Living Standards Measurement Survey 2004 (Wave 4 Panel)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Living Standards Measurement Study [hh/lsms]
This is the fourth Living Standards Measurement Survey conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina and it is panel with 2001, 2002, and 2003 Living Standards Measurement Surveys.
In 2001, the World Bank in co-operation with the Republika Srpska Institute of Statistics (RSIS), the Federal Institute of Statistics (FOS) and the Agency for Statistics of BiH (BHAS), carried out a Living Standards Measurement Survey (LSMS).
The Living Standard Measurement Survey LSMS, in addition to collecting the information necessary to obtain a comprehensive as possible measure of the basic dimensions of household living standards, has three basic objectives, as follows:
1. To provide the public sector, government, the business community, scientific institutions, international donor organizations and social organizations with information on different indicators of the population's living conditions, as well as on available resources for satisfying basic needs.
2. To provide information for the evaluation of the results of different forms of government policy and programs developed with the aim to improve the population's living standard. The survey will enable the analysis of the relations between and among different aspects of living standards (housing, consumption, education, health, labor) at a given time, as well as within a household.
3. To provide key contributions for development of government's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, based on analyzed data.
The Department for International Development, UK (DFID) contributed funding to the LSMS and provided funding for a further three years of data collection for a panel survey, known as the Household Survey Panel Series (HSPS) – and more popularly known as Living in BiH (LiBiH). Birks Sinclair & Associates Ltd. in cooperation with the Independent Bureau for Humanitarian Issues (IBHI) were responsible for the management of the HSPS with technical advice and support provided by the Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER), University of Essex, UK.
The panel survey provides longitudinal data through re-interviewing approximately half the LSMS respondents for three years following the LSMS, in the autumns of 2002 and 2003 and the winter of 2004. The LSMS constitutes Wave 1 of the panel survey so there are four years of panel data available for analysis. For the purposes of this documentation we are using the following convention to describe the different rounds of the panel survey:
- Wave 1 LSMS conducted in 2001 forms the baseline survey for the panel
- Wave 2 Second interview of 50% of LSMS respondents in Autumn/Winter 2002
- Wave 3 Third interview with sub-sample respondents in Autumn/Winter 2003
- Wave 4 Fourth interview with sub-sample respondents in Winter 2004
The panel data allows the analysis of key transitions and events over this period such as labour market or geographical mobility and observations on the consequent outcomes for the well-being of individuals and households in the survey. The panel data provides information on income and labour market dynamics within FBiH and RS. A key policy area is developing strategies for the reduction of poverty within FBiH and RS. The panel will provide information on the extent to which continuous poverty and movements in an out of poverty are experienced by different types of households and individuals over the four year period. Most importantly, the co-variates associated with moves into and out of poverty and the relative risks of poverty for different people can be assessed. As such, the panel aims to provide data, which will inform the policy debates within BiH at a time of social reform and rapid change.
In order to develop base line (2004) data on poverty, incomes and socio-economic conditions, and to begin to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the BiH MTDS, EPPU commissioned this modified fourth round of the LiBiH Panel Survey.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
The househod questionnaires includes modules on:
- Individual demography and education
- Labour / employment
- Values and opinions
- Agricultural activities
Domains: Urban/rural/mixed; Federation; Republic
Producers and sponsors
State Agency for Statistics (BHAS)
Republika Srpska Institute of Statistics (RSIS)
Federation of BiH Institute of Statistics (FIS)
The World Bank
Department for International Development, UK
Birks Sinclair & Associates Ltd
Independent Bureau for Humanitarian Issues (IBHI)
Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER)
University of Essex, UK
The Wave 4 sample comprised of 2882 households interviewed at Wave 3 (1309 in the RS and 1573 in FBiH). As at previous waves, sample households could not be replaced with any other households.
Eligibility for inclusion
The household and household membership definitions assume the same standard definitions used at Wave 3. While the sample membership, status and eligibility for interview are as follows:
i) All members of households interviewed at Wave 3 have been designated as original sample members (OSMs). OSMs include children within households even if they are too young for interview, i.e. younger than 15 years.
ii) Any new members joining a household containing at least one OSM, are eligible for inclusion and are designated as new sample members (NSMs).
iii) At each wave, all OSMs and NSMs are eligible for inclusion, apart from those who move outof-scope (see discussion below).
iv) All household members aged 15 or over are eligible for interview, including OSMs and NSMs.
The panel design provides that sample members who move from their previous wave address must be traced and followed to their new address for interview. In some cases the whole household will move together but in other cases an individual member may move away from their previous wave household and form a new "split-off" household of their own. All sample members, OSMs and NSMs, are followed at each wave and an interview attempted. This method has the benefits of maintaining the maximum number of respondents within the panel and being relatively straightforward to implement in the field.
