International Labor Migration 2010-2012, Baseline, Benchmark and Endline Surveys - Philippines

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

The study includes data and materials (do files, survey instruments) necessary for the replication of the paper: "Unilateral Facilitation Does Not Raise International Migration from the Philippines" by Emily A. Beam, David McKenzie, Dean Yang. According to the study, signifcant income gains from migrating from poorer to richer countries have motivated unilateral (source-country) policies facilitating labor emigration. However, their effectiveness is unknown. The investigators conducted a large-scale randomized experiment in the Philippines testing the impact of unilaterally facilitating international labor migration. Their most intensive treatment doubled the rate of job offers but had no identifable effect on international labor migration. Even the highest overseas job-search rate they induced (22%) falls far short of the share initially expressing interest in migrating (34%). They conclude that unilateral migration facilitation will at most induce a trickle, not a food, of additional emigration.

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

42 barangays from six municipalities in Sorsogon Province

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

Household

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

Sample survey data [ssd]

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

Early in 2010, we randomly selected 42 barangays from six municipalities in Sorsogon Province in which to conduct the baseline survey. We collected a household roster from each barangay that included a list of households, and we used these to set barangay-specific target sample sizes proportional to population. We targeted approximately 5% of the total population from each barangay, or roughly 26%of households. We sorted households randomly and selected the first listed households to be our target. When a household could not be located or had no eligible members, we replaced it with the next household on the list.

From each household, interviewers screened the first member they met who had never worked abroad and was age 20-45. Subsequent to the baseline survey, we learned from recruitment agencies that most individuals over age 40 would not be eligible for overseas work, so we restricted our baseline sample to the 4,153 individuals age 20-40 we interviewed. Houses selected were typically far enough apart from each other that concerns about information spillovers are second order; to the extent that there were spillovers, our treatment estimates are lower bounds on the differential impact of more information. The passport assistance was only offered to the respondents themselves, and so it is not subject to such spillovers.

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

Face-to-face [f2f]

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

Attached

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

We obtained measures of whether the respondent migrated abroad for work from full, proxy, or log surveys for 4,089 respondents, or 98.5% of our sample. Of those, 73% were surveys with the respondents themselves, 20% were proxy surveys, and 7% were log surveys. Excluding the log surveys, we have a 91% response rate for their full set of job search and migration outcome variables.

摘要
---------------------------
本研究包含用于复制论文《单边促进并未提升菲律宾的国际移民》所需的数据和材料（do 文件、调查工具），该论文由 Emily A. Beam、David McKenzie 和 Dean Yang 撰写。研究表明，从贫穷国家迁移到富裕国家所获得的显著收入增长激励了单边（来源国）政策以促进劳动力移民。然而，其有效性尚不明确。研究人员在菲律宾进行了一项大规模的随机实验，以检验单边促进国际劳动力移民的影响。他们的最强烈干预措施将工作机会的比率翻倍，但并未对国际劳动力移民产生可识别的影响。即使是他们引发的最高海外求职率（22%）也远远低于最初表示有兴趣移民的比例（34%）。他们得出结论，单边移民促进最多只能引发涓涓细流，而非洪流般的额外移民。
地理覆盖范围
---------------------------
索索贡省六个市镇的42个村庄
分析单位
---------------------------
家庭
数据类型
---------------------------
样本调查数据 [ssd]
抽样程序
---------------------------
2010年初，我们从索索贡省六个市镇的42个村庄中随机选取了村庄进行基线调查。我们从每个村庄收集了一份家庭花名册，列出了家庭名单，并据此设定了与人口成比例的村庄特定目标样本量。我们针对每个村庄的总体人口的约5%，或大约26%的家庭。我们随机排序家庭，并选择第一个列出的家庭作为我们的目标。当家庭无法找到或没有合格成员时，我们用名单上的下一个家庭进行替换。
从每个家庭中，访谈者筛选出第一位遇到的从未在国外工作且年龄在20-45岁之间的家庭成员。在基线调查之后，我们从招聘机构了解到，40岁以上的大多数人不符合海外工作的资格，因此我们将基线样本限制为我们访谈的4,153名20-40岁的个体。选定的家庭之间通常相距足够远，以至于关于信息溢出的担忧是次要的；在信息溢出的范围内，我们的处理估计是更大信息差异影响下的下限。护照援助仅向受访者本人提供，因此不受此类溢出影响。
数据收集方式
---------------------------
面对面 [f2f]
研究工具
---------------------------
附件
回应率
---------------------------
我们从4,089名受访者中获得了关于受访者是否移民国外工作的完整、代理或日志调查的度量，占样本的98.5%。其中，73%是受访者本人的调查，20%是代理调查，7%是日志调查。排除日志调查后，我们对他们的完整工作搜索和移民结果变量集的回应率为91%。