Living Standards Measurement Survey 2000 - Kosovo

Abstract
---------------------------

Starting June 1999, after the intervention of NATO in the conflict between Kosovo and Serbia (FRY), the United Nations provided interim administration for the province. The consequences of the conflict on the living standards of the population were severe, with the collapse of the industrial sector, the paralysis of agriculture, and extensive damage to private housing, education and health facilities and other infrastructure. In addition, the conflict brought massive population displacement both within Kosovo and abroad.

A year later, Kosovo was in a process of transition from emergency relief to long-term economic development. The purpose of the survey was to provide crucial information for policy and program design for use by the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), international donors, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the Kosovar community at large for poverty alleviation and inequality reduction.

During the same period, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) was planning an agriculture and livestock survey. It was decided to join both surveys, in order to pool resources and provide better assistance to the newly re-formed Statistical Office of Kosovo (SOK) and to take into account the extensive Kosovar peasant household economy. Therefore the agriculture and food aid modules are more developed than those of a standard LSMS survey.

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) also was interested in information related to labor force and employment. They had run a socio-demographic and reproductive health survey with the United Nations Population Fund, covering approximately 10,000 households at the end of 1999. IOM provided the urban sampling frame for the present survey.

Geographic coverage
---------------------------

Kosovo.
Domains: Urban/rural; Area of Responsibility (American, British, French, German, Italian); Serbian minority

Analysis unit
---------------------------

- Households
- Individuals
- Community

Kind of data
---------------------------

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure
---------------------------

SAMPLE DESIGN

The sample design used in the Kosovo LSMS 2000 had to contend with the fact that the last census, conducted in 1991, was rendered obsolete by the boycott of the Albanian population and by the massive displacements since March 1998.
A Housing Damage Assessment Survey (HDAS) was conducted in February 1999 and updated in June 1999 by the International Management Group (IMG) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in the rural areas. The survey covered 95 percent of the Albanian rural areas and provided the basis for the rural sampling frame, after updating. The updating and household listings in selected villages were conducted by FAO.

Since the HDAS did not cover Serbian villages, a quick counting4 of housing units was performed in these villages, following a procedure similar to the one in the urban areas. In urban areas, the original plan was to use the information from the on-going individual
voters’ registration conducted by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Since the registration was limited to individuals above 16 years old, it was then decided to conduct a quick counting of households in the 22 urban areas. The quick counting and subsequent listing of households was performed by IOM, under the supervision of the sampling expert hired by the World Bank.
.
FRAMEWORK

UNMIK divided Kosovo into 5 areas of responsibility (AR), roughly equivalent to the former regions (American – Southeast, British – East including Pristina, French – North, German-South, Italian – West). The rural frame used the IMG/UNHCR Housing Damage Assessment Survey. It was updated with the collaboration of FAO and provided much better information on which to build the sample for the survey. Aerial pictures of the villages selected in the survey were used to help identifying housing units. Only one household was interviewed in each housing unit. For the Serbian villages, counting households and making listings had to be elaborated by the survey team.

In urban areas, IOM contracted the quick counting to SOK in the Albanian cities and to firms in the Serb areas. These firms updated existing lists, or performed some quick counting. Using the updated information IOM created enumeration areas of size 150-200 housing units. Based on this quick counting, a full listing took place in all the selected EAs and 12 households were randomly selected. Given safety issues and quality problems discovered at the enumeration stage, the Serb urban listings were revised after the end of the survey, by the Serb survey team, who had performed the rural listings.

The sample was preset at 2,880 households in order to allow analyses in the following breakdowns: (a) Kosovo as a whole; (b) by area of responsibility, (c) by urban/rural locations. In addition, the survey data can be used to derive separate estimates for the Serbian minority.

In the rural area, 30 Albanian villages were randomly selected in each AR and a listing of all households in the village was established.5 In each village, 12 households were then randomly selected (8 for interviewing and 4 reserve households). Similarly, 30 urban enumeration areas (between 150 and 200 households lie in each urban EA) were randomly selected in the Albanian part of each AR. Twelve households were then selected in each EA. In the rural area, 30 Serb villages were selected from the three municipalities in the northern part of Kosovo, the enclaves and the municipality of Strepce. Thirty urban EA were selected in the same region. In each village and urban area, 12 households were then randomly selected.

STRATIFICATION

In addition to the explicit stratification of the areas of responsibility and the ethnic composition in each rural and urban category, an implicit stratification of geographic ordering in a serpentine method in the villages and urban enumeration areas was followed. In order to be able to provide estimates for the separate domains described above, it was recommended that 240 households be interviewed in each domain. We had very little prior knowledge of response rates. In the rural villages, it was decided to select 12 households and identify 4 of them as “reserve households”. These reserve households were to be used only in specific cases, described at length to the logistics person/driver of the interviewing team. The final sample size was 1,200 rural and urban Albanian households and 240 rural and urban Serb households, for a total sample size of 2,880 households.

Mode of data collection
---------------------------

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument
---------------------------

Two questionnaires were used to collect the information: a household questionnaire and a community questionnaire. No anthropometric information was collected as malnutrition problems, facing Kosovar children and women, would not be detected by these procedures.