Definition of 'out-of-scope'
It is important to maintain movers within the sample to maintain sample sizes and reduce attrition and also for substantive research on patterns of geographical mobility and migration. The rules for determining when a respondent is 'out-of-scope' are:
i. Movers out of the country altogether i.e. outside BiH
This category of mover is clear. Sample members moving to another country outside BiH will be out-of-scope for that year of the survey and ineligible for interview.
ii. Movers between entities
Respondents moving between entities are followed for interview. Personal details of "movers" are passed between the statistical institutes and an interviewer assigned in that entity.
iii. Movers into institutions
Although institutional addresses were not included in the original LSMS sample, Wave 4 individuals who have subsequently moved into some institutions are followed. The definitions for which institutions are included are found in the Supervisor Instructions.
iv. Movers into the district of Brcko
Are followed for interview. When coding, Brcko is treated as the entity from which the household moved.
Details of the address at which respondents were found in the previous wave, together with a listing of household members found in each household at the last wave were fed-forward as the starting point for Wave 4 fieldwork. This "feed-forward" data also includes key variables required for correctly identifying individual sample members and includes the following:
- For each household: Household ID (IDD); Full address details and phone number
- For each Original Sample Member: Name; Person number (ID); unique personal identifier (LID); Sex; Date of birth
The sample details are held in an Access database and in order to ensure the confidentiality of respondents, personal details, names and addresses are held separately from the survey data collected during fieldwork. The IDD, LID and ID are the key linking variables between the two databases i.e. the name and address database and the survey database.
The level of cases that were unable to be traced is extremely low as are the whole household refusal or non-contact rates. In total, 9128 individuals (including children) were enumerated within the sample households at Wave 4, 5019 individuals in the FBiH and 4109 in the RS. Within in the 2875 eligible households, 7603 individuals aged 15 or over were eligible for interview with 7116 (93.6%) being successfully interviewed. Within co-operating households (where there was at least one interview) the interview rate was higher (98.6%).
A very important measure in longitudinal surveys is the annual individual re-interview rate as a high attrition rate, where large numbers of respondents drop out of the survey over time, can call into question the quality of the data collected. In BiH the individual re-interview rates have been high for the survey. The individual re-interview rate is the proportion of people who gave an interview at time t-1 who also give an interview at t. Of those who gave a full interview at wave 3, 6654 also gave a full interview at wave 4. This represents a re-interview rate of 98.9% - which is extremely high by international standards. When we look at those respondents who have been interviewed at all four years of the survey there are 5923 cases which are available for longitudinal analysis, 2732 in the RS and 3191 in the FBiH. This represents 76.5% of the responding wave 1 sample, a retention rate which is again high compared to many other panels around the world.
The Wave 4 data contain the appropriate weights for longitudinal analysis. The establishment of weights and their application was undertaken by Fahrudin Memic (EPPU) in consultation with Dr.Peter Lynn (ISER).
The Wave 4 weights were produced using the Wave 3 weights that were adjusted for non response using a logit model. Dependent variables in the logit model were:
- squared age
- dwelling type
- dwelling conditions.
For the new entrants in the Wave 4 (not present at Wave 3) a “fair share” algorithm was applied. For all 16+ years old members who were present in BiH in 2001 (non migrants) weights were calculated by dividing the total household weight by the number of household members (including new entrants). That weight was applied to all household members. Therefore the total household weight remained the same after weighting.
For migrants (not present in BiH in 2001) and 15 year old children weights were calculated by dividing the total household weight by the number of household members (excluding new entrants).
That weight was applied only to new entrants. Therefore the total household weight changed after weighting.
In the very few cases where both types of new entrants were present the first method was applied excluding the migrants (not present in BiH in 2001) and 15 year old children from the calculation. Then the second algorithm was applied.
Dates of Data Collection
Data Collection Mode
At the end of fieldwork Supervisors had checked 230 households to confirm that an interview had taken place. Random telephone checks were made by IBHI to ensure the interviewers had called at addresses. In total 117 checks were made. The combination of checks made by Supervisors and the Project Assistant at IBHI resulted in a 12% sample check.
Data Collection Notes
Mainstage Fieldwork Procedures
From a total of 126 field staff, 15 were new to the survey at Wave 4. In November 2004, Supervisors and Interviewers were provided with the Questionnaire, a Control Form, a Movers Form, Interviewer or Supervisor Instructions (containing editing instructions) and completed examples.
Briefing Supervisors and Interviewers
Three days of interviewer and supervisor briefing was delivered during the period 22-24 November 2004. All briefing sessions were conducted at the Hotel Italia in Sarajevo. The primary leaders for the sessions were the FBSTA (Rachel Smith) and Edin Sabanovic (BHAS). All field staff were provided with Instructions which contained the basic information needed for survey administration, however, during the briefing this material was heavily supplemented with additional printed materials, forms and examples. Each session was conducted semi-formally, with opportunities for questions and answers as well as for further explanation and additional examples.
