Enterprise Survey 2011
Lesotho, 2011
National University of Lesotho,
Created on
June 01, 2015
Last modified
June 01, 2015
Page views
12029
Download
257194
Documentation in PDF
Metadata
DDI/XML
JSON
Identification
Survey ID Number
LSO_2011_MCC-ES_v01_M
Title
Enterprise Survey 2011
Country/Economy
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Lesotho | LSO |
Study type
Independent Evaluation
Abstract
The 2011 MCA-Lesotho baseline enterprise survey is a national survey of enterprises. The main objective of the survey was to assess the current status of businesses in Lesotho, in relation to four principal factors, namely, water supply and sanitation, essential health services, investment climate in the country, land administration and modernization of the commercial legal system. The survey used a single-stage stratified sampling design in which stratification was done by rural/urban, industrial classification and size of enterprise.
Most enterprises had been in business for slightly less than 10 years and reported that the registration process was lengthy, costly and difficult. The enterprises had more male workers than female workers and had more males as top managers. Most enterprises reported own savings as their first most important source of start- up capital. Majority of enterprises did not know about the credit bureau and did not use financial institutions to secure loans. Generally, enterprises procured their products from local wholesalers and retailers and conducted transactions using cash over the counter as the most common mode of payment to suppliers.With respect to type of land ownership, the largest proportion (37.5%) of individually-owned enterprises was Form C holders, followed by tenant enterprises or those that rented business premises (31.3%). In terms of the acquisition of land/business plots, 43.5% of the enterprises had acquired land/plots through customary allocation by customary chiefs, followed by those that had purchased plots through transfer from someone (22.3%). Most individually-owned enterprises (48.4%) had also acquired plots from customary chiefs, followed by plots that were purchased from someone else (21.3%). In contrast, most jointly-owned enterprises had acquired plots through transfer from someone for cash (32.6%), followed by public sector agency grants (26.3%).
A significant proportion (69.8%) of enterprises did not have formally registered titles/documents to the premises that they used; The top reason for opting to rent/sublease business premises was not intending to acquire land, which was mentioned by 35.1 percent of enterprises. The second reason was of enterprises that did not qualify to hold land in Lesotho, which was mentioned by 23.2 percent of enterprises
Majority (67.2 percent) of enterprises did not have occupational insurance. Over 50 percent of the enterprises did not have all the policies. Workers in 83.5 percent of all enterprises did not have access to a health and safety officer. In 88.3 and 91.7 percent of all enterprises, workers did not have access to a counselor and services of a Social Worker, respectively. Workers in 32.6 percent of all enterprises did not have break hours. As high as 86.4 percent of the enterprises lost between one (1) and 30 days to sick leave in the last twelve months. Majority of enterprises (84.5%) provided neither educational programmes/activities nor ARVs to their workforce.
Most enterprises had been in business for slightly less than 10 years and reported that the registration process was lengthy, costly and difficult. The enterprises had more male workers than female workers and had more males as top managers. Most enterprises reported own savings as their first most important source of start- up capital. Majority of enterprises did not know about the credit bureau and did not use financial institutions to secure loans. Generally, enterprises procured their products from local wholesalers and retailers and conducted transactions using cash over the counter as the most common mode of payment to suppliers.With respect to type of land ownership, the largest proportion (37.5%) of individually-owned enterprises was Form C holders, followed by tenant enterprises or those that rented business premises (31.3%). In terms of the acquisition of land/business plots, 43.5% of the enterprises had acquired land/plots through customary allocation by customary chiefs, followed by those that had purchased plots through transfer from someone (22.3%). Most individually-owned enterprises (48.4%) had also acquired plots from customary chiefs, followed by plots that were purchased from someone else (21.3%). In contrast, most jointly-owned enterprises had acquired plots through transfer from someone for cash (32.6%), followed by public sector agency grants (26.3%).
A significant proportion (69.8%) of enterprises did not have formally registered titles/documents to the premises that they used; The top reason for opting to rent/sublease business premises was not intending to acquire land, which was mentioned by 35.1 percent of enterprises. The second reason was of enterprises that did not qualify to hold land in Lesotho, which was mentioned by 23.2 percent of enterprises
Majority (67.2 percent) of enterprises did not have occupational insurance. Over 50 percent of the enterprises did not have all the policies. Workers in 83.5 percent of all enterprises did not have access to a health and safety officer. In 88.3 and 91.7 percent of all enterprises, workers did not have access to a counselor and services of a Social Worker, respectively. Workers in 32.6 percent of all enterprises did not have break hours. As high as 86.4 percent of the enterprises lost between one (1) and 30 days to sick leave in the last twelve months. Majority of enterprises (84.5%) provided neither educational programmes/activities nor ARVs to their workforce.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
Enterprise
Version
Version Description
Anonymized dataset for public distribution
Scope
Topics
| Topic |
|---|
| Retail Sector, Services Sector, Manufacturing Sector. |
| Activities and Products/Services of the enterprise |
| Productivity, Sales and Profitability |
| Costs/Expenses incurred by Enterprise |
| Ownership and Land Tenure |
| Access to finances and financial services |
| Workers’ Welfare |
| Investment Climate |
Keywords
| Keyword | Vocabulary |
|---|---|
| Land Tenure | Land tenure |
| Sales | Sales |
| Access to finances | Financial access |
| Ownership | Ownership |
| Workers' policy | Workers' policy |
| Lesotho | Workers' policy |
| enterprise | Workers' policy |
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
The survey was designed in such a way that the sample of enterprises provides estimates at the national level, for urban and rural areas and by industry sector of enterprise (Retail, Service and Manufacturing). All 10 districts of Lesotho were covered.
