Living Standards Measurement Survey 2002 (General Population, Wave 1 Panel) and Family Income Support Survey 2002 - Serbia and Montenegro

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

The study included four separate surveys:

1. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2002
2. The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002
These two datasets are published together.

3. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)
4. The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003
These two datasets are published together separately from the 2002 datasets.

Objectives

LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.

The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).

Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]

Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.

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

The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).

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

Sample survey data [ssd]

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

Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.

The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.

The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.

Planned sample:
In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.

Sample type:
In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.

Stratification:
Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.

The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was,as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.

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

Face-to-face [f2f]

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

In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following:
1. Roster with demography.
2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage.
3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind.
4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind.
5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle.
6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs
7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings
8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments)
9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education.
10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).

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

During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.

In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households or 9.9% refused cooperation with interviewers after three attempts, and 472 household were not at home. The number of interviewed persons was 19,725.

Since the aim of the repeated survey in 2003 was to interview a total of 3,000 households, census block unit 301 was included in the sample since it had 3,119 households that were interviewed in the previous survey and a trend of reduction of interviewed households was to be expected. The realized sample in 2003 included 2,548 households. The interviewers did not manage to collect data for 571 selected households or 18.3% of selected households. Out of this number, 266 or 8.5% of households refused cooperation with interviewers after three attempts, and 305 households were not at home, changed the place of residence or were absent at the time when the interview was conducted. The interviewed households included 8,027 persons.

The number of achieved interviews for Family Income Support recipients was 456 households.

The number of achieved interviews of Roma in Roma settlements was 525 households.