Since FAO and SOK were conducting a price survey in 7 cities of Kosovo, on a monthly basis, it was decided to not include a separate price questionnaire but use the data from the FAO-SOK price survey. The Kosovo LSMS 2000 collected information using a household questionnaire, which was based in part on the standard LSMS questionnaire developed in Grosh and Glewwe (2000).

The standard questionnaire was adapted to the specifics of the Kosovar environment and special modules about displacement, food aid and social protection were added. Individual modules were administered as much as possible to most informed respondents. Box 1 contains a summary of the content of the questionnaire.

The community questionnaire was designed to collect information on community-level infrastructure, with a special emphasis on school and health facilities as well as displaced persons issues. Box 2 contains a summary of the content of the community questionnaire. [Note: Community is defined as the Primary Sampling Unit (PSU) of the survey. In rural areas, it generally encompasses villages unless these are less than 50 households (in which case, they were grouped with a neighboring village) or more than 200 households (in which case, they were broken-up in PSUs of 50-200 households). In urban areas, community is defined as the Enumeration Area but includes the larger city when referring to secondary school and university, hospitals and factories.]

Response rate
---------------------------

Households from the original sample selection which could not be interviewed were replaced by reserve households to reach the final sample size. The non-response rate among households originally selected for inclusion in the sample in rural Albanian areas was 11.8 percent and 20.8 percent in urban Albanian areas. These rates in the Serbian areas were 14.2 percent among rural households and 39.2 percent among urban households.

In the rural Albanian areas, non-response came mostly from households having moved outside of the village. A few refusals were due to the fact that households were in mourning or celebrating other religious occasions (wedding, baptisms, circumcisions, etc…), or the household head was a women alone. There were only 20 actual refusals of the originally selected households, only 2 percent of the 1,200 households originally contacted.

In the Serbian rural areas, half of the non-responses were due to households having traveled to Serbia for visits (holidays, health care issues, indefinite travel….). Other reasons included: interviewer’s safety (houses too isolated) and households refusing to respond in the absence of the head. There were only 5 such cases, again only 2 percent of the 240 households originally contacted. In the urban areas, 10 percent of the non-responses were linked to listings problems (non-existent addresses). Another 75 percent came from households having moved (temporarily or indefinitely) and/or renting their dwelling to KFOR and international staff. The remaining reasons included refusals for security and illness reasons. There were only 6 such cases, again close to 2 percent of the 240 households originally contacted.