Universe
The population of interest was all registered enterprises in Lesotho. The number of total registered enterprises was 6,758 enterprises.
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name |
|---|
| National University of Lesotho |
Producers
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| Millennium Challenge Account Lesotho | Overall Coordination |
| Millennium Challenge Corporation USA | Funding |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name | Abbreviation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Millennium Challenge Corporation USA | MCC USA | Funding Agency |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
The sampling design was a three - stage stratified sampling design in which the country was stratified in three levels - district as first level of stratification, urban/rural as second level and enterprise size as third level. The enterprises within the sub-strata were the sampling units. The rural/urban strata at national level were the smallest domain of study for which reliable estimates were required. Selection was only done at last stage of stratification.
Power calculations determined a required sample size of 960 enterprises from the total universe of 6, 758.
The enterprises were categorized into two groups for purposes of sample allocation, the large enterprises and the other enterprises. The 92 large enterprises were each assigned probability of 1 so that all were included in the sample. The medium, small and micro enterprises were further grouped into rural and urban enterprises and urban and rural sample allocations determined using power allocation as follows:
1. Large enterprises were subtracted from the total enterprises (6758 - 92 = 6666)
2. The enterprises were categorized into rural/urban ( Nrural = 3542, Nurban = 3124)
3. The large enterprises were removed from the computed sample (960 - 92 = 868)
4. The remaining sample 868 is allocated to rural/urban using the power ratio - with 448 for rural and 420 for urban.
Within each district, the enterprises were stratified into urban and rural enterprises. They were then stratified by size: micro enterprises (<5 employees), small enterprises (5 - 9 employees), medium enterprises (10 - 49 employees), and large enterprises (50 and above employees). A systematic sample of enterprises was selected from each size category except the large enterprises which were all included into the sample.
Power calculations determined a required sample size of 960 enterprises from the total universe of 6, 758.
The enterprises were categorized into two groups for purposes of sample allocation, the large enterprises and the other enterprises. The 92 large enterprises were each assigned probability of 1 so that all were included in the sample. The medium, small and micro enterprises were further grouped into rural and urban enterprises and urban and rural sample allocations determined using power allocation as follows:
1. Large enterprises were subtracted from the total enterprises (6758 - 92 = 6666)
2. The enterprises were categorized into rural/urban ( Nrural = 3542, Nurban = 3124)
3. The large enterprises were removed from the computed sample (960 - 92 = 868)
4. The remaining sample 868 is allocated to rural/urban using the power ratio - with 448 for rural and 420 for urban.
Within each district, the enterprises were stratified into urban and rural enterprises. They were then stratified by size: micro enterprises (<5 employees), small enterprises (5 - 9 employees), medium enterprises (10 - 49 employees), and large enterprises (50 and above employees). A systematic sample of enterprises was selected from each size category except the large enterprises which were all included into the sample.
Response Rate
In summary, out of the targeted sample of 926 enterprises, 724 of them were reached giving a response rate of 78.2%. A total of 679 enterprises were successfully completed representing a completion rate of 73.3%. Non response was reduced by Research Assistants motivating the respondents to cooperate and ensuring confidentiality. Some of the non response was due to Researchers not giving prior notice to the enterprises.
Weighting
Methods and variables used in weighting: Design weights were computed from the sample information as the base weight adjusted for the response rate under each activity and size of enterprises. Base weights were calculated as the inverse of probabilities of selection of the enterprises.
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2011 | 2011 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face interviews were used to collect data.
Supervision
The field organization was in 6 research teams with 6 Overall Supervisors, 16 Area Supervisors and Enumerators. Provision was made for follow-ups/callbacks of enumerators with the support of the area Supervisors. Translators were used for Chinese and Indian enterprises whose managers did not speak English. Data analysis was done using SPSS and it was mainly descriptive.
Questionnaires
Questionnaires
The principal instrument used to collect primary data was the structured questionnaire which was administered through face-to-face interviews. The development of data collection tools was based on the information needs and expectations of the MCA-Lesotho and its stakeholders. In order to address the diversity in the operations of manufacturing and retail/services enterprises, two separate modules were developed, one for manufacturing and another for retail/services sectors. The set of data collection tools therefore consisted of the core questionnaire plus manufacturing and retails/services modules. A pretest was conducted by Area Supervisors who conducted one-on-one interviews at enterprises and contributed to improvement of the questionnaires.
Data Processing
Other Processing
Data processing involved the design of data entry form, data capturing, data editing and cleaning, and data documentation. The data were captured in 15 microcomputers using a data form designed with Microsoft Visual Studio 2008. Some of the computers were used for data capturing and others for data verification. Data cleaning rules were developed and used to clean and edit the data. The data were then captured, validated, edited, cleaned and converted into Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS). Data analysis was done using SPSS and Microsoft Excel software packages.
Access policy
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | |
|---|---|---|
| Monitoring & Evaluation Division | Millennium Challenge Corporation | impact-eval@mcc.gov |
Location of Data Collection
Millennium Challenge Corporation
Archive where study is originally stored
Millennium Challenge Corporation
http://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/105
Cost: None
http://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/105
Cost: None
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI_LSO_2011_MCC-ES_v01_M
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Millennium Challenge Corporation USA | MCC USA | Funding Agency |
| Millenium Challenge Account Lesotho | MCA-L | Project Management |
Date of Metadata Production
2014-08
DDI Document version
Version 1 (2014-8-26)
Version 2.0 (April 2015). Edited version based on Version 01 (DDI-MCC-LSO-Enterprise-2014-v1) that was done by Millennium Challenge Corporation.
Version 2.0 (April 2015). Edited version based on Version 01 (DDI-MCC-LSO-Enterprise-2014-v1) that was done by Millennium Challenge Corporation.