During each briefing session, the sample addresses were distributed to each interviewer and discussed with them in detail. Ample time was allowed for a clear understanding of the materials, quantity of work expected from each interviewer and the procedures to be followed in conducting the work. Prior to leaving the briefing session each interviewer thus had: an assignment, field administration forms and a supply of survey questionnaires.
Each interviewer was allocated, on average, 30 households. The main data collection period was scheduled for six weeks in length. New interviewers were provided with supplementary briefing by their respective Supervisor.
The importance of in-field quality control procedures was stressed throughout the briefing. Quality control procedures for the Supervisors included:
1. a review of all sample materials prior to assignment to each interviewer
2. strict control over the activities of a small group of interviewers (5 to 6 interviewers per Supervisor)
3. weekly updates and meetings with each interviewer
4. verification of 10% of the work of each interviewer via field visits or telephone contact with selected households
5. accounting for and editing of all data from each interviewer prior to data entry.
The major problem for panel surveys is attrition, that is, the loss of respondents who either refuse to take any further part in the survey, are unable to be contacted during fieldwork, or who move and cannot be traced. Attrition in panel surveys is potentially damaging as the sample size for respondents with complete longitudinal records reduces over time and there is a danger of differential attrition introducing bias. The following procedures were applied in an attempt to reduce attrition.
As at wave 3, interviewers were provided with tracking information collected at Wave 3. This process worked extremely well in enabling interviewers to find movers. Further tracing of movers was undertaken by the BHAS by Edin Šabanovic. At the end of fieldwork 21 movers had been sent to BHAS of which 12 (57%) had been successfully located and passed to an interviewer. This represents a good success rate, especially considering the short time period available in this process.
One advance letter per household was produced. Production of the advance letter was part of the feed forward process and each letter was personally addressed to each sample household.
As a small token of thanks for taking part in the panel, a calculator, was given to each person interviewed.
Approximately 70% of the questionnaire was based on the Wave 3 questionnaire, carrying forward core measures in order to measure change over time. However in order to develop base line (2004) data on poverty, incomes and socio-economic conditions, and to begin to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the BiHDS the Wave 4 questionnaire additionally contained the Wave 1 Consumption module and a few other LSMS items to allow direct comparability with the Wave 1 data.
As at previous waves, CSPro was the chosen data entry software. The CSPro program consists of two main features intended to reduce the number of keying errors and to reduce the editing required following data entry:
- Data entry screens that included all skip patterns.
- Range checks for each question (allowing three exceptions for inappropriate, don't know and missing codes).
The Wave 4 data entry program had similar checks to the Wave 3 program - and DE staff were instructed to clear all anomalies with SIG fieldwork members. The program was tested prior to the commencement of data entry. Twelve data entry staff were employed in each Field Office, as all had worked on previous waves training was not undertaken.
Instructions for editing were provided in the Supervisors Instructions. At Wave 4 supervisors were asked to take more time to edit every questionnaire returned by their interviewers. The SIG Fieldwork Managers examined every Control Form.
Individual level identifiers have been attached to all members of the Wave 4 households selected for the panel sample. There is a household level identifier (IDD) for the issued household and each member of that household has a person number (ID) within the household. The household level identifier is needed for each wave but does not necessarily need to be related to the previous wave identifier for a given household. Households change in composition over time, making the notion of a core household that endures over time problematic for a panel.
In addition to these wave specific household and person number identifiers, each sample member has a unique personal identifier (LID) attached to them. This identifier is the unique number that each sample member carries with them throughout the life of the panel, even if they move between different households. This is the key linking identifier to be used in analysis when matching together data for the same individual from different waves of the survey and is a critical variable.
LSMS Data Manager
The World Bank
In receiving these data it is recognized that the data are supplied for use within your organization, and you agree to the following stipulations as conditions for the use of the data:
1. The data are supplied solely for the use described in this form and will not be made available to other organizations or individuals. Other organizations or individuals may request the data directly.
2. Three copies of all publications, conference papers, or other research reports based entirely or in part upon the requested data will be supplied to:
Department for International Development
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
The World Bank
Development Economics Research Group
LSMS Database Administrator
1818 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20433, USA
tel: (202) 473-9041
fax: (202) 522-1153
3. The researcher will refer to the 2004 Living in Bosnia and Herzegovina Survey as the source of the information in all publications, conference papers, and manuscripts and will credit DFID, the Agency for Statsitics of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Federal Office of Statistics and the Republika Srpska Institute of Statistics as the organizations that collected the data. At the same time the statistical institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina are not responsable for the estimations reported by the analyst(s).
4. Users who download the data may not pass the data to third parties.
5. The database cannot be used for commercial ends, nor can it be sold.
Disclaimer and copyrights
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.