摘要
---------------------------
自1999年6月起，随着北约干预科索沃与塞尔维亚（前南斯拉夫共和国）之间的冲突，联合国对该省实施了临时行政管理。冲突对人口生活水平产生了严重影响，工业部门崩溃，农业停滞，私人住宅、教育、卫生设施以及其他基础设施遭到广泛破坏。此外，冲突还导致了科索沃境内及国外的巨大人口流动。
一年后，科索沃正从紧急救济过渡到长期经济开发。此次调查的目的在于为联合国科索沃临时行政使命（UNMIK）、国际捐助者、非政府组织（NGO）以及科索沃全体社区提供政策制定和项目设计的关键信息，以用于扶贫和减少不平等。
在同一时期，联合国粮食及农业组织（FAO）正在策划一项农业和畜牧业调查。经决定，将两项调查合并，以便集中资源，为刚成立的科索沃统计局（SOK）提供更好的援助，并考虑广泛的科索沃农民家庭经济。因此，农业和食品援助模块比标准LSMS调查更为完善。
国际移民组织（IOM）也对与劳动力市场和就业相关的信息感兴趣。他们在1999年底与联合国人口基金合作进行了一项社会人口和生殖健康调查，覆盖了大约10,000个家庭。IOM为本次调查提供了城市抽样框架。
地理覆盖范围
---------------------------
科索沃。
领域：城市/农村；责任区（美国、英国、法国、德国、意大利）；塞尔维亚少数群体
分析单位
---------------------------
- 家庭
- 个人
- 社区
数据类型
---------------------------
样本调查数据 [ssd]
抽样程序
---------------------------
样本设计
科索沃LSMS 2000所采用的样本设计必须应对这样一个事实：1991年进行的最后一次人口普查因阿尔巴尼亚人口的抵制以及自1998年3月以来的大规模流离失所而变得过时。
在1999年2月进行了一次住房损害评估调查（HDAS），由国际管理集团（IMG）和联合国难民事务高级专员公署（UNHCR）在乡村地区更新。该调查覆盖了95%的阿尔巴尼亚乡村地区，并在更新后为乡村抽样框架提供了基础。FAO在选定的一些村庄中进行了更新和家庭清单编制。
由于HDAS未涵盖塞尔维亚村庄，因此对这些村庄的住宅单位进行了快速计数，其程序类似于城市地区的程序。在城市地区，最初的计划是使用由欧洲安全与合作组织（OSCE）进行的持续进行的个人选民登记信息。由于登记仅限于16岁以上的个人，因此决定对22个城市地区进行家庭快速计数。快速计数和家庭清单编制由IOM在世行聘请的抽样专家监督下进行。
框架
UNMIK将科索沃划分为5个责任区（AR），大致相当于前地区（美国-东南部，英国-东部包括普里什蒂纳，法国-北部，德国-南部，意大利-西部）。乡村框架使用了IMG/UNHCR住房损害评估调查。在FAO的合作下进行了更新，为建立调查样本提供了大量更好的信息。调查中选定的村庄的航空照片被用来帮助识别住宅单位。每个住宅单位中仅采访一个家庭。对于塞尔维亚村庄，计数家庭和编制清单必须由调查团队详细制定。
在城市地区，IOM将快速计数委托给了阿尔巴尼亚城市的SOK以及塞尔维亚地区的公司。这些公司更新了现有清单，或进行了一些快速计数。使用更新的信息，IOM创建了150-200个住宅单位的编制区域。根据这次快速计数，对所有选定的EA进行了全面清单编制。在编制阶段发现的安全问题和质量问题时，塞尔维亚城市清单在调查结束后由执行农村清单的塞尔维亚调查团队进行了修订。
样本量预置为2,880个家庭，以便允许以下分析：（a）科索沃作为一个整体；（b）按责任区划分；（c）按城市/农村位置划分。此外，调查数据可以用来为塞尔维亚少数群体推导单独的估计。
在乡村地区，在每个责任区随机选择了30个阿尔巴尼亚村庄，并建立了村庄中所有家庭的清单。然后在每个村庄中随机选择了12个家庭（8个用于采访，4个备用家庭）。同样，在阿尔巴尼亚每个责任区的阿尔巴尼亚部分随机选择了30个城市编制区域（每个城市编制区域有150-200个家庭）。然后在每个EA中选择了12个家庭。在乡村地区，从科索沃北部的三个市政区、飞地以及斯特雷普策市镇中选择了30个塞尔维亚村庄。在同一地区选择了30个城市EA。在每个村庄和城市地区，然后随机选择了12个家庭。
分层
除了在每个农村和城市类别中对责任区和民族构成的明确分层外，还遵循了在村庄和城市编制区域中采用蛇形方法的地理顺序的隐含分层。为了能够为上述所述的各个领域提供估计，建议在每个领域采访240个家庭。我们对响应率的先前知识非常有限。在农村村庄，决定选择12个家庭，并确定其中的4个为“备用家庭”。这些备用家庭仅用于特定情况，详细描述给采访团队的物流人员/司机。最终样本量为1,200个乡村和城市阿尔巴尼亚家庭以及240个乡村和城市塞尔维亚家庭，总样本量为2,880个家庭。
数据收集方式
---------------------------
面对面 [f2f]
研究工具
---------------------------
使用了两个问卷来收集信息：一个家庭问卷和一个社区问卷。由于面临科索沃儿童和妇女的营养不良问题，未收集人体测量信息。
由于FAO和SOK正在科索沃的7个城市进行每月的价格调查，因此决定不包含单独的价格问卷，而是使用FAO-SOK价格调查的数据。科索沃LSMS 2000收集信息使用的是家庭问卷，该问卷部分基于Grosh和Glewwe（2000年）开发的LSMS标准问卷。
标准问卷根据科索沃的具体情况进行了调整，并增加了关于搬迁、食品援助和社会保护的特殊模块。尽可能地将个别模块应用于信息最丰富的受访者。框1包含了问卷内容的摘要。
社区问卷旨在收集关于社区级基础设施的信息，特别强调学校和卫生设施以及搬迁人员问题。框2包含了社区问卷内容的摘要。[注：社区定义为调查的初级抽样单位（PSU）。在农村地区，通常包括村庄，除非这些村庄的家庭少于50户（在这种情况下，它们与邻近的村庄合并）或超过200户（在这种情况下，它们被划分为50-200户的PSU）。在城市地区，社区定义为编制区域，但在提及中学和大学、医院和工厂时，包括更大的城市。]
响应率
---------------------------
原始样本选择中无法采访的家庭被备用家庭所取代，以达到最终样本量。在农村阿尔巴尼亚地区的原始样本选择中的非响应率为11.8%，在阿尔巴尼亚城市地区为20.8%。在塞尔维亚地区，这些比率分别为14.2%（农村家庭）和39.2%（城市家庭）。
在农村阿尔巴尼亚地区，非响应主要来自已搬迁出村庄的家庭。一些拒绝的原因是家庭正处于哀悼或庆祝其他宗教场合（婚礼、洗礼、割礼等），或户主为单身女性。原始选定的家庭中有20个实际拒绝，仅占最初联系到的1,200个家庭的2%。
在塞尔维亚农村地区，一半的非响应是由于家庭前往塞尔维亚访问（假期、医疗问题、不定期旅行等）。其他原因包括：采访者安全（房屋过于偏远）和户主缺席时家庭拒绝回应。这类情况仅有5例，再次仅占最初联系到的240个家庭的2%。
在城市地区，10%的非响应与清单问题（地址不存在）有关。另外75%来自已搬迁（临时或长期）并将住宅出租给KFOR和国际工作人员的家庭。其他原因包括安全和健康原因的拒绝。这类情况仅有6例，再次接近于最初联系到的240个家庭的2%。]