved and age of exit/completion. The section also allows one to assign a unique code for each school attended by the individual. These unique codes were received from the Ministry of Education and allow for analysis on school characteristics based on further data from the Ministry.
6. The migration section was moved earlier in the questionnaire so that it applies to all individuals whether they worked or not. In 1998, this section only applied to those who had previously worked. The section now applies to all those aged 15 and above. It also includes a new question about place of birth.
7. In the sections on work characteristics, we no longer have a reference week and a reference three months. We used instead the past seven days (counting back from day of first interview with individual) and the past three months.
8. In the unemployment section (Section 4.2), we added questions about the use of a landline or cell phones in job search activities. We also separated the question on registering with a government agency from the job search question. Now all the
activities listed under job search are limited to the past three months reference period.
9. We separated the questions on subsistence and domestic work in a new section. These questions now apply to all children aged 6-17 and all women aged18-64, irrespective of employment status. The questions on domestic work are now
much more detailed than before and ask about time spent on various domestic chores during the past 7 days. If the same amount of time is spent everyday, then interviewers were instructed to multiply the daily times by seven. However, this is designed to allow for variations in schedules every day. One of the reasons this section now applies to the past week rather than a reference week was that that it might be difficult to get an accurate estimate due to recall problems. Only the last question of the section allows for the activity to be done concurrently with other activities (child care). Otherwise, interviewers were instructed that they are enquiring about the time spent exclusively on the activity in question.
10. Questions about the “first job” were added into the section detecting employment in the forgoing three months. As in the job mobility section, to qualify as a job, the individual must have spent at least 6 months at the job. Thus, a job during summer vacation is considered a job in the current employment section, but does not qualify as a first job or as a job in the mobility section. Similarly, an individual could have worked in the reference 3 months (on summer jobs) but have no first job, because that job lasted less than six months. The same criterion of six months applies to the job mobility section to prevent listing of back and forth mobility between school and work for students who work only during the summer.
11. Chapter 7 contains two entirely new sections, one on fertility and one on the cost of marriage. Sections 7.1 and 7.2 apply to all ever-married women.
12. In the earnings chapter, the section on second main job was dropped. The instructions specify that if the main job has changed during the past three months, earnings should be collected in this section for all main jobs combined, not just the last one. This should not be a problem since very few people actually change their main job in a given three month period. The same applies for the earnings of the secondary job. If an individual has changed their secondary job during the past three months, earnings should be collected for all the secondary jobs combined in the three months period.
13. The household enterprises questionnaire now applies to all individuals, irrespective of whether they have enterprises or not. While these questions are better placed at the household questionnaire, we believe that having these questions early at the interview might scare people off. The household enterprise questionnaire comes towards the end of the interview and was therefore an ideal place for these questions. Household enterprise questions are divided into four sections: one section on non-agricultural enterprises and three short sections on agricultural enterprises.
Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics
All questionnaires administered in different governorates were moved to CAPMAS head office in Cairo for office review and data processing.
The major tasks involved in the stage of office review are:
?? To check for missing variables
?? To check the logical sequence of collected data
?? For panel and split households, to ensure that the data collection team visited the same household by comparing the 1998 data sheets to the newly filled questionnaire. This also entails checking that individual IDs are correctly copied from the 1998 data sheet to their proper places in the new questionnaires.
?? To ensure that individual IDs are written on each page for data entry Reviewers were given clear instructions to minimally change questionnaires and to refer to the research team should they find major changes requested into a certain questionnaire. In this case, we used to call the data collection team and ask them to re-visit the household.
Office review training took place during the data collection process on February 8, 2006. Six teams (each with 4 or 5 reviewers) started working a week later as questionnaires were gradually moved to Cairo. The office review process lasted till June 30, 2006.
Coding entails turning text describing occupations, economic activities, education certificates and schools into numeric values following CAPMAS coding booklets.
This stage began May 1st and was finalized June 30, 2006.
Economic Research Forum (ERF)
firstname.lastname@example.org , www.erf.org.eg
Central Agency for Public Mobiliztion and Statistics (CAPMAS)
Licensed datasets, accessible under conditions.
The users should cite the Economic Research Forum and the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS) as follows:
"Economic Research Forum and the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), Egypt labor Market Panel Survey 2006 (ELMPS06), Version 1.0 of the Licensed data files (April 2013), provided by the Economic Research Forum. http://www.erfdataportal.com/index.php/catalog"
Disclaimer and copyrights
The Economic Research Forum and the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS) have granted the researcher access to relevant data following exhaustive efforts to protect the confidentiality of individual data. The researcher is solely responsible for any analysis or conclusions drawn from available data.
(c) 2007, Economic Research Forum
Economic Research Forum(ERF) - 21 Al-Sad Al-Aaly St. Dokki,Giza,Egypt
Economic Rerearch Forum)
Date of Production
DDI Number and Study ID edited by World Bank Data Group (May 2013)