摘要
---------------------------
本项研究包括四个独立的调查：
1. 2002年对塞尔维亚普通民众的LSMS调查
2. 2002年对家庭收入支持（塞尔维亚语中为MOP）受益人的调查
这两个数据集一同发布。
3. 2003年对塞尔维亚普通民众的LSMS调查（面板调查）
4. 2003年对罗姆人定居点的罗姆人的调查
这两个数据集独立于2002年的数据集发布。
目标
LSMS代表了家庭生活水平的综合性研究，其设计及执行基于国际在该类型研究方面的经验。基本调查于2002年在塞尔维亚代表性家庭样本（不含科索沃和梅托希亚）中开展。其目标是根据家庭福利的全面数据建立贫困状况，并识别易受伤害的群体。此外，其目的还包括通过收集个人参与特定政府社会项目的详细信息，评估安全网项目的针对性。本研究作为制定塞尔维亚贫困减少战略（PRS）的基本文件，于2003年10月由塞尔维亚共和国政府采纳。调查于2003年对面板样本（2002年调查中参与的 households）进行重复。
2003年对人口接受度和状况的分析是制定贫困减少战略（PRS）监控系统步骤的第一步。调查遵循与2002年调查相同的方法论原则，仅在内容上对某些模块进行了必要的调整，并减少了样本量。重复调查的目的是获得面板数据，以便在一年期内监测生活水平的变化，从而表明塞尔维亚在2003年期间贫困是否有所减少。[注：面板数据是在同时参与两次调查的 households 样本中获取的数据。这些数据使得追踪同一 persons 在一年期内的生活水平成为可能。]
除了这两项针对全国和地区代表性样本的综合性调查，旨在描绘一般人口状况外，还有两项特别关注易受伤害群体的调查。在2002年，对家庭收入支持受益人的生活水平进行了调查，旨在验证这一由政府支持的社会福利计划。在2003年，对罗姆人定居点的罗姆人进行了调查。鉴于所有现有经验表明，这是塞尔维亚和黑山领土上最易受伤害的群体之一，但罗姆人贫困问题研究不足，因此调查的目的是将这一群体的贫困与基本人口的贫困进行比较，并确定2003年哪些罗姆人群体面临最大的贫困风险。然而，有必要强调，罗姆人LSMS数据集包括了最易受伤害的罗姆人，而融入主流人口的罗姆人则不包括在本研究中。
地理覆盖范围
---------------------------
调查在整个塞尔维亚领土（不含科索沃和梅托希亚）进行。
数据类型
---------------------------
样本调查数据 [ssd]
抽样程序
---------------------------
2002年和2003年对普通民众（LSMS）进行的两项调查的样本框架包括塞尔维亚所有永久居民，不包括科索沃和梅托希亚的居民，根据联合国关于人口普查的建议中包含的永久居民定义，这些建议在2002年塞尔维亚共和国人口普查中被应用。因此，永久居民是指居住在塞尔维亚领土超过一年的所有人，外交和领事人员除外。
家庭收入支持受益人调查的样本框架包括塞尔维亚领土上所有当前受益人，根据社会事务部提供的官方受益人名单。
罗姆人定居点的罗姆人群体定义面临障碍，因为塞尔维亚罗姆人总人数的精确数据不可用。根据2002年最后一次人口普查，有108,000名罗姆公民，但认为普查数据显著低估了罗姆人总人数。然而，由于没有其他更精确的数据，这个数字被用作估计罗姆人定居点罗姆人人口的基数。根据2002年普查，至少有7%的总人口宣称自己是罗姆国籍的定居点被选中。总共83%或90,000名自称为罗姆人的罗姆人居住在以这种方式定义的定居点，这个数字被用作罗姆人定居点罗姆人的样本框架。
计划样本：
2002年，普通民众样本的计划规模为6,500户家庭。样本既在全国范围内又在地区上具有代表性（在每个单独的层中具有代表性）。2003年，计划的面板样本规模为3,000户家庭。为了保持样本的代表性质量，我们保留了2002年实现的大样本中每两个人口普查区单元。这样我们就保持了按层分配的相同分配方式。在选定的普查区单元中，与2002年基本调查相同的 households 被访谈。
2002年和2003年家庭收入支持受益人以及罗姆人定居点罗姆人的计划样本各为500户家庭。
样本类型：
在国家调查中，实施的样本是一个两阶段分层样本。第一阶段单元是人口普查区，第二阶段单元是 households。在2002年的基本调查中，人口普查区是根据家庭数量按比例选择的，因此家庭数量较多的普查区有更高的选择概率。在2003年的重复调查中，第一阶段单元（人口普查区单元）是从2002年获得的基本样本中选择的，仅包括偶数编号的人口普查区单元。实际上，这意味着每两个先前调查中的普查区单元都包括在样本中。在每个选定的普查区中，包括先前轮次中访谈的相同的 households，并对其进行访谈。在2003年完成调查后，将案件在 households 和成员层面进行合并。
分层：
市政当局被分层为以下六个领土层：沃伊vodina、贝尔格莱德、西部塞尔维亚、中部塞尔维亚（舒马迪亚和波莫拉夫莱）、东部塞尔维亚和东南塞尔维亚。选择的主要单元进一步分层为属于城市类型定居点的普查区和属于农村类型定居点的普查区。
家庭收入支持受益人的样本代表了从社会事务部提供的官方受益人名单中随机选择的案例。罗姆人定居点罗姆人的样本，与国家调查一样，是一个两阶段分层样本，但第一阶段单元是罗姆人口在百分比超过7%的定居点，第二阶段单元是罗姆人 households。定居点被分层为三个领土层：沃伊vodina、贝尔格莱德和中部塞尔维亚。
数据收集方式
---------------------------
面对面 [f2f]
研究工具
---------------------------
在所有调查中，都使用了经过最小修改的相同问卷。它包括不同的模块，主题上分开的区域，旨在从不同角度感知家庭的 生活水平。主题领域如下：
1. 人口清单。
2. 住房条件和耐用消费品模块，包含关于 households 拥有的耐用消费品年龄的信息，并特别关注收集有关能源账单、支付和使用的详细信息。
3. 食品支出日记（每周），包括家庭生产、礼物和实物转移。
4. 基于主要支出回忆期的问卷，足以在 household 层面上构建年度消费，包括家庭生产、礼物和实物转移。
5. 所有耕种10+英亩土地或饲养牛的 households 的农业生产。
6. 参与和转移支付模块，按项目进行详细分解。
7. 劳动市场模块，与劳动人口调查（LFS）的简化版本一致，包含捕获各种非正式部门活动的额外问题，并提供收入信息。
8. 健康，重点关注服务利用和支出（包括非正式支付）。
9. 教育模块，包括学前教育、义务教育、中等教育和高等教育。
10. 特殊收入模块，重点关注其他部分未涵盖的收入来源（重点关注汇款）。
应答率
---------------------------
在实地工作中，访谈员记录了精确的访谈日记，记录了成功和失败的访问。特别注意记录一些 households 未被访谈的原因。为因拒绝而未访谈的 households 和在选定普查区领土上找不到特定 households 的情况分别打分。
2002年，共联系了7,491户家庭。在这其中，共访谈了6,386户家庭，在621轮普查中。访谈员未能收集到1,106户或14.8%的选定 households 的数据。在这其中，634户或9.9%的家庭在三次尝试后拒绝与访谈员合作，472户家庭不在家。
2003年重复调查的目的是访谈总共3,000户家庭，因此将人口普查区单元301包括在样本中，因为它有3,119户家庭在先前调查中被访谈，并且预计访谈的家庭数量将减少。2003年实现的样本包括2,548户家庭。访谈员未能收集到571户选定 households 或18.3%的选定 households 的数据。在这其中，266户或8.5%的家庭在三次尝试后拒绝与访谈员合作，305户家庭不在家、改变了居住地或访谈进行时不在家。访谈的家庭包括8,027人。
家庭收入支持受益人的成功访谈数为456户。
罗姆人定居点罗姆人的成功访谈数为525户。